[OCC7N]

I can at least tell you that I do have an interest in saving up for a Holo Audio May and Bliss KTE stack to either bust a myth for myself or experience a revelation. If I find myself hearing the exact same things in the exact same way compared to ESS -> THX with my volume-matched sighted listening, so be it, I am not susceptible to the "magic", but I would still be able to enjoy it as one would a COSC-rated Swiss watch.

Now, do you hear the far-panned sounds as coming right from the drivers, or are they somehow projected forward or further to the sides?

When a delta is playing to my ears it feels like every layer has the same time/clock.

Thats the beauty of R2R every layer/instrument feels independent.

You don’t need expensive R2R to solve this mystery…

 

[Aetherhole]

Excuse my interrupting, but I would like to better understand what folks are hearing when they describe "holographic", "3D", "tall", and "wide" soundstage out of a tube amp. How would you compare this with speaker imaging or actual live imaging within a concert venue? Is it just a general sense of "bigness"? I would suppose either distortion or an actual bass or midrange elevation could induce a fullness that causes a recording to sound "bigger", though I without crossfeed would probably still image the sound sources on a small arc between the headphones in front of my eyes and forehead. Otherwise, the only way I have truly been able to project a recorded orchestra out in front of me (by at least a meter, some recordings convey distance better) was with HRTF measurements and binaural DSP. I can even use this DSP to hear sounds coming a meter from the left and right (what my beginner self had expected the Arya Stealth to do, which it certainly did not, and if it did, it would have sounded ridiculous). And with that, the only "height" I get is the sense of the ear space within my Meze Elite and HE1000se, sounds mostly being positioned sharply along a line between the virtual speakers, any sense of height variation to the sounds arguably being an imaging error caused by inaccuracies in my HRTF measurements and rendering.

The ”bigness” to me is the perceived space, like sounds coming from further away, rather than a fuller sound frequency. I think both headphones and two-channel speaker systems come with inherent challenges in that regard. With speakers, they naturally are much further away, physically, from the ear, so they require less effort to sound big/cavernous, whereas headphones are right next to your ear, so making them sound like they are not is tricky and difficult. Speakers require more effort to address being able to pinpoint sound cues within the stereo image and distances closer and further away. The sound from the left and the right transducers are going to arrive to both ears regardless. A lot of times that has to do with room reflections/acoustics and trying to mitigate that (room acoustic treatment is a rabbit hole in of itself). Crossfeed effectively is trying to reproduce some of the sounds your left ear would hear from the right channel and visa versa. The problem I find is that it simply moves things forward in sound space, but reduces the ability to envelop the listener proportionally.

As far as perceived height to the sound, my experiences with speakers in general has been that the sound appears to come sharply from a 2-dimensional plane, typically right at ear height. My experience is kind of the oppose of what you describe with headphones, like the Arya, HE1K, and Susvara, I’ve gotten more of a sense of the sound coming from beyond that 2D horizontal plane. I have a much easier time perceiving sounds coming from above my head with headphones, or even behind me, versus stereo speakers. On the other end of the headphone sound stage, the HD600/650’s typically have three-blob effect, which you get sound in a blob on the left, right, and right in the middle, with little to nothing in between.

I think in either case, with good speakers or headphone systems, the objective many people are going for is being able to perceive sound dimensionality beyond the physical transducers themselves, width, height, and depth/distance-wise (re: 3D).

I don’t quite know how vacuum tubes come into the mix for all of that, other than maybe having a similar correlation to what OCC7N describes with delta-sigma versus R2R DACs.

 

[Aetherhole]

Also, yes, space and dimension is still going to largely depend on the recorded tracks themselves.

 

[jamesjames]

Also, yes, space and dimension is still going to largely depend on the recorded tracks themselves.

For what it's worth, I do think you make a good point: the sense of space created by the recording/amp/transducer (when things are working well) is not apparently tethered to the transducer. I suppose that might be seen as an obvious point - but I think it's often lost in discussions like these. The standard stereo effect is, of course, perhaps the most obvious instance of this. But I've always thought it's essentially the same effect that we are trying to describe when we discuss 'image', 'sound stage', 'performance space', etc. The 'depth' effect I think is inherent in the stereo effect - the relative extent being the real point of differentiation. I'm inclined to believe this is governed to a larger extent than is generally acknowledged by the recording and accuracy of its reproduction- whether on headphones of loudspeakers.

 

[MrHaelscheir]

The ”bigness” to me is the perceived space, like sounds coming from further away, rather than a fuller sound frequency. I think both headphones and two-channel speaker systems come with inherent challenges in that regard. With speakers, they naturally are much further away, physically, from the ear, so they require less effort to sound big/cavernous, whereas headphones are right next to your ear, so making them sound like they are not is tricky and difficult. Speakers require more effort to address being able to pinpoint sound cues within the stereo image and distances closer and further away. The sound from the left and the right transducers are going to arrive to both ears regardless. A lot of times that has to do with room reflections/acoustics and trying to mitigate that (room acoustic treatment is a rabbit hole in of itself). Crossfeed effectively is trying to reproduce some of the sounds your left ear would hear from the right channel and visa versa. The problem I find is that it simply moves things forward in sound space, but reduces the ability to envelop the listener proportionally.

As far as perceived height to the sound, my experiences with speakers in general has been that the sound appears to come sharply from a 2-dimensional plane, typically right at ear height. My experience is kind of the oppose of what you describe with headphones, like the Arya, HE1K, and Susvara, I’ve gotten more of a sense of the sound coming from beyond that 2D horizontal plane. I have a much easier time perceiving sounds coming from above my head with headphones, or even behind me, versus stereo speakers. On the other end of the headphone sound stage, the HD600/650’s typically have three-blob effect, which you get sound in a blob on the left, right, and right in the middle, with little to nothing in between.

I think in either case, with good speakers or headphone systems, the objective many people are going for is being able to perceive sound dimensionality beyond the physical transducers themselves, width, height, and depth/distance-wise (re: 3D).

I don’t quite know how vacuum tubes come into the mix for all of that, other than maybe having a similar correlation to what OCC7N describes with delta-sigma versus R2R DACs.

Tracks by Yosi Horikawa like "Letter" certainly had the pencil traversing a warped path behind my head. Usually when sounds are more clearly imaging from above or behind me, it is most likely mixed in the track and intended for headphone consumption. It is of course easier to apply that binaural mixing to headphone playback than through speakers where crossfeed is already locking the image forward. Hearing imaging height or "3D holography" out of something mixed for stereo speakers without special HRTF effects is what I find to be a weird proposition.

Regarding crossfeed, I personally don't really hear much "envelopment" when in the concert hall, even if not especially when listening from the mezzanine. Huge orchestral swells or tutties are still largely frontal, and I suppose I can in some cases where further back feel the volume of all the hall reflections before me, I suppose that presenting a form of "soundstage height". With that, I've found that good crossfeed, especially one based on personal HRTF measurements and SOFA file rendering, can present that frontal rather than lateral hugeness well, sheer loudness or bass content being enough for me that wall of sound in front of my entire face like in a live recording, and I suppose headphone pad or driver height can help with that. [[I suppose now listening to https://app.idagio.com/recordings/12229508 with my HRTF rendering, recordings or pad height can contribute to a sense of there existing a "ceiling" to the sound, or feeling the sounds expand in all directions within that virtual space. I feel a bit amused by the prospect that this mere discussion is causing me to notice more "soundstage" or space in the same playback system and recordings. Maybe my custom NMD pads for the HE1000se help give the sense of the ceiling being yet higher. I still desire improved imaging of distance even for loud sounds.]]

Otherwise, with this crossfeed, I certainly don't hear individual sounds imaging at different heights. For example, how many of you have heard a recording where a singer's guitar actually imaged below their voice?

I suppose another question for those who experience "amp holography" or whatever, can you literally look at the virtual sound sources without feeling like you need to cross your eyes or look far left and right? That is what I can do with my DSP, and with head-tracking, even when my head is bowed down, resting on my hand, I can still hear sounds imaging from my Genelecs (on hiatus until I get a proper listening room and room treatment; I used them for measuring my HRTF and to double-check weird imaging) even when they are turned off with the plastic wraps draped over them.

Now, I would certainly like to check out some tracks known to exercise the sense of "soundstage depth" or varying distances between sounds. At least for classical, some recordings project some sounds better or at least convey timbral distance though it may still sound like that further timbre were still imaging from closer.

 

[Aetherhole]

For what it's worth, I do think you make a good point: the sense of space created by the recording/amp/transducer (when things are working well) is not apparently tethered to the transducer. I suppose that might be seen as an obvious point - but I think it's often lost in discussions like these. The standard stereo effect is, of course, perhaps the most obvious instance of this. But I've always thought it's essentially the same effect that we are trying to describe when we discuss 'image', 'sound stage', 'performance space', etc. The 'depth' effect I think is inherent in the stereo effect - the relative extent being the real point of differentiation. I'm inclined to believe this is governed to a larger extent than is generally acknowledged by the recording and accuracy of its reproduction- whether on headphones of loudspeakers.

You’re right, it ought to be obvious, but is often lost.

Additionally, to your point, most of the time people are trying to get the most out of the recording, without the equipment or transducers being the bottleneck. The old adage comes to mind - you can polish a turd, but at the end of the day, it’s still a turd (paraphrasing here). We can have the most resolving, best imaging gear possible, but if the track itself is recorded/mixed poorly, or even recorded in mono, stereo imaging capabilities won’t matter one bit.

 

[Aetherhole]

Tracks by Yosi Horikawa like "Letter" certainly had the pencil traversing a warped path behind my head. Usually when sounds are more clearly imaging from above or behind me, it is most likely mixed in the track and intended for headphone consumption. It is of course easier to apply that binaural mixing to headphone playback than through speakers where crossfeed is already locking the image forward. Hearing imaging height or "3D holography" out of something mixed for stereo speakers without special HRTF effects is what I find to be a weird proposition.

Regarding crossfeed, I personally don't really hear much "envelopment" when in the concert hall, even if not especially when listening from the mezzanine. Huge orchestral swells or tutties are still largely frontal, and I suppose I can in some cases where further back feel the volume of all the hall reflections before me, I suppose that presenting a form of "soundstage height". With that, I've found that good crossfeed, especially one based on personal HRTF measurements and SOFA file rendering, can present that frontal rather than lateral hugeness well, sheer loudness or bass content being enough for me that wall of sound in front of my entire face like in a live recording, and I suppose headphone pad or driver height can help with that. [[I suppose now listening to https://app.idagio.com/recordings/12229508 with my HRTF rendering, recordings or pad height can contribute to a sense of there existing a "ceiling" to the sound. I feel a bit amused by the prospect that this mere discussion is causing me to notice more "soundstage" or space in the same playback system and recordings. Maybe my custom NMD pads for the HE1000se help give the sense of the ceiling being yet higher. I still desire improved imaging of distance even for loud sounds.]]

Otherwise, with this crossfeed, I certainly don't hear individual sounds imaging at different heights. For example, how many of you have heard a recording where a singer's guitar actually imaged below their voice?

I suppose another question for those who experience "amp holography" or whatever, can you literally look at the virtual sound sources without feeling like you need to cross your eyes or look far left and right? That is what I can do with my DSP, and with head-tracking, even when my head is bowed down, resting on my hand, I can still hear sounds imaging from my Genelecs (on hiatus until I get a proper listening room and room treatment; I used them for measuring my HRTF and to double-check weird imaging) even when they are turned off with the plastic wraps draped over them.

Now, I would certainly like to check out some tracks known to exercise the sense of "soundstage depth" or varying distances between sounds. At least for classical, some recordings project some sounds better or at least convey timbral distance though it may still sound like that further timbre were still imaging from closer.

I love that track by Yosi Horikawa among others by him. I hear understand what you’re saying though. I will say, stereo imaging accuracy is going to be a bit different for live recorded symphonic music. If you’re experience it live in a concert hall, you’re mostly going to get the reverberation, as opposed to the symphony or orchestra is playing all around you like you were on stage with them.

Regarding amps, I don’t feel like I need to cross-eyed to perceive the sound image.

Regarding tracks to exercise the sense of ”soundstage depth,” one album that comes to mind is Britten: War Requiem.

There are times that the various vocal soloists sound like they are standing at slightly different distances and different locations. The symphony and choir sound further away from them.

It’s also go very distinct positional imaging, too. Now, this may or may not be the most “accurate” representation of what you would have experienced if you were in the audience, but I think this album does a great job with sound location accuracy. Even being able to pick out where specific voices from the choir are.

 

[jamesjames]

You’re right, it ought to be obvious, but is often lost.

Additionally, to your point, most of the time people are trying to get the most out of the recording, without the equipment or transducers being the bottleneck. The old adage comes to mind - you can polish a turd, but at the end of the day, it’s still a turd (paraphrasing here). We can have the most resolving, best imaging gear possible, but if the track itself is recorded/mixed poorly, or even recorded in mono, stereo imaging capabilities won’t matter one bit.

Without wanting to give this the look of a mutual admiration society meeting, I must say I think you're spot on! And I think this idea has implications for many of the discussions encountered on sites like this. I often read that some components are problematic because they're too revealing - and that poor recordings suffer as a result. I guess the idea is that we should look for components that allow us to enjoy music collections (or streaming services) - in the knowledge that many recordings are poor. This tends to assume we want to hear something regardless of audio quality - which may be true for some I suppose. Well, I have the opposite perspective! I want components that require high quality recordings in order to sound 'good' because only high-quality recordings can provide me with the musical experience I want. I don't keep bad recordings. I replace them with good recordings - the higher the resolution the better. Admittedly, this reflects my particular preference (classical music) where multiple performances and recordings of the canon is the norm. But the point for me is that questions of why we listen are critical to what we should look for in components.

 

[jamesjames]

Tracks by Yosi Horikawa like "Letter" certainly had the pencil traversing a warped path behind my head. Usually when sounds are more clearly imaging from above or behind me, it is most likely mixed in the track and intended for headphone consumption. It is of course easier to apply that binaural mixing to headphone playback than through speakers where crossfeed is already locking the image forward. Hearing imaging height or "3D holography" out of something mixed for stereo speakers without special HRTF effects is what I find to be a weird proposition.

Regarding crossfeed, I personally don't really hear much "envelopment" when in the concert hall, even if not especially when listening from the mezzanine. Huge orchestral swells or tutties are still largely frontal, and I suppose I can in some cases where further back feel the volume of all the hall reflections before me, I suppose that presenting a form of "soundstage height". With that, I've found that good crossfeed, especially one based on personal HRTF measurements and SOFA file rendering, can present that frontal rather than lateral hugeness well, sheer loudness or bass content being enough for me that wall of sound in front of my entire face like in a live recording, and I suppose headphone pad or driver height can help with that. [[I suppose now listening to https://app.idagio.com/recordings/12229508 with my HRTF rendering, recordings or pad height can contribute to a sense of there existing a "ceiling" to the sound, or feeling the sounds expand in all directions within that virtual space. I feel a bit amused by the prospect that this mere discussion is causing me to notice more "soundstage" or space in the same playback system and recordings. Maybe my custom NMD pads for the HE1000se help give the sense of the ceiling being yet higher. I still desire improved imaging of distance even for loud sounds.]]

Otherwise, with this crossfeed, I certainly don't hear individual sounds imaging at different heights. For example, how many of you have heard a recording where a singer's guitar actually imaged below their voice?

I suppose another question for those who experience "amp holography" or whatever, can you literally look at the virtual sound sources without feeling like you need to cross your eyes or look far left and right? That is what I can do with my DSP, and with head-tracking, even when my head is bowed down, resting on my hand, I can still hear sounds imaging from my Genelecs (on hiatus until I get a proper listening room and room treatment; I used them for measuring my HRTF and to double-check weird imaging) even when they are turned off with the plastic wraps draped over them.

Now, I would certainly like to check out some tracks known to exercise the sense of "soundstage depth" or varying distances between sounds. At least for classical, some recordings project some sounds better or at least convey timbral distance though it may still sound like that further timbre were still imaging from closer.

I think your observations in relation to crossfeed are very interesting and tend to reflect my own experience. I don't want to go too far off topic here - so will just mention that I've written more about crossfeed on the thread relating to that topic on this site. I'll try to find it, and forward it separately, in case you're interested.

 

[jamesjames]

Here's the link: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/anyone-into-crossfeed.961533/

 

[MrHaelscheir]

If you’re experience it live in a concert hall, you’re mostly going to get the reverberation, as opposed to the symphony or orchestra is playing all around you like you were on stage with them.

I'm not sure what you mean by "mostly going to get the reverberation", or at least I in my present concertgoing experience (almost averaging once a week or more for this concert season, my first time doing so) primarily experience the direct sound and only on occasion some higher-frequency stuff imaged off of a wall or ceiling reflection. Now, I do suppose that the headphone imaging without crossfeed is closer in character to what the conductor hears, though not so in terms of sound distance.

For your suggested album (I'm listening to it through https://app.idagio.com/recordings/44945751), there was certainly a jump after proceeding to the second trap and hearing the first soloist. Without any crossfeed, section sounds rather lopsided with the cellos and even flute imaging right from the right driver of my Meze Elite, the vocalist per how this recording is interacting with my headphone HRTF is bizarrely imaging a bit to the upper front right, which must obviously not be intended. With binaural head-tracking, the instruments in that section image right from my currently powered off right Genelec 8341A, and I suppose I did notice something interesting and somewhat hard to describe about how the soloist imaged. Maybe it's as though you could hear that the soloist was recorded from a mic closer up rather than out in the audience such that you can sense the size of the soloist's head rather than their standing on the stage (I later in "Bugles Sang..." realized that the soloist interestingly even sounds a bit further up compared to the instruments coming from the right virtual speaker, and I can even angle my head up toward that voice with head-tracking). Some other vocal tracks where the singer is close to the mic image like that for me, presenting the feel of their singing 1 meter in front of me (with binaural head-tracking). With binaural head-tracking, I can notice how the trumpets (now within the "Dies irae") on the right were perhaps panned a bit excessively, but can otherwise reasonably hear the horns and bass drum in the middle far left, and the sense of the bass drum filling the hall (I almost feel like I'm describing "cable sound", but I can only describe the stuff I hear through binaural head-tracking "unreal"). The soprano is at the front left middle, more level with the main stereo width, sounding a bit more distant but loud and focused with a "halo" about the voice. Without HRTF crossfeed, that soloist images merely inside the left driver with any reverb like with the drum sounding constrained to the space of that ear cup. The centered choir elements and instruments image more reasonably. Mm, going back, to the first track in "Dies irae" without crossfeed, the drum on the left is more forward and fills the space a bit better, and the choir there interestingly had some height position. The trumpets could sound big from the right driver, the choir then singing from almost 45 degrees up. Perhaps with the HRTF crossfeed, there is indeed a sense of the choir being elevated behind the orchestra (certainly not as ascertainable without the crossfeed), however it is that they managed to capture that (unless the more recent distribution had access to the raw tracks and remixed it with special effects). [[Hmm. In the second track of "Offertorium", with HRTF crossfeed, the right male soloist sounds more leveled as though he were shorter or less elevated than the soloist to his left.]]

Anyways, an impressive recording (even if remastered) for 1963.

https://app.idagio.com/recordings/20489734 was the first recording I heard with my binaural head-tracking for which I was surprised to feel like the orchestra was being more convincingly imaged beyond the wall in front of me. https://app.idagio.com/recordings/26011608 is a recording where I felt the soloist was more convincingly projected ahead.

 

[MrHaelscheir]

Without wanting to give this the look of a mutual admiration society meeting, I must say I think you're spot on! And I think this idea has implications for many of the discussions encountered on sites like this. I often read that some components are problematic because they're too revealing - and that poor recordings suffer as a result. I guess the idea is that we should look for components that allow us to enjoy music collections (or streaming services) - in the knowledge that many recordings are poor. This tends to assume we want to hear something regardless of audio quality - which may be true for some I suppose. Well, I have the opposite perspective! I want components that require high quality recordings in order to sound 'good' because only high-quality recordings can provide me with the musical experience I want. I don't keep bad recordings. I replace them with good recordings - the higher the resolution the better. Admittedly, this reflects my particular preference (classical music) where multiple performances and recordings of the canon is the norm. But the point for me is that questions of why we listen are critical to what we should look for in components.

Indeed, as someone who a year ago was tied to YouTube recordings prior to getting the Arya Stealth and an Idagio subscription (the latter was one of the most significant events of my life, lol), I can for works I like find myself sampling the beginnings of tens or over a hundred recordings, then queuing up the ones worth spending more time evaluating. As I have been saying here nowadays, I want my playback system to allow me to evaluate recordings, not gear.

 

[Aetherhole]

Without wanting to give this the look of a mutual admiration society meeting, I think you're spot on! And I think this idea has implications for many of the discussions encountered on sites like this. I often read that some components are problematic because they're too revealing - and that poor recordings suffer as a result. I guess the idea is that we should look for components that allow us to enjoy music collections (or streaming services) - in the knowledge that many recordings are poor. This tends to assume we want to hear something regardless of audio quality - which may be true for some I suppose. Well, I have the opposite perspective! I want components that require high quality recordings in order to sound 'good' because only high-quality recordings can provide me with the musical experience I want. I don't keep bad recordings. I replace them with good recordings - the higher resolution the better. Admittedly, this reflects my particular preference (classical music) where multiple performances and recordings of the canon is the norm. But the point for me is that questions of why we listen are critical to what we should look for in components.

I’m with you on the higher resolution recordings, though I listen to a lot of genres almost equally, so the experience with quality of recordings are going to be very different depending on that genre. I really, really have a hard time with recordings that clip, though. Those are the worst. What I love most about this hobby comes down to just that — what we are critical of (and maybe forgiving of) and what we experience are so very individualistic. Not only that, one of the biggest factors that we’ve not talked mentioned yet… aural acuity. Everyone’s ears, hearing, and processed perception vary. Maybe as uniquely varied as a fingerprint.

 

[Aetherhole]

I'm not sure what you mean by "mostly going to get the reverberation", or at least I in my present concertgoing experience (almost averaging once a week or more for this concert season, my first time doing so) primarily experience the direct sound and only on occasion some higher-frequency stuff imaged off of a wall or ceiling reflection. Now, I do suppose that the headphone imaging without crossfeed is closer in character to what the conductor hears, though not so in terms of sound distance.

For your suggested album (I'm listening to it through https://app.idagio.com/recordings/44945751), there was certainly a jump after proceeding to the second trap and hearing the first soloist. Without any crossfeed, section sounds rather lopsided with the cellos and even flute imaging right from the right driver of my Meze Elite, the vocalist per how this recording is interacting with my headphone HRTF is bizarrely imaging a bit to the upper front right, which must obviously not be intended. With binaural head-tracking, the instruments in that section image right from my currently powered off right Genelec 8341A, and I suppose I did notice something interesting and somewhat hard to describe about how the soloist imaged. Maybe it's as though you could hear that the soloist was recorded from a mic closer up rather than out in the audience such that you can sense the size of the soloist's head rather than their standing on the stage (I later in "Bugles Sang..." realized that the soloist interestingly even sounds a bit further up compared to the instruments coming from the right virtual speaker, and I can even angle my head up toward that voice with head-tracking). Some other vocal tracks where the singer is close to the mic image like that for me, presenting the feel of their singing 1 meter in front of me (with binaural head-tracking). With binaural head-tracking, I can notice how the trumpets (now within the "Dies irae") on the right were perhaps panned a bit excessively, but can otherwise reasonably hear the horns and bass drum in the middle front left, and the sense of the bass drum filling the hall (I almost feel like I'm describing "cable sound", but I can only describe the stuff I hear through binaural head-tracking "unreal"). The soprano is at the front left middle, more level with the main stereo width, sounding a bit more distant but loud and focused with a "halo" about the voice. Without HRTF crossfeed, that soloist images merely inside the left driver with any reverb like with the drum sounding constrained to the space of that ear cup. The centered choir elements and instruments image more reasonably. Mm, going back, to the first track in "Dies irae" without crossfeed, the drum on the left is more forward and fills the space a bit better, and the choir there interestingly had some height position. The trumpets could sound big from the right driver, the choir then singing from almost 45 degrees up. Perhaps with the HRTF crossfeed, there is indeed a sense of the choir being elevated behind the orchestra (certainly not as ascertainable without the crossfeed), however it is that they managed to capture that (unless the more recent distribution had access to the raw tracks and remixed it with special effects).

Anyways, an impressive recording (even if remastered) for 1963.

https://app.idagio.com/recordings/20489734 was the first recording I heard with my binaural head-tracking for which I was surprised to feel like the orchestra was being more convincingly imaged beyond the wall in front of me. https://app.idagio.com/recordings/26011608 is a recording where I felt the soloist was more convincingly projected ahead.

Great observations! Admittedly, I’ve not experienced HRTF crossfeed, but your descriptions really make me curious to try it out!

It is an impressive recording for 1963, but assuredly remastered.

”Mostly going to get the reverberation” is certainly referring to just the hall reflections, which is going to vary significantly on the hall you are in. I imagine concert theaters, performing arts halls are often going to be less echoey, as they’ve been designed to be so, but you will still get some room/space reverb. Unlike movie theaters where they purposefully carpet and drape the walls to reduce reverb as much as they can. Gothic church cathedrals are on the opposite side, where reverb can be heard for like ten seconds afterwards. I love singing chamber music in those spaces, it’s so much fun, but it also is more forgiving on performer’s mistakes because the hall reverb can mask those faults.

 

[jamesjames]

I’m with you on the higher resolution recordings, though I listen to a lot of genres almost equally, so the experience with quality of recordings are going to be very different depending on that genre. I really, really have a hard time with recordings that clip, though. Those are the worst. What I love most about this hobby comes down to just that — what we are critical of (and maybe forgiving of) and what we experience are so very individualistic. Not only that, one of the biggest factors that we’ve not talked mentioned yet… aural acuity. Everyone’s ears, hearing, and processed perception vary. Maybe as uniquely varied as a fingerprint.

Once again, I think you make a good point. I would once have assumed that, as individual hearing is obviously so central, it would crop up from time to time in discussion. And I find it very strange that it's generally left entirely out of account when discussing the pros and cons of particular components. That said, I do think other listeners' impressions of components are still useful. I guess it will always be impractical (impossible?) to usefully describe individual hearing or predict which components will be a good 'fit'. I still find the more thoughtful contributions of others in describing their own impressions a good way into the search for promising components. I've been surprised over the years how often those general observations hold for me.