View Full Version : Do different people hear different sonic signatures in kit?
jandl100
03-01-2010, 07:56
This one has baffled me a bit for a while. It's been highlighted by a recent thread on the Wigwam forum where folks were listing kit that they do not 'get'. i.e. they cannot hear the merits of and (presumably) would not choose to own.
[All very negative of course, and against the AOS Ethos! ;)]
Actually, some of it is quite interesting in that there's a lot of common ground, but also some very glaring discrepancies.
One in particular I would like to highlight as providing a good example of what I am on about ....
A Krell 400xi integrated amp.
I owned one and found it ingratiatingly musical, if definitely a bit on the warm, slightly dark and cuddly side of the fence.
Changing other components in the system gave a consistent view that this was what the Krell was doing.
In fact, adding the CDP from the same range (the 280) which to my ears def had the same sonic signature, made the sound way too warm and cuddly. It went pronto, while the amp stayed a while
But some folks are commenting how sterile and shrill that Krell amp is. And those folks are crazed box-swappers like me, so I'd expect them to have tried various different equipments with the amp.
Is the answer trivial in that different examples of the same model sound different? I only heard a single example.
Or are we actually hearing the sonic signature of equipment differently? :scratch:
Or maybe it comes down to different musical tastes bringing out different aspects of equipments' sounds?
Thoughts?
Rare Bird
03-01-2010, 08:02
It proves one thing, never take any notice of mag reviews , they don't & can't sound the same when you actually buy.
Peter Galbavy
03-01-2010, 08:08
To come up with any valid view we're going to have to think about the whole physiological process of hearing (and feeling, it's not just about the two receivers on your head!) and the psychoacoustic process in the brain and more. Then add to that the environment that the equipment is being used in - room, humidity/temp/etc. of the air as the transmission medium, the taste in music.
Just on the subject of ears, I can't hear anything above 12KHz and my sinuses get restricted/blocked sometimes, which makes a huge difference. I also like feeling bass and stuff, which influences my opinion on equipment but many will never play at a volume that does this for them so that's another influence.
It goes on, I guess.
Personally, my immediate unscientific view is that yes, there is a difference between people and how the evaluate equipment and what it does relative to another lump of metal, glass and plastic.
jandl100
03-01-2010, 08:17
It proves one thing, never take any notice of mag reviews , they don't & can't sound the same when you actually buy.
Maybe - but what about forum reviews, or anyone's opinion of anything?
There are huge amounts of consistency - for example, to my distress (;)) I seem to hear things in a very similar way to Marco, despite not very much overlap in musical taste. We often have the same views on kit, while I have to differ markedly with others.
Perhaps we just need to identify those folks (be they mag reviewers or forum denizens) whose perceptions and/or tastes match our own?
Rare Bird
03-01-2010, 08:45
Jerry
It's impossible to be recommended an item from any form of review. Hi-fi systems are built around synergy, what someone else has within his system will more than likley be worlds apart from yours, it will be in a totally different enviroment aswell.This hobby is about finding your own way, a huge amount of money wastage in the process, something i'm done with i'm sorry to say.
jandl100
03-01-2010, 08:57
Jerry
It's impossible to be recommended an item from any form of review.
Hi Andre - I must admit that I don't agree with that at all.
In my experience, a lot of equipment has sonic signatures that can be heard by different people in a wide variety of systems. You just have to identify those who have similar tastes to your own, I think, although you can never be certain about specific things, but you can expect to agree 80% or more with people of similar mind.
I'm happy to take Marco's word on things - certainly as far as putting them on my Want List to be investigated. Others I know to not take much notice of as we seem to hear things very differently.
I was just curious as to why some people seem to hear things so very differently to others.
Hi all, happy new year ! :)
Well, imho, the real big differences among different peoples' opinions comes from:
- the speakers
- the room
- the listening material
Then, of course, other things may vary (like mains conditioners, cables and so on) but the main differences are not there.
I mean, when you know the poor mastering of some records used for comparing, and the fact that some rooms/speakers combinations offer a +-20dB (!!!) variation across the main audible spectrum (100Hz to 3-4kHz) what can you expect ? :scratch:
Rare Bird
03-01-2010, 09:34
Jerry:
i'm gonna have to argue the toss here, how can you go on a recommendation from Marco,you just said equipment has sonic signatures that can only be heard by different people. Marco's Tannoys may be the best thing since sliced bread to him & his system may work well & i'm not doubting that, but to someone else they may think different, that's how it is.I think the hardest thing your experiencing is your playing with high end products, that alone is a minefield, i've been there & i can safely say it was the worse experience i've ever had to deal with.I was in tears most time with financial loss & frustration.
I hope i don't come across rude with this statement but the few years i've seen you post on forum you have had more box swaps than soft mick but your still in two minds now, you'll continue to box swap regardless of what people may sugest.
Yes people do hear things different, i heard people not half praising certain equipment that i found just simply sounds tripe..It is a minefield & very subjective & you do have to find your own way, how can you not.
Once again sorry if i'm coming across rude.
Hi all, happy new year ! :)
Well, imho, the real big differences among different peoples' opinions comes from:
- the speakers
- the room
- the listening material
Then, of course, other things may vary (like mains conditioners, cables and so on) but the main differences are not there.
Hence the reason you can't listern to reviewed tests & recommendations
jandl100
03-01-2010, 09:45
That's fine Andre - You do not come across as rude at all. You are only experessing a different opinion to mine. I can live with that! :)
But my experiences with other people's views on equipment are very different to yours, I think. I would just repeat what I said earlier ....
In my experience, a lot of equipment has sonic signatures that can be heard by different people in a wide variety of systems ....
I'm happy to take Marco's word on things - certainly as far as putting them on my Want List to be investigated.
I am very sad to hear that you have had bad and frustrating experiences with high end equipment - I can only say that I personally enjoy every single moment of it! Even the equipment that doesn't work for me is interesting.
One example that springs to mind is the Chord DAC64, which in a bake-off organised by A N Other forum was variously described as 'over-bright', 'realistic' and 'shut-in'. It was being listened to in the same system, in the same room, so the only variable was people's ears/perception.
It seems to me that some prefer a 'warmer' sound, so that anything that doesn't have that sonic signature will seem 'harsh' or 'over-bright.' To condemn such people as not being able to accept realistic sound is missing the point, because it comes down to personal taste, and no-one not present at the original recording is able to judge how realistic any system's sound is.
Sand Dancin Donkey Walker
03-01-2010, 11:33
Hi Guys
I think as a common rule you can pick up a general feeling for a product using friends or forums, and use that as a guide to set you off in a direction. But for a final outcome you need to find your own path.
As for people hearing different things than others. I believe that there is no universal answer to that one.
As I think there are too many person influences that will direct buyers, to or away from any one product.
Though it is good when you find someone you can trust and bounce ideas off. Again ultimately the final decision is or shoud be your own, be that good or bad
Andy - SDDW
Haselsh1
03-01-2010, 12:04
It is well known in the scientific community that people perceive sounds in different ways. One guy will hear a totally different sound from another guy and this is exaggerated with age. It is also well known that women have much more acute hearing at high frequencies. That is one reason why your female partner may not like your hi-fi even though you think it is well sorted.
Jerry, only just come to this thread (too many late nights....) and I have to concur with your views on the Krell 400Xi...
The *300* series Krell integrated was rather toppy in balance, but was clean with it to be fair, but the rather cheaper 400 model (still twice the US price in the UK) was a much more friendly sounding product IMO - a bit like comparing good CB Naim to the current range (and I'm not being critical here)..
Before the Linn/Naim brainwashing took over (it was, for us youngsters), the few better and more specialised dealers tended to agree on the merits of various products, acknowledging that with speakers, the dem and domestic facilities would dictate clients' choice - although there was a bigger gap between good and bad and a bad speaker was universal across dealer networks.
There have been products which have gained popularity due to zealous reviews - apologies neil, but my anti stance on Marantz's KI is doe to the dire budget models which carried his "signature" and the hard-as-nails sounding PM66SE Sig amp which we *had* to sell (WTF has lots to answer for) yet nobody I spoke to in other dealers liked..
jandl100
03-01-2010, 12:58
Jerry, .... I have to concur with your views on the Krell 400Xi...
Yup.
How anyone can describe it as sterile and screechy is beyond me.
Which is, of course, my point!
Perhaps it just depends on what they are comparing it with. If their system was set up to sound 'right' with a brace of Quad II valve amps, say, then the Krell may sound bright in comparison ... but that is a fairly extreme example, and I doubt its general validity.
I reckon they're mistaking the models as the 300 integrated and 500 power amp could take your fillings out with the wrong cables and ssssspeakers (!)
People (yep and I'm one of them if I'm not very careful) tend to get pre-conceived ideas, tarring all products from a manufacturer with the same brush. Krell have gone from smooth (if a little cloudy sometimes) to neutral (KSA 80 in my opinion) to huge and harsh (KSA250 IIRC) and back to sweetness with control (FPB series). Heavan knows where they are now (hanging on by the skins of their teeth if reports of events last year are truthful)...
Hi Jerry,
Yup.
How anyone can describe it as sterile and screechy is beyond me.
Which is, of course, my point!
Are you 100% sure that these people have actually heard the Krell in question?
There are lots of folk, you know, on forums who waffle shit about stuff they've not even heard (for whatever reason)!! :mental:
Other than that, given the rather extreme example, it must just simply be very different interpretations of "sterile and screechy"....
Btw, I'm glad that you find my advice useful sometimes, and do agree that one can relate to certain people in terms of the kind of sound they like to achieve with their system or the components they use :)
Marco.
jandl100
03-01-2010, 19:56
Hi Jerry,
Are you 100% sure that these people have actually heard the Krell in question?
Marco.
Yes, I'd say they are both reliable and not bullshitters. Both though (perhaps irrelevantly) are seriously into heavy rock as their preferred music.
Both though (perhaps irrelevantly) are seriously into heavy rock as their preferred music.
I've always wondered whether preferred music conditions preferred equipment... :scratch:
But then, people who like various styles are bound to swap constantly depending on the occasional "dominant" preferred style ? I'm condemned to eternal swapping, if it is true. :(
Rare Bird
03-01-2010, 20:39
Well flatpopely openly stated his Linn/Naim system was built around Progressive Rock!
Steve Toy
03-01-2010, 20:47
Back to the OP, during demonstrations where there has been a group of people present everyone in the group tends to hear the same thing. The differences tend not to be what is actually heard but where the sonic preferences lie, especially where there is an obvious trade off.
Steve Toy
03-01-2010, 20:54
It is well known in the scientific community that people perceive sounds in different ways. One guy will hear a totally different sound from another guy and this is exaggerated with age. It is also well known that women have much more acute hearing at high frequencies. That is one reason why your female partner may not like your hi-fi even though you think it is well sorted.
I think the opposite is true. Those of us, male or female, with more acute hearing at high frequencies will likely be more tolerant of any upper-frequency harshness not less. Older people with limited frequency hearing range tend to be more sensitive to such harshness. The reason for this is as sound approaches the upper limits of our hearing capabilities it sounds more distorted and for the same reason wide-bandwidth equipment sounds clearer within the audible range.
The main difference between modern good amps I suspect is almost certainly the clipping characteristics and any built-in ringing that some cheaper amps design in. Good valve amps soft-clip very graciously as I recall and will appear to go far louder than technically they should because they're not hard clipping or oscillating IMO.
I did use the Krell 400 integrated for a few months on dem but I must admit I never felt the need to thrash the b*ll*cks out of it to see how it clipped.
if we're all still here in 25 years time, I'd love to see what Andrew "flat" feels about reproduced sound - whether he can still tolerate his amps' sounds. I know my tastes have very much changed in recent decades and I went off Naim's worst excesses back in 1985, but still like the Nait 1, 2 and 52/Supercap/135's.
theophile
04-01-2010, 06:14
Okay.
I don't often post here,but here's my take:
We don't all listen to the exact same system,in the exact same room,with the exact same recordings via the exact same ears.
Hence,there are bound to be differences of opinions,even if the exact same component were to be given to all of us for a fair assessment.
Even the situation outlined in a previous post where a group of people gathered together in the same room,with the same system,arrived at divergent assesments of the sound stimulate me to ask a few questions:
Were they all seated in the same chair when they listened(ie they listened in sequence,one after the other),or was a row(rows)of chairs set-up,and they all,listened simultaneously?If they listened simultaneously,the difference between on-axis and off-axis dispersion from the speakers may well be responsible for a widely differing asessment of the resulting sound.
My experience is that every tiny part of what comprises a system,bears some influence on the resulting sound.Include in that statement,the surfaces/furniture the components sit-upon,the RFI environment,the non-system furnishings/objects in the room,the materials which comprise the ceiling,walls and floor of said room,the seating position and probably a host of other factors that I am unable to call to mind immediately.
I agree that components have an individual sonic signature.The problem is that they have to be assessed within the context of a system comprised of components which all posess individual sonic signatures.Then to complicate matters even further,all components interact in practice in such ways which subtlely or grossly alter the resulting sound.
Does anyone see the conundrum that exists?
There is no such thing as a 'level playing field'.
Yes,it could be argued that given familiarity with the sound of one's system, one may be able to arrive at some conclusions about the contribution of a particular component.The conclusion will however be only absolutely accurate in the broadest sense,and really only applicable with components/systems which are the same as one's own,in rooms the same as one's own,with ears that are the same as one's own.In other words the the assesment will only really be accurate for oneself whilst listening to one's own system.
That's my take on the matter.
Do different people hear different sonic signatures in kit?
thats a good question Jerry,
at the past audio talk diy meets we usually have a trophy for the best kit of the day, based on all's opinions,
asking people what they liked is an eye opener.. people hear so differently...
some people accept things that are not as life like as being good, and sometimes dislike of what the majority think sounded fine, I would guess because they are comparing kit to their own bench mark opinions, not what actually sounds good or more correct to the majority.
the penny dropped moments are when just one guys says that is not right in a room full people who think all is well and he points out why...
the first open baffles i heard i was not impressed with.. then a guy who's a well known hi end transformer maker pointed out all that was wrong with them to me.. and he was right.. that put me off open baffles for a long time.
Then nick gorham pointed out to me what was wrong with my horns.. it took an afternoon of a/b's... so i then decided to try open baffles and soon after dumped the back horns.. like every thing else in life, its a leaning curve...
my bench mark opinions have changed over the years.. with some very slowly learnt acceptances coupled with some enlighted moments of what is right.. there are so many aspects to musical reproduction it is very different to form an opinion on a quick listen. unless there are some obvious faults..
and what do you compare to... live music... or your opinion.. or what your used to listening to..I think for most its usually the last one..
its all too opinionated, you know folks who like the same type of sound as yourself which is your point... that does not make it that you like perfection... just a type of sound..
i had a box swapping few years, mostly solid state and it was expensive.. i'm sort of cured now, if cured is that i now make lots of amps with the same few classic valves and bits. but is there major upgrades to be had ? you never know so i keep searching...
cheers
steve
Good post, Steve. I concur with you completely :)
For me, you've hit the nail on the head here:
some people accept things that are not life like as being good, and sometimes dislike of what the majority think sounded fine, I would guess because they are comparing kit to their own bench mark opinions, not what actually sounds good or more correct to the majority.
I guess that what you state is sometimes only natural, but as far as I'm concerned those who are guilty of the bit in bold should get out and listen to more live music, preferably of the acoustic variety, and obtain a proper handle of how real instruments actually sound, because all they're doing otherwise is kidding themselves on ;)
You're right, and I've said this before, it's all about benchmarks. Therefore, if we all agree on this then the goal is to improve the quality and reliability of our benchmark, then use it effectively to judge equipment, making in the process new discoveries and thus genuine progress, leaving behind bias, preconceptions and comfort zones where they belong!!
Marco.
I think the opposite is true. Those of us, male or female, with more acute hearing at high frequencies will likely be more tolerant of any upper-frequency harshness not less. Older people with limited frequency hearing range tend to be more sensitive to such harshness. The reason for this is as sound approaches the upper limits of our hearing capabilities it sounds more distorted and for the same reason wide-bandwidth equipment sounds clearer within the audible range.
I found the Naim Nait and Linn Kans unbearably harsh when I auditioned them back in the early '80s, and I was much younger then than you are now. But maybe they were really harsh.
Steve Toy
04-01-2010, 18:17
Joe, I think they were. I heard some harsh kit back in my 20s when I could hear up to 20k.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.