[Zoide]

Hi,

Over time, I've come to notice that two of the most common Head-Fi words are "warm" and "analytical". Usually, this refers to the sound that you get from a tube amp vs. a SS one with the AD8610, or the sound of one headphone vs. another one. Or vinyl vs. CD. It goes on and on and on.

But what exactly do warm and analytical mean? Is there a good explanation, analogy, or pair of comparative sound files that someone could contribute so as to clear up this thing?

Thanks!

 

[Permonic]

Doug (Servinginecuador) et al. did the ultimate "Head-Fi" dictionary, online source is here: http://www.kiwirant.co.nz/articles/audiophileterms.html

 

[KR...]

analytical Very detailed, almost to the point of excess.

warm The same as dark, but less tilted. A certain amount of warmth is a normal part of musical sound.

you can see the full list here :

Sounds Like? An Audio Glossary
by J. Gordon Holt

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

 

[fewtch]

If you're talking "warm vs. analytical" then warm refers to a sound that makes you focus just on listening to the music in a "big picture" sense, while analytical makes you want to analyze the details of the music while listening.

 

[Snake]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KR... warm The same as dark, but less tilted. A certain amount of warmth is a normal part of musical sound.

I'm sorry, but with respect I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Some instruments have a natural sound which we describe as "warm", while others definitely do not. If you have ever heard a trumpet, trombone, flute or drum set with high hats played in a close space, naturally, these instruments have no "natural" warmth as we, audiophiles, describe it.

Warmth, as used in audiophilia to describe the recreated sound, is an effect which overlays all sound created by that system, increasing fullness in the bottom octaves. It is a psychoacoustically pleasing effect, but it is NOT natural as it impresses that effect on the entire spectrum of instruments being played, whether it is a naturally occurring phenomenon of the instrument or not.

"Warmth", the increase of apparent energy in the lower octaves of an instrument's range, occurs naturally due to either construction of the instrument itself or the environment it is being played in. Each instrument is different, but when the energy increase occurs across all instrument ranges this is when you know that effect is completely artificial, impressed by external forces (either the recording location, the recording mix or the reproduction system). By almost all accounts as you climb the scale of reproduction systems into the stratosphere of the cost / performance scale you will find that 'warmth', that is as applied across the entire audio / instrument spectrum, decreases. Each instrument increases its uniqueness inside the reproduced audio spectrum, where 'warm' is only applied to those conditions which merit it - that is, where 'warm' actually exists in the recording of the instrument's performance.

"Warmth" is a common desire of many people for it's pleasing, mellow effect on the psychoacoustics of music reproduction but, by no mistake, should "warm" be considered a natural effect of the creation of music. If it were, frankly, audiophiles and recording engineers would not have coined the term nor would they take such pains to try to describe and moderate it's appearance. If it were "natural" the presence of it would not be bothersome in the consideration of purity inside the audio chain. If an instrument, or for that matter instrument / performer / performance acoustic space combination, creates a bump in lower frequency energy response apparent to the human ear, versus other combination of factors utilizing a similar instrument in a different combination, then that should be shown by the reproduction system. If the effect of lower frequency energy bump is not there, as a natural phenomenon preserved on the recording, then the reproduction system as absolutely no right to create that energy bump on its own.

That's called accuracy.

 

[KR...]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake I'm sorry, but with respect I'm going to have to disagree with you there.

You can't do that since I didn't write it, that was J. Gordon Holt's words, take it up with him, if you dare, LOL!

 

[Wodgy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake By almost all accounts as you climb the scale of reproduction systems into the stratosphere of the cost / performance scale you will find that 'warmth', that is as applied across the entire audio / instrument spectrum, decreases.

I disagree. There is such a thing as excessive warmth, but in my experience high end gear (Meridian, etc.) is warmer than cheap mass-market gear. Similarly, in my own DIY designs, as the power supply is improved, the sound generally becomes warmer. Excessively analytical reproduction is usually a sign that a component is not properly designed. There's a difference between a trumpet having bite (good) and a system that doesn't reproduce the warmer acoustics of that same trumpet when played in a fine concert hall.

 

[Snake]

Very much true. But in general the higher end you go the more that direction towards warmth is dampened to a feeling of "exactly what is necessary, and not a bit more". Lower end gear, when tilted towards warmth, ends up feeling "more than accurate"

Also note the "trumpet when played in a fine concert hall". It's the concert hall adding that warmth, which therefore must be recreated accurately by the reproduction system. If the concert hall does not add that warmth then it has absolutely no right in being presented during the playback, and therefore the comment of "warmth is natural" is false. Avery Fisher Hall, before mods, was a dry hall. To reproduce it as warm was dead inaccurate. It's still a matter of factors adding up into a unique performance, where inside that performance warmth may, or may not, be present. A system should reproduce that, both sides, without fail. A system which skews towards one direction, and one direction only, should not be considered accurate.

I think it's a question of viewpoint mindset. Is a Meridian 'adding' warmth, or is it just better at resolving exactly what is there in the first place, 'adding' nothing? I prefer the second view.

 

[Spareribs]

Ideally, I like both warm and analytical.

My version of warm and analytical is a great vinyl record played on a tube amp with big beefy transformers and through great speakers. Headphones do not capture that magic fully in my opinion.

It’s warm as in the right full tone and nothing harsh. And it’s analytical as in 3D sounding and you can hear the harmonics, some of the transients and overtones.

If you have good pressings of jazz records from the early 60s, they are amazing.

 

[Spareribs]

It’s basically good quality tape saturation providing mild pleasing analog distortion (or subtle overdrive) and popular among many studio engineers.

Modern studio engineers try to emulate that characteristic with good computer software and it’s actually pretty good ….if they do it right !

 

[Spareribs]

On a good vinyl version, Bill Evan’s piano sound is sonic heaven. His stuff from the early 60s.

A piano that’s well recorded on reel to reel tape is like warm heaven but it’s also detailed too.

Even recordings from the 80s can be stellar. My vinyl version of Madonna’s second album Like a Virgin (1984 release) is so good that it kind of makes me hate digital at times. But you need a really good phono preamp to really wake up the sound of vinyl in my opinion.

One thing I notice on my vinyl Madonna album is that there are some extended high notes in the background music but they are not shrill and the high frequencies are smooth like butter. So good !