Thiel Owners

Hi Tom,

By tonality I suppose you meant frequency domain.  But time and frequency domain are the same.  You can convert from time domain to frequency domain and vice versa.  

For example, if you have a waveform in time domain, you can perform Fourier analysis into frequency domain, but then later on, if you want, you can convert the frequency domain back to the original time signal with no loss of information.

You probably had in mind steady state frequency response.  But when you convert from time domain to frequency domain, the phase information is still there, so no information is lost and the frequency domain is just as valid as in time domain.  One is no superior than the other.

Yes - the impulse response contains both time and frequency information which are related in known ways decipherable by Fourier and Hilbert Transforms. But, I am referring to the auditory-brain mechanisms which perceive frequency/tonality differently from impulse/time. This area is much more obscure and unstudied and, I believe, contains they key to understanding why some folks think phase/time coherence is valuable in music reproduction.

I land firmly in that camp - that it matters. But most of the audio engineering community (Toole and others) believe otherwise. My extensive personal experience leads me to value it and therefore try to understand it. I also know how easy it is to demonstrate the false negative premise - to 'prove' anything isn't so.

Over the years there have been many reviews and comments regarding how well details can be heard with Thiel speakers. Recall John Atkinson having to re-master a recording when getting the 2.2 for review, because he could hear edits and punches which had previously gone un-noticed. I recall a commenter stating how 'screwed-up' the Thiel 3.5 was because the orchestral recording sounded like the listener was hanging from the rafters! Guess what? The mics were hanging from the rafters. So, I consider his condemnation as a compliment - the speaker allowed apprehension of spatial presentation masked by even very expensive studio / mastering monitors.

This spatial ability is not related to frequency response. There are many speakers with far flatter frequency response because first order requires very broad range of all overlapping drivers, operating far out of their comfort zones. Thiel went to all that trouble to get flat-enough frequency response because we were and remain convinced of the musical importance of coherence, even if most people don't care and most experts dismiss its validity. That's what specialty companies do, they propose their unique vision. 

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your detail feedback.  Something just struck me that could give me a clue.  I keep thinking that music is limited to 20KHz, but that's not true, it's our hearing that is supposedly limited to 20KHz.  BUT musical instrument has no frequency limitation.  For example, when a drum is struck, the energy could be well above 20KHz.  So the speakers whether we are aware of it or not, are required to reproduced music at quite a bit higher than 20KHz.

Anyway, more to come.

tomthiel

how are you enjoying the Sony SCD-1 player in your hot rod garage or studio?  Do you utilize this player for CD, SACD or both on playback?

Any other spinners in your current possession? Excellent discussion on the whole time/phase front.

Happy Listening!

JA - the SCD-1 is sick. After a few discs, it would not play, would not open its lid and showed bogus text . . . It is at the shop, needs a new master control board, which Sony does not support. I'm looking for a used board.
But . . . while it played, it was pretty grand, both on CDs and SACDs. Compared to my reference Philips CD-80, which was SotArt in 1985, the SCD-1 was more relaxed and vibrant. I do hope to get it back someday.