@erik_squires Thanks. I agree a subwoofer can have a significant effect. With my previous system, running Apogees, the subwoofer not only provided enhanced bass response, but also opened the sound stage ambient hall reproduction, improved the organic foundation of the presentation, and improved timbre. To my ears, my current system is solid to 30Hz and is very good to excellent in staging and imaging, as well as timbre compared to other systems I auditioned during the assembly process. I also agree with you on scale. I am limited by having to integrate the system into a living room of a modest house in the NYC suburbs. I do have work to do with my system. Portable acoustic panels between the speakers for critical listening will improve SQ and a better DAC (looking at a Bricasti M1S2 or M21). However, my observations focus on the sweet, liquid, flowing nature of a live performance where there is a vivid level of detail without a single grain and hint harshness. I believe it starts with the recording engineering and continues to be exacerbated through the recording chain for some better recordings (50s, 60s Mercury, Decca, RCA; recent 2L, Proprious, Naxos, RR, etc.) capture the effect to a degree. I believe unless there is a technology paradigm shift, we will always be behind in the reproduction of the absolute. As stated, in a week or so I will loose my calibration and get out of my current critical listening mode and enjoy my system again focusing on the artistic performance even though I am now in audiophile system evaluation mode which I consider a fault.
It Happens Every Time I Calibrate
It happens every time … being disappointed with the sound of my system after recalibrating my ears to a live performance. I just returned from a performance of Mendelssohn/Balanchine A Mid Summer Night’s Dream at the NYC Ballet sitting first tier/center at the David H. Koch theater enveloped in the sweet, liquid sound of the orchestra and chorus, and entranced in artistic cue of the choreography. The design intent of my system is founded on reproducing accurate timbre, reproduction of micro and macro dynamics, and organic imaging. Friends that have heard my system comment on the natural, sweet, liquid, dynamic and dense reproduction of recorded music. But it does not come close to a live performance. Much has to do with the recording. Some of the better ones get close. Regardless, even with my best recordings, there are certain artifacts, such as the way strings are reproduced where the sweetness and liquidity is not as pronounced, or the complexity of woodwind or brass instruments is not as prominent that make it clearly evident reproduced sound is far from absolute. My disappointment in my system will last a week or so until my ears loose there calibration, and I will be happy again with my system until the next time I go to the Met, Koch, or Carnegie. Do any of you have similar experiences?
- ...
- 10 posts total
It's a tough one to chase. I am sensitive to string harshness especially violins. Sometimes I find a live performance a little on the polite or muted side in regards to the strings and it takes a bit of an aural adjustment. That being said, I have tried to get my system to reproduce strings as close as I can to a live performance. |
@goose To my ears, it is not muted strings I hear in a live performance. Rather, I hear crystal clarity and vivid detail. Recorded music on a good system can produce the same clarity and detail. What I continue to try to articulate is that clarity and detail is, completely sweet and liquid and without any artifacts producing a harshness that is not natural to my ears. This, I feel, we have become familiar with as hi-end clarity and detail rather than a problem with the state of the art of recording and playback. Even the best multi 6-figure systems I have listened to cannot achieve this level of sweetness and liquidity. |
| Post removed |
- 10 posts total