Explainations needed Please

[fc911c]

Hello Everyone,

I am new to the forum and to the hobby so please bear with me.

I hear terms such as Sound Stage, Laid Back, Synergy, Vailed, and other's to describe the sound some headphones prodcue. Could some take the time to explain what each of these terms mean so I can become inlightened? I would really apreciate it.

I have a set of HD650 on the way and a Mkk3 amp kit. I do have some back round in with electronics so I think I should be good there. I am sure if I get stuck this forum be be a great help


I own PX100 at the moment connected to a Samsung YP-Z5 which sounds pretty good.

Thanks
Frank

 

[GSurge]

Those are just terms people try to use to describe the sound. It's an abstract quantity, so it's difficult to do it.

Good synergy is when different components sound good together.

If a phone is laid back, the sound tends to be less "in your face," it sounds farther away. This is similar to the "veil," which means compared to other headphones which may be very "forward" the sound is somewhat muffled. This is also known as being dark.

The opposite of laid back and dark is bright and colored.

Hope this helps.

 

[fc911c]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GSurge /img/forum/go_quote.gif Those are just terms people try to use to describe the sound. It's an abstract quantity, so it's difficult to do it. Good synergy is when different components sound good together. If a phone is laid back, the sound tends to be less "in your face," it sounds farther away. This is similar to the "veil," which means compared to other headphones which may be very "forward" the sound is somewhat muffled. This is also known as being dark. The opposite of laid back and dark is bright and colored. Hope this helps.

Thanks that was a big help, What about Sound Stage, I hear this mentioned quite a bit?

thanks
Frank

 

[Duggeh]

The best way to learn a familiarity with the terms you are uncertain about is to read more. You will learn a lot from the context of reviews and impressions. Since you ask particularly about soundstage. Soundstage is the total aural area of the recording. It is the means by which different sounds or instruments in a song or piece of music can be seperated from each other in terms of space. Further to the left or right. Further away or closer to you, or higher or lower than one another.

There is a LOT of vocabulary used in describing audio which is nothing but unabashed nonsense or empty words. Watch out for it.

 

[nc8000]

This thread might help you get started http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=223116

 

[ericj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif There is a LOT of vocabulary used in describing audio which is nothing but unabashed nonsense or empty words. Watch out for it.

Yeah, this is why i have trouble writing reviews. I know in 30 seconds whether i like the way something sounds but it takes hours and hours to figure out what i like about it.

And then, what to say? "Uh, me like!"

And even the terms that we all seem to agree on being descriptive, like 'extension', sometimes people disagree on what it means anyway.

Personally, I think a headphone has good bass extension when subsonic tones can be felt. But some people think it means something else.

 

[fc911c]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif The best way to learn a familiarity with the terms you are uncertain about is to read more. You will learn a lot from the context of reviews and impressions. Since you ask particularly about soundstage. Soundstage is the total aural area of the recording. It is the means by which different sounds or instruments in a song or piece of music can be seperated from each other in terms of space. Further to the left or right. Further away or closer to you, or higher or lower than one another. There is a LOT of vocabulary used in describing audio which is nothing but unabashed nonsense or empty words. Watch out for it.

thanks you explained it well

Frank

 

[fc911c]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericj /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yeah, this is why i have trouble writing reviews. I know in 30 seconds whether i like the way something sounds but it takes hours and hours to figure out what i like about it. And then, what to say? "Uh, me like!" And even the terms that we all seem to agree on being descriptive, like 'extension', sometimes people disagree on what it means anyway. Personally, I think a headphone has good bass extension when subsonic tones can be felt. But some people think it means something else.

Thanks for your input.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nc8000 /img/forum/go_quote.gif This thread might help you get started http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=223116

thanks I will have a look.

 

[fatcat28037]

Here's a link to another Glossary you may find helpful.

http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50/index.html

 

[fc911c]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatcat28037 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here's a link to another Glossary you may find helpful. http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50/index.html

thanks, will do

Frank

 

[kipman725]

"I hear terms such as Sound Stage, Laid Back, Synergy, Vailed, and other's to describe the sound some headphones prodcue. Could some take the time to explain what each of these terms mean so I can become inlightened? I would really apreciate it."

These are the terms you should be looking for if someone is describing something without the proper test equipment and is relying on emotional analysis. This is the kind of thinking that leads to putting rocks on speakers and doing silly things like paying for expensive cables.

I would also ignore anything sterrophile says.. there the type of people who claim to be able to hear the differences between power cords. I would like to stress how impossible it is for one power cable of adequate conductivity and diameter to sound different to any other. The mind boggles :|

 

[El Condor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kipman725 /img/forum/go_quote.gif "I hear terms such as Sound Stage, Laid Back, Synergy, Vailed, and other's to describe the sound some headphones prodcue. Could some take the time to explain what each of these terms mean so I can become inlightened? I would really apreciate it." These are the terms you should be looking for if someone is describing something without the proper test equipment and is relying on emotional analysis. This is the kind of thinking that leads to putting rocks on speakers and doing silly things like paying for expensive cables. I would also ignore anything sterrophile says.. there the type of people who claim to be able to hear the differences between power cords. I would like to stress how impossible it is for one power cable of adequate conductivity and diameter to sound different to any other. The mind boggles :|

You seem to be expressing more of a belief in your own perceived value of hardware than a true statement. As I already mentioned in another post, underlying physical changes do occur constantly in EVERY physical system. Whether those changes (they are so numerous that testing for all of them is virtually impossible) can be perceived by human beings, within a certain margin for error, is what needs to be determined. I don't have trouble imagining that many such variations can impact the musical experience of many attentive listeners significantly. To what degree? This is entirely left to the experience and attentiveness of verbose listeners and their equipment (both hardware and wetware).

I don't know about you, but music doesn't mean anything to me if it isn't, relatively, emotionally linked to my experiences. Sharing such experiences with others and returning the favor is what makes all of this worthwile.

If you like to claim that music is not an relative experience, then I would have a strong tendency to think that you are even further away from reality than sterrophile. Raw data is useful, but it seems to me to be relatively useless without a human context.

It is strongly reminiscent of the relative experiences of human beings tasting wines, or cheese, or cigars, or cognacs, etc., and discussing about their relative perceptions. Will you tell them they are wrong? Your point seems somewhat moot in such a context.

 

[finbad]

Yeah, the Stereophile glossary fatcat offered up is an excellent recource of audio terms. Highly recommended reading & bookmark...

There is a problem with business influancing opinions which kipman725 refers to, and we need to be mindful of while even reading members opinions here. Although it is against board rules I sometimes wonder at some peoples motives and incentive when promoting certain gear, and so should other readers both here and at Sterophile. I certainly wouldn't suggest ignoring to read either. But you do need to learn to edit what is read. Sometimes folks are just overly excieted with a new toy perhaps, and other times it does make one wonder...

Next, you should learn to realize differences spoken about here are often of slight degrees if within the same price catagory, for instance. However, these slight differences do add up and over time and within a particular application, such as a specific gerere of music can be what makes a particular set up sound great for one person whereas only so-so to a second. There is alot of wiggle room for many different opinions while they must be respected as being valid to the writer due to factors of personal preferance and even maybe shape of ones ear. So, be aware if the writer is a classical / Rock listener etc, or prefers to listen at low volumes and has a system similar to yourself, to better gauge expectations for yourself .

Good luck~

 

[ericj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Condor /img/forum/go_quote.gif You seem to be expressing more of a belief in your own perceived value of hardware than a true statement. As I already mentioned in another post, underlying physical changes do occur constantly in EVERY physical system. Whether those changes (they are so numerous that testing for all of them is virtually impossible) can be perceived by human beings, within a certain margin for error, is what needs to be determined. I don't have trouble imagining that many such variations can impact the musical experience of many attentive listeners significantly. To what degree? This is entirely left to the experience and attentiveness of verbose listeners and their equipment (both hardware and wetware).

Yeah.

But three feet of litz-braided silver won't do diddlysquat compared to a few hundred feet of solid copper romex and untold miles of rotting copper and aluminum.

And that's if you ignore how much the power changes as it goes through any AC filtering within the power supply circuit, transformer, rectification, smoothing, more filtering . . .

A claim that a power cord makes a difference is an admission of ignorance or insanity. I won't see it any other way.

 

[HFat]

Come on, don't feed the troll: power chords are way off-topic. The problem is not audiophoolery (nor "emotional analysis" as such) but the lack of a material basis for communication.
I can show you green (with some margin of error due to imperfect color reproduction of whatever display you're using) but I can't make you hear "laid back".

As a result we get into situations such as this one:

Quote:

Originally Posted by GSurge /img/forum/go_quote.gif The opposite of laid back and dark is bright and colored.

GSurge and myself like to believe we have a handle on these words but I'd say that this is a false statement. Who's to say who is right and who is wrong? I guess we could make a poll but how many such polls will we then need before we understand ourselves?

EDIT: In other words, the Stereophile glossary is useless for the most part not because it's a contemptible publication but because the definitions are insubstantial or circular.