Ultra high resolution


Hi folks, I suppose this is a question none could answer appropriately. How come that some (there are to my knowledge only two of them) amplifier brands are building such ultra high resolution solid state amplifiers without having a treble that sounds shrill or piercing or artificial? It is of course proprietary info if you ask those manufacturers.
Is it because of very tight selection of matched transistors? Is it because lack of global but high level of local feedback? Is it because of the use of very expensive military grade parts? Is it because of the power supply? Is it because of the application of special circuit design? Is it because all of the above?

Chris
dazzdax
Oh, a percussionist, no wonder... ;-)

(Sorry, but I couldn't resist. I play trumpet and guitar, so you're welcome to come back with an appropriate rebuttal).

It takes two to agree to disagree, but I do agree to disagree, for now.

The case isn't closed however, because you'll constantly find disagreement with your position.

Dave
To me ultra resolution doesn't mean a sharp, piercing treble. It is the antithesis of that, but without a rolled off treble. With ultra resolution is as if you hear music breathing in front of and around you.

Chris
Chris,

Yes, It does clarify what kind of treble and tonal balance we are all talking about. Sometime there is music content that is embedded in recording that just pops out either from way back or side with such a realistic tonal balance that you just say out loud wow and for a moment you wonder whether it came from somewhere around the house or outside or what?

Also other aspect of the disagreements here is as to how much details one prefers relates to which seating position (5th or 10th row- actual seating position near field or far field at home) perspective he or she prefers (like Mr T). Once you get HR system, I think it does not matter if you are 5 ft away. 10 ft away or up and around the house or how loud the system plays, you should get in general similar palatable and believable tonal balance and right details amount.
My preference (or have right now) is to have this (right tonal balance, harmonics and detail combo) at the level tad (extremely small) below what should be right in real life. I would rather have my mind fill-in/ make up for rest of the tiny amount. Weird reasoning I agree, but for me it works and thus more records/material becomes listen-able. I have 2 digital and 2 anaIog sources and this set up works great for large % of perm and combination. Although I have optimized my system for one Digital and one analog source in particular. I think it does not take very long (different recordings have different balance) to tilt the balance the other way so quick that it gets unrealistic so quick more often.

Okay I will get off my soapbox now.

I do ( and I think others) recognize what Chris is talking about.

Rodman99999, Thanks for the software recommendations.
Not an unreasonable question, but can I have some fun and give answers in three groups; System, Listening position and then Vinyl software no silver discs.

This is one system I can suggest; Wilson Maxx2, ASR Emitter II with battery option or Dartzeel electronics, Acustic Raven 3 motors, Dynavector DV 507II arm or others, Dynavector DV DRT XV1s or Clearaudio Goldfinger cartridge, 2nd arm Graham Phantom with Lyra Titian Mono or Dynavector DRT XV1s mono, Nordost Valhalla cables.

Listening position: 4-5 feet centered

You can delete amp and speakers and go to Stax Omega Series II Earspeakers

Software: Shefield Labs, M&K Direct Disc; Telarc; Many of these new 45's; Nonesuch percussion