What makes the Bloom around instruments . . .

Went for a listen to the song mentioned and my AS S30 made the organ plain to hear. If the Pass amp kills the organ then I have struck gold.

Chuck, the quote you posted from Rtn1 is as good a description of the quality called "bloom" as I have ever read (though as Elizabeth said, many call it "air," an even more vague term). To me, this is one of the most undefinable of all audio reproduction factors. I think a combination of elements contribute to it - Elizabeth, Noble, Bryon, Baranyi, and others all made good comments on it. To me, these factors add up to much more than one term could describe, but if some want to call it bloom, so be it - it has to be called something, if we are going to discuss it. For me, and for many fellow orchestral musicians, this is one of the most important qualities of sound reproduction - this bloom factor goes a very long way towards determining how "real" a system will sound. Digital and solid state have a very hard time reproducing this particular quality of instrumental and vocal timbres - as I have said before, I think it has a great deal to do with how much of the harmonics/overtones of/in these timbres are reproduced.

I have never heard one of those Pass amps - I would very much like to someday.

Fool,

If the Pass amp kills the organ on the DS song why would you want to hear it? =8>D

Let's take our audiophile hats off for a moment, and ask: In general, what do we usually think of when we hear the word "bloom"? Speaking for myself, I think of a flower. When a flower blooms, what does it do? It radiates in all directions. In music/audio, that is exactly what "bloom" means. It is the sense that the sound of a sonic image radiates in all directions. It creates a sense of dimensionality, with an audible sense of the sound projecting not just forward, but also sideways, and to the rear. Additionally, contrary to the audiophilic quest for the elusive "black space between images", there is a sense of great energy in those spaces; rich with the overtones, and undertones of each image.

That is what happens when an acoustic musical instruments play in a real space. Their sound is projected in all directions. The fundamental tones, and overtones (harmonics) of each note that is played create "difference tones". These difference tones are the result of two notes (frequencies) creating a lower tone, which is the difference in frequency of the two original notes. This process is repeated a practically infinite number of times in the course of a musical performance, creating an incredibly complex sonic soup. The ability of a component to pass that much information through is also referred to as the ability to resolve, or pass low level information. However, "bloom" is not a quality that a component should bring to the table. True bloom is something to be retrieved from a recording. The test is simple: If all recordings sound "bloomy" through a given component, that "bloom" is a distortion. Recordings are subject to the limitations of the equipment used to make the recording. In other words, not all recordings have "bloom". Some were recorded in a way, or with equipment, that will sound really flat, and two dimensional, with little sense of the expansion of overtones; without any "bloom". But the great recordings, when played back on equipment that can resolve that subtle low level information will sound, as we all know, fantastic.

I grew up in the tube days,and there are descriptive words that are being used now,that's different from what I've learned.The best way that I know of on how to describe a lot of these words that are used,is to have two different amps,one that has a lot of the characteristic,the other, very little.This was how I learned them,hanging around audio stores,since I was little.Basically it captures all the warmth,timbre,air,and the 3d imaging,full body of an instrument,hardly anything lacking.Upper end SS amps do capture more of it now,but not quite as much as a tube amp does,at least in my opinion.I may be wrong on my description.Threads like these are hard to post on,because the way the descriptions seen to very more and more.A person that's fairly new to audio,will start using these descriptive words,on what they think they are,and it may very.One audio dealer(in hi-end),that was around since the tube days, caught me of guard.He asked me this when tube amps started returning,what does the word liquid mean,that you tube amp guys tend to use.He asked me,because he knew I wouldn't embarrass him.It took a while,but I came in there with an old Dynaco(full of liquid),a old Nad(dry),and a couple of old recordings that had some instruments that were recorded on gear,that was real liquid sounding.He got it right from the beginning,just nobody ever compared it to him.He said he felt dumb,and seem embarrassed,should have known,but was relieved to know for sure.He was familiar the sound difference of it,but didn't want to use that word until somebody assured him.