Natural Sound

[microstrip]

(...) So I think detail and resolution are describing pretty much the same thing. (...)

They are related, but IMO not exactly the same thing. Resolution is the capability of isolating and showing something, the details are fine points.
I associate detail to very specific and individual events , resolution to the ability to dig in aspects such as separation of melodic lines, sound stage layering, more global aspects. IMO a system can sound detailed and have little resolution. Consider that, for example, small amounts of proper distortion can enhance detail.

 

[Al M.]

They are related, but IMO not exactly the same thing. Resolution is the capability of isolating and showing something, the details are fine points.
I associate detail to very specific and individual events , resolution to the ability to dig in aspects such as separation of melodic lines, sound stage layering, more global aspects.

Makes sense. Although timbral detail can also fall under the umbrella of resolution.

IMO a system can sound detailed and have little resolution. Consider that, for example, small amounts of proper distortion can enhance detail.

I agree with that. For example, my previous speakers accentuated the detail from the friction of the bow on string instruments, e.g., of solo violin or in a string quartet. They did so in a way that, as I am quite confident now, was due to distortion.

 

[hopkins]

Makes sense. Although timbral detail can also fall under the umbrella of resolution.



I agree with that. For example, my previous speakers accentuated the detail from the friction of the bow on string instruments, e.g., of solo violin or in a string quartet. They did so in a way that, as I am quite confident now, was due to distortion.

The friction of the bow did not sound natural? I think we need a panel of « friction » experts to check this… I’m out!

 

[morricab]

I agree.

But what question does that answer for you?

For me, answering that question doesn't tell me which recording is the more convincing or believable reproduction of the sound of that instrument.

Assuming it’s a very good recording, it tells you which system is more truthful to the real thing. It will also be more accurate with all other recordings as long as the full sonic range was covered by that recording.

 

[morricab]

I simply meant - as you mentioned in the rest of your post - that there is no method that can decide for you what is more "realistic" overall. Although perhaps with AI?

I was thinking about all this because I actually went to audition some speakers this morning... It was fun.

While it is impossible to summarize the sound that is heard through a simple set of criteria, I find it equally difficult to listen to recordings and ask myself whether they sound like live music or not, because they simply don't. The dealer played a Johnny Cash track and I closed my eyes and simply enjoyed listening, but I don't know what Johnny Cash really sounded like. I played that David Watkin Bach solo recording which was mentioned in a thread here, and it sounded pretty good. It did raise some questions, but the acoustics were not ideal. I am not that familiar with the track, it is played on an old instrument - it is not so easy to compare it to a reference.

During that audition, I did try to evaluate some aspect of the sound, in comparison to what I am used to listening at home: resolution, neutrality, dynamics/speed., etc.. What did I conclude from it? That I will be returning next week for another listening session!

Which speakers? What amps?

 

[morricab]

The friction of the bow did not sound natural? I think we need a panel of « friction » experts to check this… I’m out!

If you have ever lived with a violinist and actually compared the sounds of different bows on different violins, then you would understand that that bowing sound can be quite unnatural on many systems…not that I think Al has any idea what natural bow friction sounds like …

 

[Al M.]

If you have ever lived with a violinist and actually compared the sounds of different bows on different violins, then you would understand that that bowing sound can be quite unnatural on many systems…not that I think Al has any idea what natural bow friction sounds like …

Sure I don't, Mister resident super expert. Just a few chamber concerts here and there...actually, quite a lot of them, upclose to the instruments, further away, and in between, and in very different venues. But hey, it all doesn't count because I'm deaf anyway...and you are the undisputed expert...carry on...

 

[tima]

I associate detail to very specific and individual events , resolution to the ability to dig in aspects such as separation of melodic lines, sound stage layering, more global aspects. IMO a system can sound detailed and have little resolution. Consider that, for example, small amounts of proper distortion can enhance detail.

The distinctions you draw are listening distinctions. Do you think each of those is the consequence of intentional component design? For example can a component be designed to separate melodic lines but lack detail?

 

[microstrip]

The distinctions you draw are listening distinctions. Do you think each of those is the consequence of intentional component design? For example can a component be designed to separate melodic lines but lack detail?

I would not say "lack detail" , but be less detailed. But yes, I think that it is designer intention. But the overall effect is a system property, including room.

 

[morricab]

Sure I don't, Mister resident super expert. Just a few chamber concerts here and there...actually, quite a lot of them, upclose to the instruments, further away, and in between, and in very different venues. But hey, it all doesn't count because I'm deaf anyway...and you are the undisputed expert...carry on...

Have you ever compared bows on three different violins, each worth in excess of a million dollars? Have you heard daily practice with said instruments for 4 1/2 years and recorded said instruments with professional microphones and recording gear? Remind me to pay attention to your comments about bow string friction once you have experienced some of those things…

 

[jeff1225]

The subject at that moment was the distinction between detail and information. You were asked to elaborate on your comment and we are still waitlist for your response.

Information and detail are very interesting words when it comes to playback. I’ve been experimenting with cables with more perceived detail (silver) and added a super tweeter.

The addition of the super tweeter is extremely subtle but I really think it’s improved the realism.

 

[tima]

I would not say "lack detail" , but be less detailed. But yes, I think that it is designer intention. But the overall effect is a system property, including room.

Do you know of examples?

 

[PeterA]

Information and detail are very interesting words when it comes to playback. I’ve been experimenting with cables with more perceived detail (silver) and added a super tweeter.

The addition of the super tweeter is extremely subtle but I really think it’s improved the realism.

Hi Jeff. What is the extension of the Hartsfield’s before the super tweeter? And how do you like the silver cables?

 

[morricab]

Information and detail are very interesting words when it comes to playback. I’ve been experimenting with cables with more perceived detail (silver) and added a super tweeter.

The addition of the super tweeter is extremely subtle but I really think it’s improved the realism.

Silver speaker cables, interconnects or both?