Which is more accurate: digital or vinyl?

"The materials and how they are executed in that instrument set the boundaries and limitations of the variable ways it can potentially sound but no player can ever play outside of those boundaries.”

Maybe we should think of it this way: "Boundaries and limitations" suggest that their is a range of timbers and that timber is only realized when the instrument is played. Therefore, musician+instrument= timber. And since ‘musician’ is a variable...well, you get the point.

Lacee,

I don't know if i misunderstood you or not but i would not necessarily look to studio's as a reference for hi fidelity. I don't mean this as a blanket statement but i think it's fair to say that the goals of studio systems and home systems are slightly or greatly different. Isn't the goal of their speaker set up more as "monitors" to dissect the music to facilitate the recording process whereas home systems try to... you know, reproduce a musically satisfying sound?

Don't some studios set up speakers up high, behind mixing consoles and in positions that would be considered poor to audiophiles?

Lacee, i hear what you are saying about the "paradox of high resolution". I understand and know what you mean.

High resolution in systems CAN BE a paradox but it doesn't necessarily HAVE TO BE a paradox and certain cases isn't.

It is only when high resolution renders instruments timbres with artificial attributes that one experiences this paradox but what if the resolution goes way up but artifacts go way down at the same time?

Take for example that dylan harmonica track. First, i will mention that solid gold in the allaerts mc 1b mk2 cart creates this rich, lush, dense, tonal shading to certain instrumental timbres that you have to hear to understand.(this thing gives me a better chance/headstart at achieving the goal imho) Now what i have done and what i continue to do (when i'm up for it(not irritated by all the tweaking) is... i play back the track and try and pinpoint the unnatural artifact in the harmonica, if i note one then i try and adjust vta and vtf or cartridge torques. When i change one of those three paramaters then, naturally the others are effected and therefore a whole new range of possibilities is introduced again.(this is good news and bad news at the same time)(bad in that it increases the potential but bad because it means more tweaking!) It's a bit like looking for a needle in a haystack. I try to get things sounding as best as i can with those contingencies but if the harmonica still doesn't sound real, then i go to moving cables around or interconnects, play the track and again try to pin point an artificial attribute in the timbre. Sometimes a change will introduce the attribute that is missing, like say, its correct timbral weight but in doing so i lose its resolution , in that the resolution now sounds mechanical. Ok no good...keep going! In retrospect, components that i felt weren't going to take me closer to the goal leave the system and others are introduced...so i guess it went something like this...

Years x many components x sourcing exotic components with exotic materials and designs x tweaking til the cows come home x failing x hundreds of listens x crossing my fingers x thinking...

Eventually you can dial in all the timbral attributes present in a harmonica and remove all the attributes that don't pertain to a harmonica.

How many attributes does the timbre of a harmonica have? 10, 20, 50, 100, ?

If one by one you topple each attribute and present them all at the same time what do you get? the sound of a real harmonica.

Anyways...as i am sure you will agree? resolution isn't in itself a bad thing. The question becomes of what order is the resolution? Is it mechanical, hashy, cold, clinical, like information not an instrument?

Or is it clear, neutral, uncolored, rich, natural?

Recently i discovered synergistic research cable company. The designer impressed me because he does not claim his most expensive cable is "what will do the trick" No, he grants that one of his cheaper cables "might do the trick" "better". I assume it is because he understands tweaking is necessary to find synergy and synergy is blind to dollars spent and even to materials utilized and the quantities in which they are present.

Anyways...once the harmonica is dialed in...i play a different record or genre and then poof, no more magic. Waaah!

I want to recommend to people to try solid pure gold as one of many materials to dial in good sound. Especially if you like classical, jazz,folk and vocals. These are the allaerts forte.

If...and its a big if...but it still might be true...if in order to reproduce timbres like reality a solid gold conductor is a necessary ingredient then even if a 50,000 dollar cd player wired in copper is utilized it still won't be able to reproduce reality irregardless of its price tag.

I think putting together a good system is an art as well as a "science". But...tell you guys something you didn't know!!!

.

Phaelon, Frogman. Some really great points there! I like how you "tweaked" the definition of timbre, adding to it a new nuance.

So,essentially a harmonica HAS NO timbre!...that is...til it's played! (smile)

Agreed, but now there is the boundaries and limits of the degree of variation between the bodies that play it. There are alot of differences but imho the differences are not vast. We all basically know what a x brand trumpet sounds like or can learn what x brand trumpet sounds like if we wanted to and tried.

I just did a google search and i did discover what personal timbre is...

In regard to the human voice it is the unique way in which each persons vocal chords are uniquely structured/distinct and how the air uniquely resonates IN that person.

"and how the air uniquely resonates IN that person.”

Ah-Ha! And who determines how the air uniquely resonates in a wind instrument? The musician! That’s who. My formula survives the first wave. :-)

Hi guys - Frogman, thanks for your excellent post. You are so much better at explaining these things than I am. Vertigo, your last comparison to the human voice is exactly right as well. As Frogman said, the instrument becomes an extension of your body. One of my teachers talked about the need to feel "grounded" when you play, because of this. Wind instruments are very similar to the human voice. We manipulate the tone both with our airstream and with our "embouchres," or the muscles in our faces used to play. No recording really captures these subtle changes with total accuracy, which is one major reason why we musicians keep insisting that no matter how good the recording is and how good the playback system is, it is definitely not the same thing as hearing it live. And yes, the term "tone" is much more commonly used for this personal aspect of sound than "timbre." I did not use the term earlier so as not to add to the confusion, but I probably added to the confusion by not using it. Once again, I am glad I became a musician instead of a writer!