+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: Sonic Signature

  1. #11
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: Surrey

    Posts: 7,103
    I'm Rob.

    Default

    I posted this thread because I got one of the 6J1 pre-amps yesterday and tbh I think it is brilliant. I think it makes music sound more how I want it to sound, dynamic but not harsh or forced. Someone else will probably disagree - something that would not bother me in the least - we all hear differently and have different perceptions of what sounds right.

    Could one say that everyone is right?
    Buy Bose...And get your parking validated!.

    https://youtu.be/ZCBe7-6rw4M

    No Highs...No Lows....It Must Be Bose!

  2. #12
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,775
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Presentation is subjective, the sound quality isn't. The sound quality is quantifiable: the amount of noise and distortion added by the system.

    Presentation is what we argue about 'I don't like electrostatics', 'I like valves better', I like to listen near field' 'I don't like metal domes' and so forth.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  3. #13
    RothwellAudio Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joe View Post
    Unless you were present at the recording session, the only insight you have into the recording is listening to it via one or more different systems. There's no way of knowing what a particular component has added, taken away, or changed.
    For the majority of music bought today there never was "a recording session", or at least there never was a complete band performance recorded in a single take. Even if there was, it's irrelevant anyway.
    If you can hear two instruments playing in unison where before you thought there was only one, or you can hear three voices doing harmony vocals were before you could just hear "some" harmony vocals, then the new piece of gear is more transparent than the old. However, it gets complicated by the fact that our brains have the ability to learn. Having heard the new details revealed by the new kit, you will still hear the new details when you switch back to the old kit because your brain has learned what to listen for.

  4. #14
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,775
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    On the best systems you don't need to listen for anything it is just there.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  5. #15
    Join Date: Oct 2012

    Location: The Black Country

    Posts: 6,089
    I'm Alan.

    Default

    I find better kit gives greater clarity, once you've heard it you don't want to go back.

    That's when you hear the new things that you haven't before, the multiple harmonies etc.

  6. #16
    Join Date: May 2008

    Location: Surrey

    Posts: 7,103
    I'm Rob.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RothwellAudio View Post
    For the majority of music bought today there never was "a recording session", or at least there never was a complete band performance recorded in a single take. Even if there was, it's irrelevant anyway.
    If you can hear two instruments playing in unison where before you thought there was only one, or you can hear three voices doing harmony vocals were before you could just hear "some" harmony vocals, then the new piece of gear is more transparent than the old. However, it gets complicated by the fact that our brains have the ability to learn. Having heard the new details revealed by the new kit, you will still hear the new details when you switch back to the old kit because your brain has learned what to listen for.
    Very interesting Andrew.
    Buy Bose...And get your parking validated!.

    https://youtu.be/ZCBe7-6rw4M

    No Highs...No Lows....It Must Be Bose!

  7. #17
    Join Date: Nov 2014

    Location: Leicestershire

    Posts: 317
    I'm Mark.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by walpurgis View Post
    Even objectivism is open to interpretation, making it all subjective.
    How very Zen!!!


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  8. #18
    Join Date: Mar 2017

    Location: Seaford UK

    Posts: 1,861
    I'm Dennis.

    Default

    It is funny and seemingly contradictory that a perception of an objective event, (objectivity is perceiving that which is outside the self), is done by individuals' perception, which makes it subjective.

    I think it true that when we have a system change and then hear more, especially if it is generally so with much of our listening on many bits of material, it has been shown to be more transparent to the source.

    This is not necessarily so if it applies to only a narrow frequency band or to only a few recordings, where it could be due to an emphasis of a particular band or some other anomaly.

    Recently I have noticed errors on what I had regarded as exemplary recordings, in one case several things in different bands previously inaudible. In a way this spoils it because it draws me into technical analysis mode.

    Another phenomenon is that often when listening to artists, they get on my nerves more, and I realise that it is because I am hearing more of the real nature of the artist, and I cannot bear him, this especially true on radio.

    A good pair of 'phones will expose what is going on HD 650 for eg.

  9. #19
    Join Date: Mar 2017

    Location: Seaford UK

    Posts: 1,861
    I'm Dennis.

    Default

    It is funny and seemingly contradictory that a perception of an objective event, (objectivity is perceiving that which is outside the self), is done by individuals' perceptions, which makes it subjective.

    I think it true that when we have a system change and then hear more, especially if it is generally so with much of our listening on many bits of material, it has been shown to be more transparent to the source.

    This is not necessarily so if it applies to only a narrow frequency band or to only a few recordings, where it could be due to an emphasis of a particular band or some other anomaly.

    Recently I have noticed errors on what I had regarded as exemplary recordings, in one case several things in different bands previously inaudible. In a way this spoils it because it draws me into technical analysis mode.

    Another phenomenon is that often when listening to artists, they get on my nerves more, and I realise that it is because I am hearing more of the real nature of the artist, and I cannot bear him, this especially true on radio.

    A good pair of 'phones will expose what is going on HD 650 for eg.

  10. #20
    RothwellAudio Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    On the best systems you don't need to listen for anything it is just there.
    In my opinion you always have to actively listen. When you're on stage it's all "just there" because there is no reproduction system getting in the way, but you still need to actively listen. You'd be amazed how many people don't listen. They're not nice to play with.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •