I crave detail. If it's all euphoric and warm, I'd figure I was being cheated. But, then again, I'm all vinyl and tubes so anything could be in there! My current main rig is detailed, sweet, holographic and surprisingly clear, transparent and neutral.
Is the appeal to euphonic distortion learned?
Hi everyone,
I have been thinking a little bit about the idea of euphonic distortion. The idea that we can make an amplifier or preamplifier sound better by not being so absolutely true to the input. The common story is that by adding 2nd order harmonics the music sounds more pleasant to more people. Certainly Pass has written a great deal, and with more nuance and detail about this and makes no bones about his desire to make a good sounding, rather than well measuring product.
Lets keep this simple description of euphonic distortion for the sake of argument, or we’ll devolve into a definition game.
I’m wondering whether it is possible that this is in large part learned? For instance, if I grew up with non-euphonic amps and then was exposed to an amp with high amounts of 2nd order distortion would I like it? Is the appeal here one which you have to have learned to like? Like black coffee through a French press?
And this discussion is of course in line with my thoughts about the ear/brain learning process. That there are no absolute’s in music reproduction because we keep re-training our ears. We keep adjusting what we listen to and ultimately at some point have to decide whether the discrimination between gear makes us happier or not. (Go ahead writers, steal this topic and don't mention me again, I know who you are).
I have been thinking a little bit about the idea of euphonic distortion. The idea that we can make an amplifier or preamplifier sound better by not being so absolutely true to the input. The common story is that by adding 2nd order harmonics the music sounds more pleasant to more people. Certainly Pass has written a great deal, and with more nuance and detail about this and makes no bones about his desire to make a good sounding, rather than well measuring product.
Lets keep this simple description of euphonic distortion for the sake of argument, or we’ll devolve into a definition game.
I’m wondering whether it is possible that this is in large part learned? For instance, if I grew up with non-euphonic amps and then was exposed to an amp with high amounts of 2nd order distortion would I like it? Is the appeal here one which you have to have learned to like? Like black coffee through a French press?
And this discussion is of course in line with my thoughts about the ear/brain learning process. That there are no absolute’s in music reproduction because we keep re-training our ears. We keep adjusting what we listen to and ultimately at some point have to decide whether the discrimination between gear makes us happier or not. (Go ahead writers, steal this topic and don't mention me again, I know who you are).
- ...
- 63 posts total
I don’t think its learned.Very good posts right on the spot for me thanks... I will only add that all discussion in audio about S.S and tubes are secondary to the main point : how to reach the highest S.Q. possible... Why? Because that means nothing at all comparing tubes/versus S.S. in general... There is too much difference in the different embeddings conditions where these comparisons took place sometimes and too much difference between bad and good S.S. and bad and good tubes and all levels between bad and good.... Then chosing one abslutely over the other possiblity make no sense....Anyway electronic design can create these 2, tubes and S.S., on par with each other... Sansui made it 45 years ago.... Acoustic control is one of the 3 keys to S.Q. and the main one key, choice of gear are only fouth,five,and six’th keys..... Second key is electrical noise floor control and third key mechanical vibrations and resonance control... Why? Because it is way more easy to buy a decent very good piece of gear than implementing the processus of controlling all the different parameters embeddings ,especially the acoustical one... How do you think a tube amplifier or a S.S. amplifier sound in a bad room? How much value can we give to a review in an bad or not optimally controlled room when the reviewers speak about "nuances" and subtle acoustic cues ? Creating this thread is fun anyway and we must learn something with post like the one i just used ..... Thanks to the poster....Thanks to the OP. |
I crave detail. If it’s all euphoric and warmUltimately it is not the gear that will give that, even well chosen, but acoustical embeddings controls .... Why? Because detailed and euphonic are a gross and not so subtle way to speak about acoustical qualities that are dependant for their manifestation way more from the embeddings controls than from the gear itself even the speakers for most of us with speakers under 5,000 dollars... Myself i want way more than details and euphony, i want pin point imaging, natural tonal timbre, over the speakers soundstage, listener envelopment experience, and good source acoustical width experience... If i had that i will have details and euphony but because of the rightfully controlled acoustical, electrical and mechanical embeddings, not by the magical virtue of a brand name manufactured product, so well designed it is.... It is easy to buy something good nowadays, much more difficult to place the gear in an optimally set controlled environment.... |
There are real instruments 🎹. They can be heard at live concerts (currently excluded). There are hi fi systems that can make you feel like you’re listening to such an event in your home. A lot of high end approved gear sounds like your listening to the players in an anechoic chamber. Use your ears 👂. Talk to someone who has experienced the high end journey from the 60’s till today. Call Steve at Decware...you will learn much and be happier for it! |
- 63 posts total