Hunt for hifi II: What is good sound?
Some time back, before I bought my Logitech Squeezebox Duet, I was touring the hifi stores auditioning CD players. Not only is my CD player the oldest component in my system, but I had also heard some mantra about "source first" in composing a stereo system, not giving it any thought beyond the initial "sure, OK". I ended up with the Squeezebox instead, and have since made a complete 180 in terms of system design philosophy.
The speakers are affecting the sound more than anything else in your system, assuming that everything is reasonably normal products. So to effectively select a main course to go with the sauce is just dumb. But since you're listening to the speakers, it makes sense to select ones that, when performing backed by a very neutral system, sounds the way you want.
But what is it then that one wants to hear, what is the desired sound? Personally I have always gravitated towards immersion, resolution and precision rather than flow, rhythm and smoothness. If the music is harsh, it should sound that way! As stupid as this may make me sound, it was only very recently that I received and understood the advice that one should not listen for any specific detail or parameter, but what is "enjoyable". I must admit that when it comes to auditioning stereo equipment, I have never once just listened for what is the most enjoyable, instead hunting for resolution, transients and extreme frequencies.
The risk with this approach is of course that what is instantly enjoyable may prove to be sugarcoated, and too much of that and the sonic diabetes becomes inevitable. An overly discerning listening on the other hand might put undue emphasis on things like treble resolution and transient speed, as such parameters may sound impressive even though they're not always true to the original recording or presented in a pleasurable way.
Thus, auditioning hifi gear is an undertaking where the right decision is based in emotion rather than measurements and facts, albeit a sprinkling of analysis is inevitable. My current attempt at finding new speakers has been the first time I've actively tried to listen this way, and I've found it very rewarding. Not only does it help me listen the way the speakers will be used over the next ten years or more, but it has also helped me get rid of a lot of doubt and uncertainty in terms of what sounds "best".
One of my fears in the world of audiophilia is to end up a "parameter listener", someone who listens to sounds rather than to music. I don't want to think about upgrading some cable or buying custom feet for my amplifier when listening to music. If you do that, you've lost the plot. So I want to get this upgrade over with as soon as possible, so that I can forget about high-end nerdery and just go back to playing records. But at the same time, I realize that to avoid those traps, I must make sure I'm getting exactly what I want. Settling for second best is not the way to sonic nirvana.
So, back to my preferences. In listening to the Focal Diablo Utopia speakers I have realized how much more detail they reveal in each and every CD, while being many times smoother and easier on my ears than my current Focal/JMLab Cobalt 806's. In fact, I have always attributed listening fatigue to the room acoustics, blaming hard reflections and orthogonal angles. I was even contemplating doing acoustic room treatment before buying the speakers, so that I could audition them at home in an enviropnment that did them justice. I was eventually talked out of this both by hifi salesmen and on web forums, with everyone basically saying that you'll need a good speaker to assess the result of any dampening or diffusion.
The realization that it's actually my speakers that have a bit of tweeter harshness, in combination with the newfound love for auditioning with my emotions, let me immediately dismiss the most detailed monitor speaker I've ever heard, the Marten Design Duke. While it showed me musical details that even the beryllium tweeter from Focal couldn't dig out, my ears felt sore after ten minutes. So while immensly impressive, they are essentially useless for someone who wants to listen for hours on end. (Slight disclaimer: They probably sound a bit less harsh with a warmer sounding amp, but if I have to tame my speakers to stand them, something's not right.)
I was also able to dismiss the T+A Criteron TS 200 – they are an absolutely astonishing speaker for the price, and if I had never listened to the Focal's I would probably have stopped looking after these, bought them (at just over a third of the Focal price) and gone home very happy. But I have heard the light, and know too well how much smoother the treble can be, and how insane an amount of bass control is actually possible.
So far in all my research and auditioning, I have pretty much accepted that with my preferences, even if I now listen with my heart much more, nothing below the price of the Diablo's will outdo them. Unless I accidentally stumble across a substantial fortune, this is very bad news, because all my quest for better sound has bought me so far is discontent.
And it gets worse...
The speakers are affecting the sound more than anything else in your system, assuming that everything is reasonably normal products. So to effectively select a main course to go with the sauce is just dumb. But since you're listening to the speakers, it makes sense to select ones that, when performing backed by a very neutral system, sounds the way you want.
But what is it then that one wants to hear, what is the desired sound? Personally I have always gravitated towards immersion, resolution and precision rather than flow, rhythm and smoothness. If the music is harsh, it should sound that way! As stupid as this may make me sound, it was only very recently that I received and understood the advice that one should not listen for any specific detail or parameter, but what is "enjoyable". I must admit that when it comes to auditioning stereo equipment, I have never once just listened for what is the most enjoyable, instead hunting for resolution, transients and extreme frequencies.
The risk with this approach is of course that what is instantly enjoyable may prove to be sugarcoated, and too much of that and the sonic diabetes becomes inevitable. An overly discerning listening on the other hand might put undue emphasis on things like treble resolution and transient speed, as such parameters may sound impressive even though they're not always true to the original recording or presented in a pleasurable way.
Thus, auditioning hifi gear is an undertaking where the right decision is based in emotion rather than measurements and facts, albeit a sprinkling of analysis is inevitable. My current attempt at finding new speakers has been the first time I've actively tried to listen this way, and I've found it very rewarding. Not only does it help me listen the way the speakers will be used over the next ten years or more, but it has also helped me get rid of a lot of doubt and uncertainty in terms of what sounds "best".
One of my fears in the world of audiophilia is to end up a "parameter listener", someone who listens to sounds rather than to music. I don't want to think about upgrading some cable or buying custom feet for my amplifier when listening to music. If you do that, you've lost the plot. So I want to get this upgrade over with as soon as possible, so that I can forget about high-end nerdery and just go back to playing records. But at the same time, I realize that to avoid those traps, I must make sure I'm getting exactly what I want. Settling for second best is not the way to sonic nirvana.
So, back to my preferences. In listening to the Focal Diablo Utopia speakers I have realized how much more detail they reveal in each and every CD, while being many times smoother and easier on my ears than my current Focal/JMLab Cobalt 806's. In fact, I have always attributed listening fatigue to the room acoustics, blaming hard reflections and orthogonal angles. I was even contemplating doing acoustic room treatment before buying the speakers, so that I could audition them at home in an enviropnment that did them justice. I was eventually talked out of this both by hifi salesmen and on web forums, with everyone basically saying that you'll need a good speaker to assess the result of any dampening or diffusion.
The realization that it's actually my speakers that have a bit of tweeter harshness, in combination with the newfound love for auditioning with my emotions, let me immediately dismiss the most detailed monitor speaker I've ever heard, the Marten Design Duke. While it showed me musical details that even the beryllium tweeter from Focal couldn't dig out, my ears felt sore after ten minutes. So while immensly impressive, they are essentially useless for someone who wants to listen for hours on end. (Slight disclaimer: They probably sound a bit less harsh with a warmer sounding amp, but if I have to tame my speakers to stand them, something's not right.)
I was also able to dismiss the T+A Criteron TS 200 – they are an absolutely astonishing speaker for the price, and if I had never listened to the Focal's I would probably have stopped looking after these, bought them (at just over a third of the Focal price) and gone home very happy. But I have heard the light, and know too well how much smoother the treble can be, and how insane an amount of bass control is actually possible.
So far in all my research and auditioning, I have pretty much accepted that with my preferences, even if I now listen with my heart much more, nothing below the price of the Diablo's will outdo them. Unless I accidentally stumble across a substantial fortune, this is very bad news, because all my quest for better sound has bought me so far is discontent.
And it gets worse...
posted by ukiro at 5.8.09
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home