Friends,
Below is an analysis of the comments regarding the Spirit-1s from a very kind gentleman that recently spent some time with them. Again, I would like to thank him for his time and effort, and I am NOT suggesting that his observations are necessarily in error in any way. My only intent is to use this incident for educational purposes. We believe that the more you know… the better our products sound.
sfox7076 wrote:
… they are not as good in the mid-range and the high-end as my SongTower RTs
Conversely, he wrote:
They accurately portrayed the songs flaws, but were not fatiguing. It’s hard to explain, but it has the mix that I want in a speaker--detailed and not fatiguing. I actually liked the Mountain Goats on this set of speakers better than on my current set because I thought they conveyed the feel of the lo-fi sound better and in a way that would let me listen to it for hours without missing the detail of the songs.
These two somewhat conflicting comments really spotlight a very interesting and controversial area of audio system performance – be it speakers or electronics as the subject at issue. Don't get me wrong… I'm not trying to defend the Spirits or take issue with sfox7076 preference of the Songtowers' performance in the mids and highs. My only intent is to *possibly* help educate everyone, and his observations make for a good illustration of my point.
OK then…I believe and am convinced that MUCH (if not most) of the endless debate in audio over perceived degrees of system and component performance are rooted in nothing more than the age-old parameter of distortion. No magic… no pixie dust… nothing special about tubes vs. transistors, linear analog vs. PWM, etc. There is a difference in materials, with some being better than others for a given application, but in general, one class of technology is not inherently superior to another except for the specific, targeted areas wherein that technology's strengths reside. For now, tubes are better than solid-state for ultra-sonic amplification in the RF range and SS is better at frequencies near DC. Nevertheless, for most audio applications products can be built well enough that if ALL (measurable and
immeasurable) forms of DISTORTION could be and were held at identical values… they would sound virtually identical regardless of the technology and/or implementation involved in their construction.
Taken that as a "given" (go along just for the ride), then distortion products are what give rise to each component's unique "signature" sound. Distortion below a certain threshold and composed of certain harmonically related signals can sound pleasant, while distortion comprised of non-harmonically related distortion intervals will tend to sound less pleasant and/or… result in a lower acceptable listening threshold.
Upshot – the path to sonic nirvana is (or should be) based on ABSOLUTE ACCURACY as our point of reference. Unfortunately, in this material world there are few (if any) examples of the "absolute." Every component, no matter how refined, adds some form of distortion. The real question then becomes… "What is the threshold wherein we can tell if the sound of a component is due to an excess of information (distortion) or the absence of true, original information?" Is it possible that we can be deceived into thinking that a certain component sounds good primarily BECAUSE of the distortion it adds? Conversely, can we also be deceived into thinking that one component doesn't sound as good as another BECAUSE it doesn't add as much distortion to the final sound we hear? As you will see, I think both statements are true.
When it comes to the subject of detail and/or resolution in audio components, I submit that what is often perceived as greater accuracy and more "detail" is actually an excess of distortion that resides somewhere below the threshold of our ability to identify it as distortion. I repeat…pay close attention here… this distortion lies BELOW the threshold wherein we can easily tell that IT IS distortion. Therefore, the brain misinterprets it as something that is "supposed" to be there, when in actuality it is not, but rather an artificial artifact that just so happens to sound "pleasant." Our brains are wired to make sense of our experiences and to recognize patterns amongst the chaos. Given sufficient exposure to a false reality, the brain will begin to interpret it AS reality. This is where "absolutes" hold their real value as reference points to gauge our perceptions against and help to keep us on track. Without absolutes, we are lost in a forest of "possibilities."
For audio, un-amplified "live" music should always be our reference. Either that, or complex test waveforms and appropriate test equipment to analyze them. Seeing the common audiophile is seldom an audio engineer with access to such equipment, live music is about all he has. Go to your kid's high school symphony concert when they don't use any PA system… and listen. You'll be amazed at the lack of bass and high frequencies. Actually, they are there and if the hall is big enough, the bass goes a lot lower than you probably realize. All the detail from the cymbals and triangle are there too. What's missing is the DISTORTION. In the absence thereof, the resulting sound will seem very "laid back" and not particularly "exceptional" sounding.
So… to evaluate a component, I suggest the following – especially at mid and high frequencies. Listen for the fundamental notes along the musical scale. Does each instrument sound like all of the different notes it is generating are there? What you are listening for is the basic frequency response. If there are significant peaks or dips in the frequency response, certain notes or sounds will always seem excessive or missing – no matter what instrument is being played in that frequency range. Extreme high frequencies are very difficult to discern. Listen to the sound of nothing but brushed (not struck) cymbals. They should sound metallic and "real" with a soft intimacy. If the extension is there, that's how they'll sound and you can tell. If it's not, forget the rest and get a better speaker or other component.
Now after having determined that the frequency response is reasonably flat (and it most certainly is on the Spirits), listen for faint details in the recording that are hard to hear. Can you hear "between the notes?" If you can't then everything will tend to sound as if it's blurred together and congested sounding. An analogy to this would be a photograph that is out of focus to some degree. Don't listen for the "sound" of a particular instrument (colors in a photograph), but rather the "sounds" of different instruments all playing at the same time (as in the contrast of a photograph). The sound of an individual instrument is a function of timbre and can vary based on the instrument itself and how it was recorded. BUT… the "sounds" of all the instruments playing simultaneously is less a function of the recording (unless it is a poor one) and more that of the playback equipment.
So following these guidelines, can you hear instruments distinctly from each other and in their own space, while ALSO being able to hear very low-level background sounds taking place at the same time? If so, then the component has good resolution and detail.
Now listen to the timbre of individual instruments. Actually, the transient speed of plucked strings or drumstick snaps on a snare can be included in this test. Do they sound real and rich sounding? Yes… how rich? Do the transient attacks have "bite" to them to the point that the instrument sounds physically close to you and "intimate?" Be careful… and don't be deceived by too much of a good thing. Conversely, does the component "lack" somewhat in this area compared to some other similar component you are familiar with? If so, go back to the earlier test. Is the resolution and detail there in the "inferior" component? Yes? Hmmm… detail and resolution are there, but the harmonic richness and maybe even the transient "speed" doesn't seem to be as much as the other component. What gives?
In the above scenario, the component that seems to be lacking something, may very well be… DISTORTION, that is. One of the first signs of a component exhibiting less distortion is that it will seem to lack a certain "euphonic" characteristic. The words "dry" and "sterile" go too far in describing the effect, but there often seems to be a definite lack of "excitement" and intimacy (often described as "detail") to the reproduction – especially compared to other similar components that do exhibit those characteristics. Another thing that a highly accurate component will lack is listening fatigue. You can listen for hours and not get burnt-out. While excitement and a bit of intimacy may be lacking, naturalness and an ease of presentation will impart a sense of musicality that is somewhat hard to express or "put your finger on." Another characteristic is that such a component's presentation will vary widely depending on the quality of the recordings. Nevertheless, only with the very worst recordings should it ever sound harsh or irritating.
Therefore, if a component has high resolution and detail combined with low listening fatigue, while also exhibiting a somewhat less than exciting presentation (especially at first listening), it most likely is producing less distortion than a comparable component that seems to have a richer, more intimate and/or more exciting presentation. The telling difference between the two is that while the lower distortion component is not as "compelling" at first, it will "grow on you" over time.
On the other hand, he higher distortion component will sound more exciting and intimate in the beginning, but will grow old over time such that you will feel that something needs "fixing." In fact, were it not for such components many cable companies along with a host of accessory manufacturers would probably not even be in business.
In closing, the final question remains: Do the Spirit-1s offer less detail than the Salk's…or less distortion? Without actual test measurements, there's no way to be sure. It's a moot point regardless though, because in the end the only thing that matters is one's perceptions and preferences. In that regard, one man's judgment (sfox7076) rules the court and in this one case, the Spirit-1s loose the debate. Ah… but thank God for lawyers and appeals. Maybe another judge will have a different opinion and they'll be acquitted!
Take care,
-Bob
PS. At some point I intend to present some very interesting test data graphs to further illustrate my point. In particular, spectral analysis comprised of "two-tone" stimulus signals can be EXTREMELY revealing. You'll see John Atkinson of Stereophile use them in his tests of solid-state components at times. But… you will NEVER see him perform the same test on loudspeakers. Why? Because if he did… you'd probably give up on audio as a hobby altogether! I'm gonna chance it though.
