Looking for the next level in imaging...

toddalin

I prefer the "without" wavetouch. Sounds like you’ve removed the body and dynamics.

I thank you for your time to listen my video and for your honest feedback!

I expect that since your ears are used to your system which sounds good forwarded focus sound and bit aggressive (in good way) if I remember correctly.

The sound "dynamic" can be strong and big sound. My system can be louder but I recorded my video at reasonable volume.

Another meaning of "sound dynamic" is ability to show subtle nuances in reproduction audio. And I think my system does that well. Again, I explained (my last post) why many of you can’t hear my system correctly (takes some time to be able to hear it) since my system is only natural sound system in the world.

Similarly, in the thread when the option of the cuts includes the original, the MBLs, and the wavetouch, I preferred the original. The MBLs sounded too thin (maybe almost "tinny") and the wavetouch sounded contrived.

Again. Thank you for your honest feedback!

The original music is always best. No reproduction audio beats the original music. I put the original music and my video together to show they are natural sounds.

In my other post (link below), the best sounding MBL system ($million) and my humble system (sounds contrived tho) are at least comparable. MBL is using a master tape. My system is playing downloaded YT video (worse than MP3) and still show good musicality.

The original music is recorded from singer’s mouth to mic direct (1~2 feet) in studio. And my video is the reproduction audio plus the sound of room. Alex/WTA

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/looking-for-the-next-level-in-imaging?page=2

What I‘m saying is, if you take a cross section of musicians the percentage that have high end stereo systems and take time to listen intently is likely no different than the general population. I‘m not saying they can‘t hear their instruments. Years of playing and practice brings a unique sensitivity to the sound of musical instruments and voice. No question musicians can hear the subtle variations between instruments to such an extent as to identify time period and maker of an instrument. And the same is true for an experienced audiophile. They can hear things and identify sounds many of us would miss.

To brag about tricking people makes no sense. Lots of ways technology is used to fool our senses. And to estimate the sensitivity of someone else‘s hearing without a formal hearing test seems foolhardy. How can we even estimate our own hearing ability without a formal hearing test?  But a formal hearing test is just one factor.  Learning to listen is just as important.

Scene from, Kung Fu, the TV show ca. 1970.  “Old man, how is it that you could hear the grasshopper at my feet.  Young man, how is it that you could not?“

Get yourself a pair of LRS+ with the right electronics and sit back and enjoy superb resolution, staging, and imaging until you find your solution.  

For an average sized room... "it don't get no better" than the LRS+... no matter what the price.  Very much like the ESL 57's.  

And when (if) you find your solution... and... you think an investment of 50-100 times the price of the LRS+ is justified... you can move the LRS+ to your office or bedroom, because you definitely won't be selling them.  

The LRS+ is great in a small room, I use one in my office. Though the lowest model from these guys may have more resolution. They also have models that go up to $50k.

Diptyque audio - Hauts-parleurs plans Haute-Fidélité - REFERENCE

However, for me if want a large sound stage and imagining I would look at a KEF Blade Meta (or 2 Meta).

My Livingroom speakers, the Yamaha NS5000, also have great imaging but the Blade is the best at that for me. The Yamaha drivers sound better to me though.