The Pain of Neutral Sound

[Macca]

Well that is the avenue I am pursuing at the moment. Just get stuff based on solid engineering principles, no bull. I mean there are no easy answers. My research so far indicates that: 'If it weighs a lot then it is probably really good' seems to be an approximate rule of thumb with pretty much any bit of kit.

Cables and mains and all that is still a mystery of course. Hard to see patterns there.

Hopefully I'll be testing the weight theory again very soon, if it ends up sterile and soulless I'll let youse know

[walpurgis]

'If it weighs a lot then it is probably really good' seems to be an approximate rule of thumb with pretty much any bit of kit.

In that case, you want a 401 in a big, foot thick slate block plinth.

[walpurgis]

[B]They'd rather place their faith in some piece of test apparatus or science journal.

Marco.

Or dealer recommendation. Which can be OK. Just don't turn up on a day when a less scrupulous one want to shift some slow moving stock.

[Marco]

Well that is the avenue I am pursuing at the moment. Just get stuff based on solid engineering principles, no bull.

You shouldn't go too far wrong with that approach. In terms of electronics, anything filled with huge fuck-off linear PSU(s) has a fighting chance of sounding good, and in terms of speakers, anything big and ugly enough to be considered as 'anti-WAF', should hit the spot nicely....

Marry the two together, and say hello to audio nirvana!

Marco.

[Macca]

In that case, you want a 401 in a big, foot thick slate block plinth.

No, if we are talking turntables, the 401 would not be my choice. A sorted one is fantastic, don't get me wrong. I'd be more tempted by an SP10 from my schoolboy engineering point of view but what I know about turntables I could write on the back of a fag packet.

I've only ever heard serious vinyl replay in other people's systems. Anyway, that's a rabbit hole of its own and off topic... The quality of the phono stage really matters is the main thing learned from my experience there.

[walpurgis]

The quality of the phono stage really matters is the main thing learned from my experience there.

Well in my case big and heavy does not apply here really. I've found the smaller and lighter phono stages better as a rule. Like the Slees and years ago I had one of those tiny Bellari VP-29 valve units. That was a big surprise. I suppose the Moth Series 30 phono amp could almost be described as heavyish. Damn good sounding for the money. MC side is good too.

[struth]

Well in my case big and heavy does not apply here really. I've found the smaller and lighter phono stages better as a rule. Like the Slees and years ago I had one of those tiny Bellari VP-29 valve units. That was a big surprise. I suppose the Moth Series 30 phono amp could almost be described as heavyish. Damn good sounding for the money. MC side is good too.

mine is tiny

[Pharos]

Two points;

Firstly the recording already carries an acoustic from the recording venue, and the listening room adds another to that, and,

Have you seen the spec of the Benchmark power amps? I thought the ATC was good at 0.005% dist. but the Benchmark is 20dB+ better, and yes it does sound very, very, good.

[Reffc]

And yet that is what some class as 'accurate', simply because measurements dictate so!

Marco.

Actually Marco, that's not the case at all.

If the right measurements are taken, and the size and design are right for the room, then an "accurate" 'speaker system should and will sound anything but lifeless and soul-less. If you believe half the hype from some manufacturers' marketing types who make bold claims about some designs which are pretty flawed, then you might end up with something that is lifeless and soul-less. It's strange just how often how people's views on "accuracy" are skewed and slanted towards just exactly what it's not. In your case, following solid engineering principles (by your own claims) should result in something accurate and far from soul-less.

Lets all try not to be divisive when entering such debates as it doesn't help the debate

[Marco]

Not sure why you'd consider my honest opinion, Paul, as "divisive"? I certainly wasn't referring to anything you've made!

The fact is, I've heard numerous examples, over the years, of equipment and speakers (in terms of the latter TAD and Wilson, for example) that despite claims of being 'accurate', as supposedly evidenced by measurements, to me sound sterile, soulless and musically bereft, which I wouldn't give house room to, especially considering the bonkers prices asked!

The 'voicing' for me of a lot of stuff being produced now (and here I'm referring mostly to that of 'large concern' commercial manufacturers) is alien to how real music sounds, so I think I'm entitled to tell it as I hear it and submit reasons why I think that is so.

The accent today is placed too much on producing a 'squeaky clean'/clear sound, at the expense of tonal warmth and musicality, which the best vintage equipment has in spades: that 'listenability', which is hard to define and can be so elusive, but is crucial to allowing one to 'relax into the music' and enjoy it, without sitting there critically analysing the sound.

And for me, this has gotten worse the more that manufacturers today use computers at crucial parts of the design stage (focussing too much on specs and measurements), instead of using their ears.

Measurements of course are vitally important when designing any piece of hi-fi equipment, speakers perhaps even more so than anything else, but at the end of the day when a 'measured to buggery' design becomes a finalised product, and is listened to by a human pair of ears, if the sound produced offends and isn't considered as enjoyable to listen to, then all the measuring in the world and striving for 'accuracy', has been for absolutely nothing.

Sometimes you can measure out all the fun!

Marco.