The answer to your question is yes, but has little to do with the audio high end. Aging produces hearing loss, and that means at some point, if you want to hear all the sounds of life, hearing aids. Yes, there are 'hi end' hearing aids, some costing $5K each. So, invest in the major hearing aid companies, and get ready to spend.
Aging and Treble and Income?
I'm in my late 50s; been listening to, and playing, music for most of my life. I still occasionally haunt the salons, but these days not to buy new gear; more just curiosity about developments in our wonderful hobby. These days I just buy music; records, CDs and the odd download.
I was listening to a very expensive system recently, a combination of an excellent digital front end, feeding an exotic tube array of components, and outputting via a beautifully constructed set of English high-end speakers.
A very impressive sound to say the least. Not like real music though: very very good hi-fi, but not real.
One of the obvious oddities was the frequency response above maybe 4k. Just incorrect. Very clear, very emphasised and incisive, no doubt, but not right.
And it occured to me that this isn't unusual. And then a set of questions came to me. For the purposes of this debate I will exclude the 128k iPod generation - their tastes in listening are their own, and as much driven by budget as space constraint as anything else. I prefer to concentrate on the generation that has increased leisure and disposable income. It's a sad fact that this generation is plagued by the inevitability of progressive hearing loss, most often accompanied by diminished ability to hear higher frequencies. But it's this generation that can afford the 'best' equipment.
My question is simply this: is it not possible (or highly likely) that the higher-end industry is driven by the need to appeal to those whose hearing is degrading? In other words, is there a leaning towards the building-in of a compensatory frequency emphasis in much of what is on the shelves? My question is simplistic, and the industry may indeed be governed by the relentless pursuit of accuracy and musicality, but so much that I have hear is, I find, very difficult to listen to as it is so far from what I believe to be reality. Perhaps there has always been an emphasis in making our sytems sound "exciting" as opposed to "honest": I can understand the pleasure in this pursuit, as it's the delight in technology itself and I see nothing very wrong in that. But, all this emphasised treble....I just wonder if anyone out there in cyberspace agrees with me?
I was listening to a very expensive system recently, a combination of an excellent digital front end, feeding an exotic tube array of components, and outputting via a beautifully constructed set of English high-end speakers.
A very impressive sound to say the least. Not like real music though: very very good hi-fi, but not real.
One of the obvious oddities was the frequency response above maybe 4k. Just incorrect. Very clear, very emphasised and incisive, no doubt, but not right.
And it occured to me that this isn't unusual. And then a set of questions came to me. For the purposes of this debate I will exclude the 128k iPod generation - their tastes in listening are their own, and as much driven by budget as space constraint as anything else. I prefer to concentrate on the generation that has increased leisure and disposable income. It's a sad fact that this generation is plagued by the inevitability of progressive hearing loss, most often accompanied by diminished ability to hear higher frequencies. But it's this generation that can afford the 'best' equipment.
My question is simply this: is it not possible (or highly likely) that the higher-end industry is driven by the need to appeal to those whose hearing is degrading? In other words, is there a leaning towards the building-in of a compensatory frequency emphasis in much of what is on the shelves? My question is simplistic, and the industry may indeed be governed by the relentless pursuit of accuracy and musicality, but so much that I have hear is, I find, very difficult to listen to as it is so far from what I believe to be reality. Perhaps there has always been an emphasis in making our sytems sound "exciting" as opposed to "honest": I can understand the pleasure in this pursuit, as it's the delight in technology itself and I see nothing very wrong in that. But, all this emphasised treble....I just wonder if anyone out there in cyberspace agrees with me?
- ...
- 72 posts total
I went to a small UK show in Southern England, graced by Dan D'Agostino, no less. He gave an interesting run down on his new Momentum amps and very new Pre amp, appearing over this side of the Atlantic for the first time. The 2 "High End" rooms, had Wilson speakers, the Sasha in one and the next one up in the other, sorry I forgot the name. The point is, I have never got Wilson speakers, at all, edgy, etched, HiFi, not music. The first room with the Sashas, first had a big Krell power amp. Just my usual, teeth being drilled experience. As I was about to run from the room, the dealer changed at an Audio Research ref 150. What a change, all the detail, soundstage depth, but creamy, full bodied, lovely sound. I finally get it Mr Wilson, thanks. The other room had the momentum monoblocks and new Pre amp. Again a beautiful rich, detailed sound, wide, deep soundstage. If my eyes had been closed, I would have thought a top tube monoblock, like Lamm. So what I thought of as hard, tipped up dry treble, in this case, proved to be the matching amps, not the speakers and my prejudice against Wilson, Focal and other speakers I consider "HiFi", may have been wrong all along. I still have my doubts about Focal though. |
Once again, Here is my favorite resource for understanding what I should hear when listening. I have a framed printed copy hanging in my listening room for reference when needed. Useful in this case to identify how variations at higher frequencies would affect what you might hear. Notice that air, definition, and pierce are three things that a tipped up high end might emphasize, for better or for worse, depending how well done. The key is in the "how well done" part I am willing to bet. Depending on how well done (including distortion levels), it might come across as either lovely or irritating, with a fine line between I would say from my experience. Other than "air", those over 45-50 can probably still hear most of whats going on short of "air" I suppose and be drawn in or repelled accordingly and not have to worry as much at whats going on above 12-14Khz or so. The biggest problems however are most likely in the parts indicated where our ears are most sensitive, like at ~ 10Khz or so (associated with "pierce" and "definition") which comes more into play for everyone. |
- 72 posts total