What is meant exactly by the description 'more musical'?


Once in awhile, I hear the term 'this amp is more musical' for some amps. To describe sound, I know there is 'imaging' and 'sound stage'. What exactly is meant by 'more musical' when used to describe amp?

dman777

I am not sure to understand your critics...šŸ˜

First i am totally with you about this sentence and you are totally right here :

We audiophiles " invented " several words that are non adequated and were invented due to each one of us ignorance levels.

But I can understand this second sentence in only one way :

I never in my audio life or MUSIC life talk of " musical ".

Any acoustician will evaluate the acoustical working parameters of a room as worst or optimal for musicality perception ...

In the same way architect acousticians will be able to design great Hall acoustic , which is an art based on science in a way more or less musical , and any acoustician can evaluate why some great Hall seems to be better than other because of the different parameter choices and informedĀ  trade-off choices ...

Any musician or maestro will be able to qualify "musical" or non musical any room or Hall ... It is not mainly and merely taste , no, it is way more the results of their ears training ...

Any designer who know what is doing will use objective derived psycho-acoustiocs facts about "musicality " in his own design for it to be minimally musical as atmasphere explained it ...

Musicality has a meaningfull definition ONLY in acoustics and psycho-acoustics not in audio consumers market for sure ... Save if we use scientific consumers evaluation tools but this is no more "taste" as relative then but psycho-acoustics objective desc ription of "musicality" perception statistically revealed ...

Psycho-acoustics rule the gear and the room ... It is musical or not ... My system well embedded is way nore musical now after what i did right than before what i did right out of their box ; and this will be perceived as such by anyone so huge difference it is , because of some synergy between components but mostly because of a good choices of the mechanical, electrical and acoustical working dimensions device controls i implemented ...

Then claiming that the word musical is merely subjective and only a relative question of taste is not even wrong , it is beside any definition of the musicality concept in acoustic which for sure is a complex set of factors but these parameters , as the time domain , the harmonics etc exist objectively and we can learn to control them ...

As atmasphere try with his own design , we can select some acoustic factors on which we can act in our own room and at the end calling that "musical" not by arbitrary taste but as the result of our conscious room design controls ...

it is why i side here with atmasphere because amplifier musical quality design is no more the result of randomness than my room acoustic design ...

Musicality vary, can be in a secondary way a taste question ; but it is not primarily a taste question but a knowledge acoustic question objectively testable ..

Another example any one could try is to listen say a sax alto or a trumpet at 2-3 meters where the player is playing at live event SPL's, no one can tolerate it by more than maybe 5-10 minutes or maybe less but with a violin at 1m. it's the same.

Ā 

I think that we have to start " understanding " live MUSIC at near field listening and after that return home and try to " mimic " in our system what we listened then we will really know.

Ā 

R.

I think that we have to start " understanding " live MUSIC at near field listening and after that return home and try to " mimic " in our system what we listened then we will really know.

Ā 

Ā 

Trying to " mimic" live events will not do anything and means what ? If we try to understand the verb "mimic" in an audio context ?

It means almost nothing if we speak about a method of doing it ...

The only way to doing it , is not going to one hundred live events , so useful it can be to know how sound a piano timbre in near listeningĀ  ; it is learning to control all acoustic concepts in our room/system for doing it rightĀ  ...

Nothing else will do ...

Recognizing that a system in some room is better for reproducing a live event playback than another system in another room will not taught you how to do it ...

Learning basic acoustics concepts and experimenting will do ...Nothing else especially not upgrading the gear without knowing basic acoustics BEFORE ...

By the way basic acoustics concepts are not only about room acoustics ...

Dear @mahgister : I agree to disagree with you and I have to tell you that I have first hand experiences witrh the SS electronic design and when JosƩ and I was in the live design and choosing active/passive parts first step was reading the part manufacturers whole sheet and under which electrical conditions comes those part specs, second step was to make a measures by our self to mate those specs looking for " zero " tolerance/accurated ( MUSIC is accurate. ) and third step was listen it inside the board and " see " its good or bad relationship through the overall design voicing.

Other that all measurements on the audio item we made " hundreds " of voicing tests in our room/systems and in several other room/systems and the audio item was listened by many other audio/MUSIC friends.

JosĆ© and I never said: " hey sounds " musical " donā€™t you think? " but we ask by our self first what we ( each one ) donā€™t like and why and after that what we like and from here think if we could find out how to improve that " donā€™t like ".

Ā 

But what are behind that " voicing "? well itā€™s a mix of true objectivity along subjectivity where science is behind the objectivity and behind subjectivity full of first hand experiences achieved over our audio life listening to home reproduced MUSIC and live attended to listen MUSIC at near field and at normal position and even in " odd " positions.

Never our target , not even in the paper, was that our unit be " musical " but only that performed with top top quality level in any audio system and bullet proof against " deaf " gentlemans. At the end the target our target is to stay truer to the recording adding and losting almost " nothing " to the audio signal. The SS unit is accurated but not clinical bu emotionally engaging/it takes you.Ā 

I think that from some years now that kind of target is the one in any audio item design and by any designer inside a market price point.

Itā€™s not that if itā€™s " musical " but if itā€™s right. I have to say that overall my levels of tolerance at both frequency extremes is really low and no I have not golden ears and I know that as any one else I tolerate THD/IMD at higher levels that what I or we can imagine. Those 2 threads I mentioned confirm this.

Speaking of " golden ears " and several years ago Ortofon decided on porpose to tilt around + 1db-2db the high frequency, so itā€™s not that Ortofon canā€™t build a flat frequency cartridge no exist reasons to that tilt:

they made it several tests with its Golden Ear listeners panel with gentlemans that were instrument players, composers, audiophiles, MUSIC lovers, woman/man, etc. The test was to listen ( with different cartridge models ) the same cartridge model that comes with flat frequency and the same model with tilted HF and over the testing time the conclusion was that that Golden Ear ( as a fact 2 panels with different people. ) panel always prefered the cartridge with tilted HF. No one there ( Ortofon ). said nothing of more " musical " / less " musical ".

Ā 

What you listen at your place itā€™s musical ? I can say no itā€™s not, over the years all modifications you did it in your room/system put you here because itā€™s what you like what it sounds right to you. In may case is exactly like that.

Can I be wrong? yes I can but this is what I learned through my audioMUSIC life.

Ā 

R.

Ā 

Iā€™ve had gear, some of it expensive and well reviewed that was not enjoyable to listen toā€¦ to my way of thinking it was not musical for me. Iā€™ve had other gear that made me want to listen, made me smile and produced sound that was enjoyable to meā€¦ that was musical. Ā 
Ā 

If I try to analyze it furtherā€¦ Iā€™ll get hung up saying things like pianos sound like pianosā€¦ or the soundstage and dynamics were greatā€¦ or there was no sibilanceā€¦but those words donā€™t capture the essence of ā€œenjoyableā€¦funā€¦emotionalā€. Ā