2. misc-audio
  3. 160445-114477

Downside to "revealing" system?

Greetings, hope all are well. Since upgrading my rig over the years( ML 11a, REL s812s, VPI Prime Sig. Soundsmith The Voice cart, Pass xp25 phono, and Luxman L509X with Cardas cables and various powercords, plus S/R room treatments which have been unbelievable) many beloved older pressings have revealed themselves to be just about unlistenable. I'm speaking of, for example, 70s Reprise Neil Young, Randy Newman, Joni etc. Pressings are immaculate and cleaned on an Audio Desk cleaner and table is definitely set up properly. Newer " audiophile" pressings sound great. End result is I am listening to more cds since acquiring an Esoteric X01 D-2 which make even old cds sound great. I've always been a vinyl person and have over 4,000 records acquired over 30 years. I am thinking of getting a new cart next year and have heard great things about the Dyna XV-1s. ( input appreciated) Anyway, forgive the long post, I am actually grateful for a diversion from current events, stay well friends!
joeyfed55
jw944ts's avatar
jw944ts
327 posts
 
Interesting discussion. Of the many, many thousands of records, clearly some are going to sound better than others. I agree that on a wonderful system, all sound better, but some still sound like s---. But, to me, the “ absolute sound” does not exist. Find a few examples of genres that please you and these can be your references in comparing system changes. But please realize that they, too, are imperfect, just pleasing to your subjective self. If you enjoy spending your listening time to being hypercritical, that is your choice, but I prefer to enjoy each for what they bring, some more than others. There are many great wines, and many great wines taste different than other great wines. Which is right? Maybe not a great analogy, but finding enjoyment in a $20 decent bottle makes life more pleasant than sitting and saying all that is wrong with them compared to a wonderful ‘82 Bordeaux.....just my thoughts....enjoy!
Post removed 
jw944ts's avatar
jw944ts
327 posts
 
@dannad....exactly...none is “absolute” or “correct”...you may seek what pleases you the most, but improving one recording may seem to worsen another, so, I think, chose your favorite “references”, and work with those....
russashe
46 posts
 
Without some details regarding what unlistenable means I can’t begin to speculate on the source of your dissatisfaction. Does UL mean worn out, excess surface noise, thin brittle sound, lack of dynamics, distortion and fidelity issues? The issue I have seen with gear that really benefits from tweaks like speaker positioning, VTA, sound treatment etc. those same systems are way below par when they are not right. Less refined systems appear to be more robust when poor setup is at play. Much like horses, Thoroughbreds won’t run if the oats aren’t hand sorted but the old cart horse just keeps pulling. No!, I am not recommending downgrading for consistency. I am just pointing out that it is way too easy to make a stellar system sound hopeless but efforts to fix it can pay off royally. Throw in some granularity on what UL means in this instance. I have lots of experience observing great gear performing at levels way below that offered by mediocre consumer grade electronics.
rvpiano's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rvpiano
2,666 posts
 
“Revealing,” as so many have implied here seems to be a very subjective term. I agree with D.S.  If a classic old recording sounds “unlistenable” it’s not that the system is too revealing.  Revealing should mean more detail is exposed, not that an element of distortion is present.  A system that is truly revealing should sound good in all but the very worst recordings. Classic LP’s are not in that category.
More to discover