Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The highest genius of hi-fi salesman: "audio speak"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The highest genius of hi-fi salesman: "audio speak" - Page 6  

post #76 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achmedisdead View Post

A good portion of the terms there,  I can at least have an idea what they are trying to say, but "musical" or "musical and engaging" are meaningless.

 

popcorn.gif 

When you put a new component into your system, or listen to a system different than your own, ask yourself what are you aware of first: the music? or how the new component/system is making that music?  And I don't mean that in a philosophical, self-aware sense of "live music vs. transducer playing a recording of live music".  But while the whole newness of the system is still fresh - what is it you pay attention to?  That's musicality. Or not.

 

Some systems have an ability to disappear into a synergistic whole where source, amp and transducer are replaced with something seemingly bigger than the sum of parts. Your focus is only on the image, not the author of the image.  The other side of the coin are components that are technically proficient, but make the user more aware of what it is doing with soundstage tricks, imaging sweetspots or over/under emphasis on tonal ranges than getting out of the way. Then you're listening more to the equipment than the music

 

 

To paraphrase an old Martin Mull quote, writing about sound reproduction is like using ballet to describe architecture.  There's a lack of common idioms and precision between the two so that unless you're intimately familiar with both forms (and I would say most of the general population are not), then there is confusion in terms and language, even though almost everyone has an innate feeling about what is being represented.  Play someone a "veiled" sound vs. an "open" one and they'll understand what you're talking about; but few would be able to quantitatively describe the degree of what is the divide between "veiled" vs. "open".  It's hugely imprecise; we just seem to be wired that way.  You practically need a synesthete to do it. But yet, that's also a primary purpose of these forums.

post #77 of 78
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smeckles View Post

When you put a new component into your system, or listen to a system different than your own, ask yourself what are you aware of first: the music? or how the new component/system is making that music?  And I don't mean that in a philosophical, self-aware sense of "live music vs. transducer playing a recording of live music".  But while the whole newness of the system is still fresh - what is it you pay attention to?  That's musicality. Or not.

 

Some systems have an ability to disappear into a synergistic whole where source, amp and transducer are replaced with something seemingly bigger than the sum of parts. 

 

All systems have this property: because a headphone without an amp won't make a noise. But the idea of magical combinations... no, this is very, very silly. Oh, occasionally you might components with somewhat compensating faults - a hump in the phones where the amp has a dip - but this not nearly as good as having flat responses to start with because you are letting noise creep in.

 

 

Quote:

 

 

Quote:

 

Play someone a "veiled" sound vs. an "open" one and they'll understand what you're talking about; but few would be able to quantitatively describe the degree of what is the divide between "veiled" vs. "open".  It's hugely imprecise; we just seem to be wired that way.  You practically need a synesthete to do it. But yet, that's also a primary purpose of these forums.

 

The problem with the above is that it is utter nonsense. It virtually relies on the power of the placebo effect! So what if you can get someone to agree to describe a single sound as veiled when you suggest that? Even beyond the role of the placebo effect, this doesn't mean that you and they will agree on another case. This is the problem when you use meaningless and pretentious phrases.


Edited by scuttle - 2/9/13 at 2:41am
post #78 of 78
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dBel84 View Post

so I get the "thing" and the "thang" could you show us an example of your "thong" ?

 

NO! Not his thong, and definitely not Analmort's!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The highest genius of hi-fi salesman: "audio speak"