Sublime Sound

bonzo75 said:

I referred to myself as third person and micro quoted Marc as me. Multiple personality disorder

Click to expand...

That's unsatisfactory to both of us.

PeterA said:

Marc, could you describe how the sound changes to you when you deflate the Stacore platforms? Particularly the blackness of the background, the quality of the bass, (extension, impact, and definition), and what happens to harmonics. I am curious to learn if the effect is similar or very different in your system. I have done this repeatedly in my system, before and after speaker positioning, removing of the room treatments. I also took the Townsend SSs to Al M.'s system and heard the same effect, as well as one of the fancy audiophile power cords. The sound changed in very similar ways with these devices in both of our systems.

Click to expand...

Peter, things shrink and harden up. A flatter more strident sound. Bass loses some articulation and a fair amount of harmonics, natural warmth. Tone and staging become a tad flat. Timbre suffers. Still an impvt over just having the tt purely on the supporting 50kg slate stand, or my Symposium rack as previous to this room. But utilising the Stacore correctly ie inflated properly opens up the sound, staging and timbre, and solidifies tone and natural warmth.

However remember, Stacore is a perfect fit for my specific circumstance, a 35'x30' overall span suspended flexy 150 yr old timber floor. This has very specific demands, and became apparent that active isolation was very much not the way to go. With Stacore being best suited in my experience, I remain in awe as to how it at a stroke sorted the issue of my floor, and added it's own secret sauce constrained layer damping to round out it's floor-nullifying properties.

DaveC said:

Well, power cables have many design parameters audiophiles don't necessarily require so they can be stepped on, run over by cars, etc. and not short-circuit. The wires arrangement of the triple-twist is also related to robustness not required for sitting behind a rack.

Also, commodity power cables are built as cheaply as possible, for audio the price isn't as much of a factor so many more materials and designs are possible that are not for a commodity cable.

Click to expand...

Do audiophiles require "designer" power cords they have to wrestle with like an alligator to get into place, some so unyielding and stiff that lifts some electronics off the ground, come with hard plastic IEC and Plug that easily slips out of the wall and equipment sockets unless you support it with another "audiophile demanded" product only to produce a very distinct sound coloration and pay thousands for the privilege?

I still don't get what makes CC super tweaky as you claimed vs a "Designed" "Audiophile" cords. I'm only trying to understand what makes CC super tweaky in your books vs what you prefer. Commodity power cords come all kinds of flavors not breaking the bank isn't a negative in my books nor does it imply low quality in this case. CC is has actual liability for producing inferior products what liability does a boutique audiophile manufactured cord plugged into audio gear faces?

DaveC said:

Look, CC was the best of a bunch of cheaply made cables that had no intent to be used in high end audio systems. CC was the best of a bunch of cables you loaded into your cart on alibaba that day.

Click to expand...

Compared to the number of industrial ones there were many more very well known high priced "designer" cords in my cart. My alibaba cart included a lot of the same ingredients used in "designer" cords too so I can understand why they're so colored.

DaveC said:

I'll also say this, and maybe I shouldn't but here goes... My PSR-14 power cable was designed according to totally objective engineering standards, and actually no part of it's design was a result of subjective testing. AT ALL. I did thoroughly test it of course, and the result was exactly what I expected from a power cable that was designed as a cost-no-object device with the best materials and engineering possible.

Click to expand...

Great, I never made any comments about your power cords they might be the best in the world but aren't quality industrial power cords manufactured with objective engineering standards? I assume by no subjective testing you mean sonically, very much doubt CC was either.

Best materials is quite subjective here, do CC's plugs fit wall & equipment sockets tighter and better than what you used? I know that as hospital grade rated cords the make a better connection and don't slip out as easily as hard plastic non hospital grade ones, are your cost no object best plugs have hospital grade rating and not slip out easily? If not subjective or sound altering what do you gain by making a cost-no-object power cord when a commodity one exists to power the same piece of equipment just as well in engineering terms? You can't argue both ways Dave specially if you want to use engineering practices as reference, when there's absolutely nothing wrong in that respect with a quality industrial grade power cords.

I can go over every "designer" power cord attribute you want to claim including neutrality and natural but preferably in another thread. Call it CC sucks if you want but we're polluting Peter's thread at this point.

david

Edit- To clarify Dave, I'm not inferring that CC is the better or worse sounding than yours or any other power cords, I'm disagreeing with your portrayal of them as a piece of junk.

Peter, I'm now really aware of changes that impose themselves to create a hint (or more) of homogeneity, and those that really lead to every disc, lp or cd, sounding different and fresh.

I can honestly say that the new room and super-isolated tt are the pivot upon which tweaks that really reveal timbre and tonal warmth are so easy to judge. For me, before this room and current round of optimising I had never easily gotten a sound nailing timbral accuracy on twin horns in classic 60s jazz, or holistic differentiation in blips in electronica, or imaging and density in orchestral; and managing to really sift out my great, from merely good, to challenging recordings.

So I had always been a bit obsessed w trying to get "more" bass or treble or microscopic detail. But room and careful tweaking has gone past this to what feels like every disc sounding wholly different to the last, nothing standing out other than really authentic timbre and tone, in a natural stage.

If you're getting this going more au naturel, great. Me? Tweaking has been critical, but I'm way more selective than before. And achieving way more holism than ever.

bonzo75 said:

Sorry, I don't know why that quote shows bonzo75 as the quoter? Can you correct? I understand you are always on the trigger to reply to me, but here am flattered you mistake me with Marc

Click to expand...

Neither do I, I was answering to Al M. Sorry!

microstrip said:

Neither do I, I was answering to Al M. Sorry!

Click to expand...

No need to apologize, you made Al's day

PeterA said:

I like that and will make the effort.

I heard Jeffrey_t's speakers, KeithR's speakers when I visited Ron last Spring. They are certainly different from mine. I also regularly hear Ack's speakers, and Al M.'s. They too are quite different. I'd like to hear some more horns besides the VOTT and JBL Everest, but as Keith wrote, not so easy in the US.

It takes a lot of time to do this correctly. When I have the time to prioritize, I will give it a shot.

Click to expand...

Peter,

Do you realize you are entering a road that will most surely force you to change all your system, except the tonearm, cartridge and cables?

I loved the EMT927 but decided to sell it because it was not an ideal match to a system that needed to include the XLFs and Vivaldi. Probably if the Soundlab's were my main speakers I would have kept it.

ddk said:

I still don't get what makes CC super tweaky as you claimed vs a "Designed" "Audiophile" cords. I'm only trying to understand what makes CC super tweaky in your books vs what you prefer. Commodity power cords come all kinds of flavors not breaking the bank isn't a negative in my books nor does it imply low quality in this case. CC is has actual liability for producing inferior products what liability does a boutique audiophile manufactured cord plugged into audio gear faces?

Click to expand...

Ok, assuming you don't understand what I said already...

You can't lump all high end cables into one box, that's absolutely not correct, but it seems to be a vital aspect of your framing of other power cables vs CC. I have to say, the way you frame the discussion is clever, and suits your goals, but it's inaccurate. Power cables don't all sound the same, that's ridiculous.

While some high end cables may be designed subjectively, many, including mine, are designed to optimal specifications in terms of electrical characteristics and materials used. This is much different from a cable designed entirely by subjective evaluation and tweaking to achieve some sort of end result.

If you compare CC to an optimal reference cable, it'll have materials that are lower quality in terms of metal purity and grain structure, conductivity, dielectric absorption, etc... the CC cable is going to measure far worse vs an optimal cable in all ways.

You can't tell me why you even think CC is that great, can you? I mean, besides your own subjective evaluation? And now they can't even be found anymore, so anyone who wants to be in the "natural, room-filling sound club" needs to acquire these mystical cables...

So you choose CC over everything else, not because it's better, but because you subjectively prefer it, that is the definition of tweaky! It can't be reproduced, it can't be bought again, if that's not tweaky, what is?

And yes, I do seem to prefer cables, and most other things audio, when they improve in objective terms. For example, my ribbon cables have very low inductance and I can hear that in power and speaker cable applications. It's a superior geometry vs what round wires can achieve in terms of LCR.

Hard to believe a cable, vacuum tube amplification and flawed-horn-speaker designer is here defending real engineering approaches to audio, maybe we need to give Amir a temporary reinstatement, lol...

ddk said:

Edit- To clarify Dave, I'm not inferring that CC is the better or worse sounding than yours or any other power cords, I'm disagreeing with your portrayal of them as a piece of junk.

Click to expand...

I never said that. Again, you're mischaracterizing what I said. I said they are built to a price point and not specifically intended for audio applications. For just about everything else in the world, CC PC's are identical in performance to any other. Does your toast taste better with CC? More natural browning, a real-bread crust-feel to it?


EDIT: Let's consider the role of a regular PC. It should first and foremost not short out, and be able to be bent repeatedly and not be able to be kinked, and if a kink is forced, not to short out. It should be able to be stepped on, maybe even run over by a car, and not short out.

Everything else is secondary to that. In audio, we have different priorities.

I will agree with you on questionable designs that are not engineering based. For example I've seen power cables, right here on WBF, made using 12g solid-core wire. This can't be bent repeatedly without cracking and the resistance going up. Eventually there will be enough resistance to heat up and possibly short or start a fire. I think this is unacceptable. I also think design decisions that lead to corrosion of the cable because they think it's better subjectively are making poor decisions.

PeterA said:

Is what you refer to as "Naturalist" more representative of what you hear from live performances?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Like the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 where the Pope divided the world between the Empires of Spain and Portugal*, I have divided the audiophile world between the Synthesists and the Naturalists - two fundamental bases of preference.

The Naturalist tends to choose live acoustic music over music reproduced by a stereo system and uses what they hear listening to live acoustic music as their model or reference for assessing their own stereo and as a guide when making choices.

The Synthesist (some prefer Idealist or how about Transcendentalist) tends to prefer the sound of their own stereo over live acoustic music and uses their own conception of an idealized sound as their basis of preference going forward.

Although your inherent tendency is that of the Naturalist, the sound you sought from your stereo was not. Per your own post-tweak account, I will suggest your stereo is better aligned with your basis of preference.

<whistling>

*N.B. Spain got all the 'New World' and a piece of eastern Asia, Portugal got everything else.

Two very interesting sentences, quoted from the F. Toole book on the live versus recording listening sessions carried in large theaters:

“Edison carefully chose singers, usually women, who could imitate the sound of their recordings and only allowed musicians to use the limited group of instruments that recorded best for demonstrations” (p. 23).
Of a 1916 demonstration in Carnegie Hall before a capacity audience of “musically cultured and musically critical” listeners, the New York Evening Mail reported that “the ear could not tell when it was listening to the phonograph alone, and when to actual voice and reproduction together. Only the eye could discover the truth by noting when the singer’s mouth was open or closed”.

microstrip said:

Peter,

Do you realize you are entering a road that will most surely force you to change all your system, except the tonearm, cartridge and cables?

Click to expand...

I assume this is a joke. While the system with the Rockport Lyra that I heard yesterday was very different from mine, it did not make want me to sell my gear. Yes, these large speakers driven by those components do some things much better than mine, and that was certainly worth pondering and aspiring. Yet my system does some other things better, dare I say, much better. And some things are comparable to an astonishing degree, also taking into account the very different rooms.

As you know well, no system or speaker can do it all, it is all a compromise no matter how expensive things can get. The question is, which is the best compromise for you and your specific listening priorities? This is something everyone personally needs to decide for themselves.

Some on this board want to dogmatically proclaim their approach the best. It does not work that way. I have found my personal compromise, also given financial constraints, and have, with the help of friends and the inspiration of hearing their and other systems, found ways to optimize my approach within the lane I have chosen. I would not be surprised if Peter feels similarly.

PeterA said:

DaveC, could you please continue to discuss your cable in your ZenWave threads? I think your own product thread would be a more appropriate place to discuss how and why you have designed it, and how it differs from other power cords. I have made my decision and chosen a different cable.

Click to expand...

It's not off topic, it's more about the approach of using CC and saying that it's somehow neutral. An example is made vs my cable in particular, but that's only an example to illustrate that not all audiophile power cables can be lumped together. I've said all I want to say on it anyways.

Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean you get to control the conversation. I am allowed to make my point like everyone else.

tima said:

Yes.

Like the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 where the Pope divided the world between the Empires of Spain and Portugal*, I have divided the audiophile world between the Synthesists and the Naturalists - two fundamental bases of preference.

The Naturalist tends to choose live acoustic music over music reproduced by a stereo system and uses what they hear listening to live acoustic music as their model or reference for assessing their own stereo and as a guide when making choices.

The Synthesist (some prefer Idealist or how about Transcendentalist) tends to prefer the sound of their own stereo over live acoustic music and uses their own conception of an idealized sound as their basis of preference going forward.

Although your inherent tendency is that of the Naturalist, the sound you sought from your stereo was not. Per your own post-tweak account, I will suggest your stereo is better aligned with your basis of preference.

<whistling>

*N.B. Spain got all the 'New World' and a piece of eastern Asia, Portugal got everything else.

Click to expand...

Tima
That is impressive!
A five hundred year old treaty I had never heard of before deployed very aptly into an audio thread.

tima said:

Yes.

Like the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 where the Pope divided the world between the Empires of Spain and Portugal*, I have divided the audiophile world between the Synthesists and the Naturalists - two fundamental bases of preference.

The Naturalist tends to choose live acoustic music over music reproduced by a stereo system and uses what they hear listening to live acoustic music as their model or reference for assessing their own stereo and as a guide when making choices.

The Synthesist (some prefer Idealist or how about Transcendentalist) tends to prefer the sound of their own stereo over live acoustic music and uses their own conception of an idealized sound as their basis of preference going forward.

Although your inherent tendency is that of the Naturalist, the sound you sought from your stereo was not. Per your own post-tweak account, I will suggest your stereo is better aligned with your basis of preference.

<whistling>

*N.B. Spain got all the 'New World' and a piece of eastern Asia, Portugal got everything else.

Click to expand...

No politics, please ... Remember Innuos is portuguese and Wadax is spanish. Should they divide markets?

I think your division misrepresents the real situation. For me it looks more like some people want to use their specific experience with a limited range of music to establish their preference, biasing it strongly with audiophile trends.

Others feel that appreciating believable sound is an intrinsic characteristic of humans due to their experience on earth and believe that their own conception, surely complemented by audio experience and knowledge, is as valid as those who claim permanent comparisons with weekly concerts.

Curiously some of those you call the "naturalists" want to be closer to the technicalities of the signal than those who accept that the industry wants to deliver the music message, not the technical aspects.

DaveC said:

Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean you get to control the conversation. I am allowed to make my point like everyone else.

Click to expand...

Yes you are, but since this is Peter's personal system thread, he does get to control the conversation to some extent, within reasonable boundaries.

@PeterA you also didn't respond to my suggestion to measure your room with and without the room acoustic treatments so you understand what might be driving your preference for not having them.

@Al M. Ok, I said I had nothing left to say on it so no use posting more about it. I also don't believe OP ever gets the ability to control posts anywhere on WBF (assuming tou is followed, of course).

Al M. said:

I assume this is a joke (...)

Click to expand...

No, it was not a joke. Have you seen the movie Ronin, with Robert de Niro and Natascha McElhone?

Lady, I never walk into a place I don't know how to walk out of.

microstrip said:

No, it was not a joke. Have you seen the movie Ronin, with Robert de Niro and Natascha McElhone?

Lady, I never walk into a place I don't know how to walk out of.

Click to expand...

Hehe, yes, this was one consideration before I decided to do the audition. But I already know enough about my preferences, what I can afford and what I want in life not to be rattled by such experiences. It was very worthwhile, and I got to hear in some sense how good the Vivaldi stack is. How cool is that?