"Frightening" or "Relaxing" sound quality?


What do I mean by that?
Not that I wish to start a new controversy --- knowing some of the usual contributors, it may not be entirely avoidable, so let’s see what gives.

Following some of the threads on the –ultimate- ‘phase-coherent’, 'time-coherent' or yet better, both, 1st order up to steep slopes, an so on, cross-over opinions, I have these notions. So let me explain.

One quite well known ‘maverick’ (done some picking on some other well known reviewer, posting it on his site...), somewhere he states: a good speaker must have the ability 'to frighten you' --- his words, and I can see/hear what he means, at least I think so.

Some other dealer in Wilson’s marvellous products (he's around my place), tells me he can only listen for about ½ hour than he is 'exhausted' --- i.e. too intense to do any longer listening…

Nobody is talking about ‘listening fatigue’ actually, it is more an emotional fatigue, as far as I get it.

Now me, I go to a life orchestra listening and emerge pretty well ‘up-lifted’, never had any fatigue (maybe my bottom, when it got a bit too lengthy) never mind emotional fatigue! Gimme Mahler, Stravinsky, Mussorgsky, heavy (classical) metal, whow --- upliftment. Never occur to me run away, get uneasy, GET FRIGHTENED!

I clearly get ‘emotional fatigue’ listening to some types of speakers!
What were they?
I think they had one thing in common: They all where, in some way, VERY realistic, but they also had something else in common, --- they did not, as it seems, stick too well to a reasonably flat amplitude response… ah ha.

What this design regimen seems to produce during listening to keep on making you jump? Apparently always something rather unexpected in happening! Now we do also know what makes us (as humans) ‘jump’: it is some unexpected ‘something’ coming ‘out of the bush’ a snapping branch, some sort of VERY REAL sound, that does not quite go along with the general set of the acoustic environment.

Now take some ‘benign, dumb’ kind of speaker, it has so little in REALISTIC sound to offer, it just can’t frighten you. You (your instinct, subconscious) just don’t ‘buy’ into it.
Now take a VERY realistic sound-producer (the ones that can make you jump) and mess with the amplitude response, what you are getting is this on the edge of your seat reaction. The VERY opposite of what a lot of music has as its intention. (Not like AV ‘Apocalypse now’ kind of chopper going to attack you from any old angle, top, behind, etc.)

Lastly, has this something to do with why lots of folks perhaps shy away from these sort of designs?
I have listened to my share and I shy away, because as REAL everything seems to be in the reproduction, it keeps me in a state of inner tension, apprehension --- even listening to some Mozart Chamber music, as there is ALWAYS something very REAL, but somehow unsettling going on.

It might just explain why some of these designs don’t ‘cut the mustard’ and not survive in the long run. Unless, and open to opinion, that we are (most of us anyway) so messed up and transistor-radio-sound-corrupted that we seem ‘unworthy of these ‘superior’ audio-designs.
I honestly don’t think so, but you may have it otherwise, as they say YMMV.

I thought it is of value to bring this up, since it does not ever seem to be part of any of the more ‘technical’ discussions ---- the human ‘fright/flight’ element in ignoring proper FLAT amplitude response in favour of minimal insertion losses, or proper impedance compensation, notch filtering, et al, just so to obtain this form of stressful realism.

It might be also something to do with age, a much younger listener (in my experience) likes to be stirred up, and emotionally knocked all over the place ---- listening to Baroque music like bungee jumping?!
Maybe.
It be interesting to hear if it is just my form of ‘over-sensitiveness’ that brings forth this subject.
Best,
Axel
axelwahl
Hi Mrtennis
you say:
>>> philosophy has anything to do with the subject <<<
Music is about LIFE, so it happens to be with Philosophy! That just by the by, therefore I of course you would not get my applause...

I've been using some similes here, which must have escaped your attention? And I have only done that, since it is NOTHING MEASURABLE we are talking about. Uless you have some fright or relexatation 'Richter scale' handy that I have not yet heard about. If so, let's have it please.
Now, if you feel, that if it can't be measured, it is not a subject for enquiry, than so be it.
I'm NOT going to open THAT can, it's too old and what's in there stinks by now --- big time.

:-)
Axel
Sorry I should have put your whole front of sentence i.e.
>>> **i don't think** philosophy has anything to do with the subject <<<
It does make some difference I guess :-)
Cheers
Axel
PS: Excuse the previous entries typo, but you still won't have my applause :-)
i don't think philosophy has anything to do with the subject. i detect a tad of obsessiveness with the words "frightening" and "relaxing".

You are right, I guess I meant semantics and not philosophy. Nevermind, it just struck me, based on your many comments questioning the deeper meaning of audiophile semantics, that you would probably draw a strong distinction between "an African or European Swallow" in a discussion about "unladen air velocity" ;-)
My mentioning of Decartes has nothing to do with philosophy per se, but with the underlying premisses or a point of view, from wich someone looks at what he percieves to be real. In that sense, if we know it or not, we are all "philosophers".

Hi Axel,
If I had the choice, I'd always opt for a "scary" stereo. Life is too short to fall asleep over it or rather why be happy with the mediocre?? Even if you cannot afford what all the gurus are raving about, there are enough tricks and tweeks to make your stuff sing--if you have the patience, the passion and the ear for it.