Solving the "complex music problem"?


I have noticed that, regardless of the system, simple music (i.e. music with only a few sounds at the same time, such as a solo instrument) sounds way better than what I'll call here "complex music", meaning music like symphony that has a lot of instruments all playing different sounds at the same time. I'm assuming that this is an inherent problem for audio equipment. In a live symphony, you might have, say, 15 different unique instruments (i.e. counting all the violins as 1 unique instrument), each of which is vibrating in a different way; but in a speaker, each driver might be trying to reproduce 10 of those sounds at the same time. So each driver is a single physical object trying to vibrate in 10 different ways at the same time. The result is that the music sounds muddy, all the different parts blend together and you lose a lot of the detail.

I have a number of questions about this that I'm hoping all you experts can help me with.

1. Is there an established name or term for this issue? 

2. Do you think my diagnosis of the problem above is correct? Or is something else going on?

3. Although this is always a problem, it's a much bigger problem on some systems than others. Are there some types of components, or some brands, that are particularly good (or bad) when it comes to this issue?

4. To what extent is this issue related to the components you have as compared to speaker placement and room acoustics?

5. To me, this is a huge issue. But I don't see it discussed all that often. Why do you think that is? Or, perhaps, it is being discussed all the time, but people are using a term I don't recognize? (hence question 1).  

 

Full disclosure, I asked a related question under the heading "need amp recommendations for more separation of instruments" and got a lot of super helpful responses. I'm very grateful to everyone who took the time to respond there. That discussion was focused on a solution to my particular problem. Here I'm hoping to have a more general discussion of the issue. I know it's bad form to post the same question twice, but in my mind, this is a significantly different question. Thanks.

ahuvia

What's the difference between the "illusion of pinpoint imaging" and actual pinpoint imaging?

No difference, perception is reality.

Big difference.

You are listening to a great orchestral performance recorded in a great hall on a well balanced system. Think London Symphony in Kingsway Hall recorded by Kenneth Wilkinson for Decca. There is a passage in the score for solo piccolo. One hears within the soundstage a perfectly placed image of the piccolo with natural timbre and no placement waver. One can literally point to the image of the piccolo within the soundstage and say “There it is!”. Even as the piccolo ascends into its highest register natural tone is preserved with no high frequency splash making the piccolo sound the size of a tuba. Beautiful! “Actual” pin point imaging.

Then there is another passage where the piccolo is playing a unison passage with clarinets and xylophone creating a unique, even odd textural blend. The piccolo sounds as it should, blended and as part of the instrumental “mix”. Much harder to isolate it within the soundstage. Play this recording back on a system with speakers  (or, whatever) which have an accentuation (distortion) at say 2000-3000 Hertz. If the piccolo is playing in that range (not uncommon) the sound of that instrumental mix will lose the sense of blend and the sound of the piccolo will be accentuated as well. It becomes more isolated within the soundstage. “Illusion” of pin point imaging.

“Perception?”, yes. “Reality?”, no way.

@frogman

Great and insightful comments.

 

Not related. But I have an album that the cover notes extolling the magnificence of the recording capturing the ambiance of the venue… I was excited… put it on the turn tablet… no ambiance… no venue sonics. Then on the back cover, diagrams of how they clustered instruments and put plexiglass partitions to isolate their sounds and mic them separately. OMG… the recording was dead… no venue.

Then there was this recording of a solo violinist… famous guy. The entire back cover talking about the incredible sweet wonderful sound of his playing. My immediate first impression was that is a description of the sound of a Stradivarius. I have had the privilege of hearing several. No where on the album did it say the instrument he played. I went and research it… he played a Stradivarius loaned to him until he stopped playing. The sound was not his virtuosity, but the instrument he was playing. He is a great violinist… but every comment was about his instrument and not his playing.

 

My point? Hmm, not sure… but learning about sound… and music you realize you can discover amazing depth and understanding. If you attend real (acoustic) concerts and make really good choices in high end audio you can experience and understand the real world of music.