Specifications VS Sound Quality

orpheus:

Looks like you've answered the question I'd posed to millercarbon.
The "crux of the biscuit", as F. Zappa might say, appears to be this: 

"Now that high end salons are no longer an option, I'll be relying heavily on past knowledge of "sonic signatures"; such as the difference between CJ and ARC, instead of auditioning..."

I'll assume you've gained this "knowledge of sonic signatures" by listening. 

Speakers are like acoustic guitars, I guess. Last fall, I spent nearly $1000 for shipping a handful of boutique acoustic guitars out here (CA) from various shops back east. Didn't like any of 'em. Got fed up and decided to just keep my mid-level Martin. If I ever upgrade my Silverlines, it will be to the current version. At least I know what sort of sonic signature to expect. 

Thanks for your helpful posts.

This thread has made me aware of the fact that these are some "strange times"; I was considering a Herron phono, but they're no longer being manufactured.

Since I can't audition speakers, and I'm familiar with "Thiel" speakers, I was considering them, but they are no more.

Recently, I received a DAC that was DOA, and they charged me a restocking fee when I sent it back. Maybe my best bet is to just be content with what I have.

Yes, I'm quite familiar with both CJ and ARC; I like CJ pre amps, but I like ARC power amps better.

The best audio I've ever heard in my life was quite simple, it was all top of the line ARC electronics including ARC "CD" player, with top of the line Theil speakers.

This was in a "high end salon" where they had a small theater that was professionally treated for the best acoustics. (who knows how much that had to do with the sound)

This was in 91 or 92, it was before the vinyl craze. I chose the CD, Santana's "Abraxas". I bought that LP in 1970, and wore out many copies since that time, so to say that I was familiar with the music is an understatement.

On this occasion, I heard sounds and music that I've never heard before nor since; it was like being on the set while it was being recorded and being in the same space with the musicians.

Since this was in 91 or 92, that shouldn't be too hard to recreate now, but I got a feeling that the room set up and the people required to do it might cost more than the equipment.

This was in a "high end salon" where they had a small theater that was professionally treated for the best acoustics. (who knows how much that had to do with the sound)

More than half of the  % of S.Q.

In my experience.... And this is true for all system at any cost...

Speakers cannot replace the room controls and  dac and amplifiers cannot replace speakers quality, nevermind their cost....

For me they is 2 groups in audio: electronical  piece of gear fetichist and people who know that what is essential is controls of the environment in the 3 dimansions: vibrations, electrical noise floor and especially acoustic...

More than half of the % of S.Q.

In my experience.... And this is true for all system at any cost...

Speakers cannot replace the room controls and dac and amplifiers cannot replace speakers quality, nevermind their cost....

For me they is 2 groups in audio: electronical piece of gear fetishist and people who know that what is essential is controls of the environment in the 3 dimensions: vibrations, electrical noise floor and especially acoustic...

It’s important to understand that sound quality comes from the quality of the noise floor of a room or space and the isolation and quality of isolation for the equipment and the parts therein. The dynamic range and the intricate subtleties in it are available for humans to peruse via the quality of the noise floor, not from how loud the equipment can inherently play vs it’s given native noise floor (pre noise isolation vs after isolation) and and listing space acoustic qualities, and so on.

"This speaker goes to 125db peaks!" is a meaningless specification if they can’t also improve the dynamic range that occurs without the rise of masking noise/distortion.

Dropping a set of klipschorns in a noisy and untreated room that had, lets say.. a set of simple two ways prior... will not give any more audio quality. It will just make the peaks louder and saturated with more untamed follow-up interfering noise -past the initial transients.

This may (and does) create a different human realized distortion and noise pattern for the listener... but it will not fix or improve anything.

Removing masking noise via improving acoustics is the most critical thing a person can do to improve the observed sound quality of an audio system.

And that requires research, lots of research and work and thoughtful application to the specific case at hand - as acoustics is not a simple problem. Otherwise we’d all have it down to a fine science and all be observing it’s correct effective use in our own systems. Note that we are not.

The next problem is that the sonic character realized in the listening space will then change.. and one might then realize that some or many of the equipment choices were wrong, as their focus, design, and overall aims in creating signal, are literally backwards (screechy over emphasized/distorted highs and transients, to try and outshout the noise!) as they were designed for poorly treated and realized acoustical spaces.

Places where, in the final analysis, people were and are listing almost backward from where they should be. Listening for sharp exaggerated peaks (with inherent long noise tails--which mask fine detail) instead of listening into the noise floor. Like trying to locate the origin and expressive character of a sharp transient gunshot and it's envelope of decay and echo.. over the din of noise from a crowd. If the crowd shut the heck up this would be quite easy. Instead it is difficult and takes time to discern just the peak alone over all the noise going on. never mind the decay and echo tail.

the data shows this to be true in that that one can gather any given 5 or so out of hundreds of various advertised ’revealing’ pieces of audio gear... and the resulting sytem will inherently screech in a very unlikable and unlistenable manner.

Yet this specification of being ’revealing’, in some ways, notably defines a goodly portion the aim of mainstream high end audio.

Correct acoustics is key in properly done high end audio rooms. then one can set about chasing the right gear to couple to that space. As the proper fidelity can finally be heard and realized in the correct acoustical space.

It’s generally a case of half steps in each direction, over and over until it is zeroed in. Everyone learns at a different pace and in their own personal ways, so it’s not a one size fits all equation in the getting there even if the aim is a 100% definable singular real thing.

All roads lead to Rome... but everyone gets their own road, if they can realize the road exists and needs be traveled. 

Importantly, the pressure loading pattern in the human ear also affects how the cila bend back and recognize signal. The pressure distortion of noise patterns in the ear retards the act of detail recognition right in the actual signal loading in the ear. this involves the noise floor of the room and how it decays and removes that noise before it reaches the ear. Remove the disturbance and recognize nuance in the signal.