2. misc-audio
  3. 1289618161

Which attributes do you value most?

Here is a list of attributes commonly valued by audiophiles, in no particular order:

1. Resolution
2. Soundstaging
3. PRaT
4. Dynamics
5. Tonal balance
6. Harmonic content
7. Accuracy
8. Coherence
9. Frequency extension
10. Scale

The list could go on and on, but you get the idea. I’m interested to hear which attributes people prioritize above others. I don’t really have an agenda, except to learn more about how people’s values influence their approach to system building. With that in mind, it would be helpful if you listed a few of your components (assuming your system isn’t linked). So...

Which attributes do you value most?
bryoncunningham
tmsorosk
1,013 posts
 
Smooth , warm , and rhythmic with no piercing or ringing .
bryoncunningham OP
890 posts
 
1. Harmonic content*
2. Coherence
3. PRaT

*Al's term 'harmonic accuracy' might be a better term than 'harmonic content' for expressing my preference, since 'harmonic accuracy' implies a resemblance to reality, while 'harmonic content' does not.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
at heart , i believe most owners of stereo system, want their music to be listenable. the attributes listed as the subject of the thread , while important to some , to varying relative degrees, pale in comparison to the ability to listen without being offended, even if their favorite attribute is not satisfied to the extent desired.

i think ranking the 10 factors listed above is more an intellectual exercise and less an instance of reality.

there are variables which cannot be completely controlled, which impact the 10 factors.
bryoncunningham OP
890 posts
 
i think ranking the 10 factors listed above is more an intellectual exercise and less an instance of reality.

The OP did not ask anyone to rank the ten attributes listed. It asked people which attributes they valued the most. The ten attributes listed were merely examples.

It seems to me that priorities among audiophiles vary, and that the variation in priorities is reflected in the variation in systems. In my view, understanding how people's priorities influence their approach to system building is a genuine attempt at learning, and not merely an "intellectual exercise."
ths364
181 posts
 
The "PRaT" acronym is new to me and seems to be a valuable descriptor for a large part of what I value in music reproduction.Without this,I find a system and in many cases a recording to be less than engaging.
Soundstaging is quite a fascinating phenomena for me and frequently a factor in choosing source material for listening.
A systems inability to project this information is not crucial IF the dynamic weight,tonal accuracy and frequency extension are all extant in the playback.

My systems are made up of mostly older but well maintained stuff that may be more mid-fi than audiophile but I'm trying. Dynaudio Special One, Harman Kardon PM655-vxi integrated, Dynaco st-70, Large Advents,DCM Timeframe 600,
Pioneer PL-71 turntable, Elac-Miracord 40H turntable...
More to discover