How do I smooth out violins?

01-05-13: Rrog
The problem with a reference recording is it can sound completely different on every system it's played on. Does that make one system bad and another good? I don't think so. Every system I have assembled gets the most from a separate group of recordings. I think it takes many many recordings to analyze a system. It would be nice if we could use one recording, but it's not that simple.

True enough, Ron. But in this case we are trying to address a single very specific problem. And IMO a problem that WILL occur with many classical orchestral recordings no matter how good the system is, as a consequence of excessive multi-miking and processing. And IMO a problem that will NOT occur with a well engineered, minimally miked, minimally processed recording unless there is a specific problem or problems in the system.

As Frogman said earlier, it is entirely possible that part of the problem is in the recordings, and something in the system is making it worse. Listening to a known good reference recording would help to isolate the degree to which the system and the recordings may be contributing to the problem. It would also minimize the likelihood that the system will be end up being changed in a manner that compensates for the problems in the mediocre recordings, but degrades or limits its performance with high quality recordings.

It is, of course, a traditional audiophile dilemma that improving the quality of the reproduction of good recordings may in some ways make run of the mill recordings sound worse. And each listener needs to optimize that tradeoff in accordance with his or her own preferences. But it would seem likely to be an exercise in futility to try to optimize that tradeoff without including one or more recordings that are of impeccable quality, and that can be counted on to not contribute to the problem that is being addressed.

Regards,
-- Al

Jmcgrogan2:

" Why do you feel the need to have someone else tell you how something sounds? I realize that reviews are merely ads, I've read many in the last few decades....some are right, some are wrong, some are right AND wrong. So what's your point?"

I don't need anyone to tell me how a CD player sounds. I knew how it would 'sound' before I bought it. And just for the record, I owned the CD5004 before I ever read the review, since I never read stereophile unless it reviews something I already own. Also, I owned the CD 5400, which is the exact same player as the CD5004 with a different face plate. So, I have owned the player since 2004. I also own the SA8001. The difference in sound between the two? There is none. The SA8001 plays SACD, that's the only difference.

And my POINT is this: Why would anyone ASSUME the player is causing the problem? There is no evidence to make the player suspect, except, it's common sense price. So knowing the audiophile mindset, that the least expensive item is always the 'problem', I thought bringing up the Stereophile review would mean something to the high-end audiophile crowd and result is better advice to the OP. It was as simple as that.

One last point. I always try to respect people who post, and will always take them at their word when it comes to the problems they state. BUT, I suspect many posters just want to be told to BUY or UPGRADE. Because the only advice anyone seems to take or even consider is the advice to replace something or buy something new. Just my perception. I could be wrong. Thanks for the post.
Cheers

Adding a tube preamp will address the issue
I would also play with replacing some caps in the dna amps
My opinion of course

Musicfile,

Good suggestions, but finances don't allow for replacing caps in the DNA and a tube pre...will have to go with just the pre for now.

Gentlemen, my two cents on this. Pretty much I agree with Frogman and Al. While they are correct that some digital recordings have gotten better, and there are even a few older ones that sound fine, it is a very sad fact that most of them are extremely over-miked and over-mixed, and just REALLY suck in general. I have plenty of first-hand experience of this, watching so-called "sound engineers" with absolutely no clue what they are doing. It is truly painful, and even infuriating. Almost no one seems to know how mikes should really be set up any more - they figure it's digital now, it's easy, it's just pushing buttons. Use as many mikes as possible, wherever we want, and then mix it to sound however the hell we want later. It is truly appalling for us musicians. They have especially lost the art, though, of doing sound at live concerts, but that's a whole other rant, though it is very much related to the non-thinking, non-listening approach that most of them have ever since digital recording was possible.

Sorry, but I happened to have an especially bad experience at tonight's show with the idiots who are the "sound guys". OK, I'm done ranting now.