[SWG255]

OK, I've actually been thinking about this more and more lately. During the late 70's and early 80's I sold hi-fi equipment for a local upscale, but not necessarily high-end store. During this time I was really, really into audio. Since then I've lived with the same components until 2 years ago this Christmas when I bought a Sony SCD-1 SACD/CD player. I had sold my turntable  a couple years before that, after noticing I'd gone more than 18 mongths without playing an LP. Now I'm starting to think about upgrading the rest of my gear.

The first thing I like in a good reproducing system is midrange "rightness" or "aliveness". This is a very difficult thing to describe, and many otherwise excellent components don't posses it. I feel it can come from solid state or tubes, but I'm more concerned with getting this quality from my loudspeakers.

Next in roughly equal importance is very low distortion, good inner detail, micro and macro dynamics, and extension in the frequency extremes. Good imaging and soundstage depth is also important, but so many recordings simply don't sound like live acoustic music in this regard that I often have trouble deciding whether a given component is "right" in this regard.

Now, how is this different than what others have said here? Well, it isn't. However, I feel too many "audiophiles" neglect the midrange to get some other attribute of the sound. I don't feel a truly high-end system will claim my hard-earned dollars unless the midrange is right. But, a "right" midrange for me sounds more "alive" than necessarily ultra smooth or warm. In my youth I was attracted to speakers from JBL, Altec/Lancing and Klipsch because they sounded more exciting than the "audiophile" choices from Acoustic Research, Advent, and KLH. (I guess I'm showing my age now...) I didn't really hear an audiophile speaker I really liked until the Dahlquist DQ-10.

Over the next year or so I hope to replace all my components and I think the journey will be at least half the fun.

BTW, my current system is:
Sony SCD-1 SACD/CD player
Motif (Conrad-Johnson) MC8 preamp
Threshold 4000 "dynamic class A" power amplifier
Synthesis LM-30 (Dave Fokos' design when he worked for Conrad-Johnson)
Sunfire subwoofer
Marantz CD-63 Mk II (I still have this, but havn't played it since getting the SCD-1)
Sony DCM-2600 DAT recorder
Marantz CDR-630 CD recorder
DYI interconnects between components
Monster speaker cable in a bi-amp configuration from the Threshold to the Synthesis

[Pirate]

Good sound to me is the door bell ringing knowing my new piece of equipment has arrived..

Seriously, Good sound brings you in beyond just listening and into the performance of the artist. You can take notice of the crack of a drumstick striking the snare, a crisp sizzle of a cymbal that lingers till the next wallop. The experience of the pedal beating the bass that creates that thump in your chest. If you’ve ever heard a good acoustic guitar played well the sound doesn’t expire in front of you it drifts and floats around you. In a great orchestral piece you become emotionally involved to the point of understanding what the sentiment of the composer was. Some time ago I experienced a system that was playing an album that I had never listen to before and didn’t know the artist…. It sent chills up and down my spine. It was unbelievable…Ive heard close but not too often. I guess that’s what I am looking for. That’s good sound to me, that’s the goal I’ve set for my system.
 Does my wife agree?  No  she has never heard it before and it’s just not that important to her. She listens to the words and that’s her involvement.

[Sa-dono]

gonefishin:



First you complain about people that say they seek neutrality and accuracy. Then you pretty much only list elements of accuracy, and one listening preference (listening by yourself). This seems rather ironic, as I imagine most people understand the terms neutral and accurate. Let us get cheesy and say, "I want my system to sound like live music, and not speakers playing!"

I do understand what you mean though, which is why I explained one of the techniques I use.


For those people mentioning that emotion is important, are there any particular elements that provide this emotion to you? Do you not feel that hearing the music as was recorded will provide you the emotions intended?

[Sa-dono]

Good sound to me is the door bell ringing knowing my new piece of equipment has arrived..

Seriously, Good sound brings you in beyond just listening and into the performance of the artist. You can take notice of the crack of a drumstick striking the snare, a crisp sizzle of a cymbal that lingers till the next wallop. The experience of the pedal beating the bass that creates that thump in your chest. If you’ve ever heard a good acoustic guitar played well the sound doesn’t expire in front of you it  ...

Too funny Great description too! Certainly all parts of the realism I look for in my search for accuracy

[audiojerry]

SWG255, It might be better if you started a new thread for your topic - you might get more responses related to your topic.

Let's discuss:
First of all, I'm with you regarding Altec-Lansing. When I first heard them back in the 60's in a demo (I had heard them as Voice of the Theater long before that, but I didn't know it) it was spine tingling. I think it was due in large part to their effortlessness and a midrange/tweeter that handled everything above 500hz, so there was no xover mucking up the midrange. I also think that the amplification such as MacIntosh, and playback mediums of that era all had a synergy that resulted in an ideally balanced sound system. Using indiviual components from these systems with today's hi-rez components don't seem to work.  

I've heard of your Threshold. Isn't it considered one of the great vintage amplifiers? And the Synthesis LM-30, are those your speakers? Maybe you have exactly what you need to give you that midrange you describe. The only obstacle is that your amp and speakers probably need to have the caps replaced. If they are more than 10 years old, they probably no longer are working as designed. Your speaker cones may also need replacing.

I'd also strongly consider replacing your wire. There are some great wire vendors participating in this forum, and I know they have some wire that can bring about a huge improvement.

If you've decided you want to go with new components, I strongly recommend auditioning as many systems as you can, whether at dealers, individuals' homes, or in-home auditions from internet dealers. You should expose yourself to the various types of (best) sounds that can be obtained with so many different sounding high-end components available today.

Personally, I'd try to get your current gear performing back to or better than when they were new. Your current dissatisfaction, if you have any, is likely due to aging capacitors and other parts, rather than inferior design compared to today's products.

My own personal favorite for best midrange in today's speakers is the limited edition Dynaudio Special 25 monitors, which I just recently discovered. Your Sunfire sub would work real well with it.

[Jay S]

A great system is one that makes me feel.  I enjoy depth, soundstage, imaging, tonality etc.  But, if everything comes together everything takes a back seat to sheer joy.  

I have to be analytical at work.  Sometimes it carries over to my home life.  A great system is one that makes me forget and simply experience the here and now.  

The usual audiophile qualities can take you closer to that nirvana but if you have to think about it... you're not there yet.

One of the most emotional musical experiences I ever had was when Sesha (where is that old pirate?) and I were blasting Elton John's Rocket Man... back before I had my digital amp or the various bybee filters or the room treatments or the Slinkylinks silver cables.  Somehow, with the nOrh CD-1 and Sylvania Gold Brand 5751 tubes, we were there, in an emotional groove, several times more intense than when I saw Elton John live in concert months later.  

Good sound is elusive.  No system has it.  The best systems will manage to recreate it more often than others, but they will never guarantee musical bliss.  That is why music is a drug.

[DVV]

A great system is one that makes me feel.  I enjoy depth, soundstage, imaging, tonality etc.  But, if everything comes together everything takes a back seat to sheer joy.  ...

AMEN to that, brother Jay!

No emotion, I'm wasting my time. Next, please.

Cheers,
DVV

[Tbadder1]

I'm probably a product of my local record playing culture that says, "great music is great music no matter what it's played on."  Truly great music gives me that tingle no matter what I listen to it on.  Kitchen radio, car stereo, reference home system, computer speakers, etc--I enjoy music equally because the greatness of the music can't be denied if one is listening to Mozart or The Stones.  Why else is Son House and Robert Johnson some of my most intensely emotional musical experiences?  No matter what you listen to those two on, the SOUND stinks.  Conversely, Nora Jones and Patricia Barber, no matter how beautifully recorded, are as engaging as Gilligan's Island reruns to me.  Delving into style is what 2nd rate artists do.  Notice I said artist (don't want to sound too harsh, and I apologize if I'm stinging any fans, but hey I love plenty of 2nd rate artists too).  But when I listen to my reference system I get a clearer picture on the artist's intention, my understanding increases, and therefore I learn to respect Barber or Jones, the poor misdirected sweeties!

Peace Love Dope
Dan

[djklmnop]

Good sound is when the music rides my buttocks like they were amber waves of grains.

[Bob A (SD)]

Ok...here I go.  I'll try to get a start of my description.


  First off...when someone is describing what they want out of a system...or describing good sound (to them)...and they state that they prefer a neutral sounding system...or a system that is accurate to the original recording is cop out.    To me this tells me nothing of what they want.  I've seen too many "audiophiles" describe this same thing...and I've heard some of their components and some of their systems.  Yet they all sou ...

I agree with much of what you've said here.  Coming up with a definition that is totally objective is an exercise in futility yet elements such as those you cite in your post are essential to achieving a synergy between the what the arist(s), engineers, and pressings give and what a reproduction system can extract.

If that synergy exists it serves to transport me (and yeah there are undoubtedly better expression to use but this one works for me... LOL).  It's often been said that laughter and good music are not only good for the soul but also good for physical health.  Both leave one with a sense of well being.  Maybe too metaphysical or downright hokey but I don't think a definition here can be expressed in concrete terms.

So if I were hard pressed my personal definition would be where synergy is achieved between a recording and a sound system such that the listener is transported to a state of euphoria.

Bob

[Psychicanimal]

I feel too many "audiophiles" neglect the midrange to get some other attribute of the sound. I don't feel a truly high-end system will claim my hard-earned dollars unless the midrange is right. But, a "right" midrange for me sounds more "alive" than necessarily ultra smooth or warm....

SWG255, It might be better if you started a new thread for your topic - you might get more responses related to your topic.

I think this would be a great topic by itself--somewhere else--but Jerry couldn't resist and neither could I.  SW, I agree with Jerry that all your power amp needs is a capacitor (and maybe rectifier bridge) update.  I have a Forté 4 and a pair of Marantz MA-5 Esotec monoblocks and I can fully understand what you say about the midrange being right--not smooth nor warm.  I have set aside my Ortofon X5 MC's high frequency extension for a modded Groovemaster II MM cartridge that has the natural, coherent midrange of a $1500 MC cartridge.  I went through a serious mod in my mini monitors in order to improve the midrange,among other things.  I am also working on improving HF extension, though.  I used to work at a store that sold Dahlquist, so I also understand this...

[Whitese]

I think that the reason the yardstick may also be obsolete is because unless we were listening to the recording as it was being made, there is no objective approximation to the real thing...

I play guitar and my family has many pro musicians, so we grew up listening to all kinds of stuff,,,and the environments in which the instruments were played, tuning, quality all became ingredients to what our brain uses to identify what we listen to, and to like it or not....So, if I grew up listening to pianos in more sterile rooms, without perfect tuning, maybe the best Elliot Gould CD may not sound right to me,,,same with any instrument. I dont use nails to finger pick,,,I am a steve howe fan, and I find using nails a bit sterile...I like the smoother pluck of a finger tip, so that affects how and what I enjoy...

Dont forget that even measuring sticks are made with inherent biases.
When I audition stuff, if it hits me emotionally, it must be because there was some quality that is familiar to me subconcously,,,that is why I hate a lot of the higher end setups, especially with JMLabs speakers...

[hmen]

To paraphrase a former Supreme Court Justice when he was trying to describe what "obscene" means - I can't describe good sound but I know it when I hear it.
  Maybe it's impossible to  describe something so subjective using objective terms.

[SWG255]

Hi,

I agree that a music reproduction system works best for me when it evokes an emotional response commensurate with the music being played back on it. The idea that a good system is one which "takes me closer to the recording" conveys an idea of what is desired from the system, but it isn't necessarily "accurate". this is because the original recording probably does not sound like the final pressin, but this is a topic for another thread.  I am responding to the last message because the word "euphoria" was used but I can also enjoy my system when it brings tears to my eyes as well as a blissful grin. In fact, i often find the emotional release of listening is theraputic when the tears do start to come to my eyes. Perhaps I need therapy, but music is cheaper, or at least lots more fun.

 

I agree with much of what you've said
here.  Coming up with a definition that is totally objective is an exercise in futility yet elements such as those you cite in your post are essential to achieving a synergy between the what the arist(s), engineers, and pressings give and what a reproduction system can extract.

If that synergy exists it serves to transport me (and yeah there are undoubtedly better expression to use but this one works for me... LOL).  It's often been said that laughter and good music  ...

[Bosh]

So far, we've mostly been wasting our time in rather pointless discussions about whether tube is better than SS, whether analog is better than digital, and so forth.

It's not so much that these are pointless topics as such, it just that we didn't define the basic element of it all - the yardstick by which we measure.

So, let's try to define something most of us can agree is what we'd call good sound. Yes, it is a hornet's nest indeed, but it has to be done sometime, so sooner better than later.

Let ...

You Like it?  It's "good".  End of story.  End of quest.

Lighten up and have some fun.

[Psychicanimal]

You Like it? It's "good". End of story. End of quest.

That's exactly why so many people prefer Bose speakers...

[Bosh]

You Like it? It's "good". End of story. End of quest.

That's exactly why so many people prefer Bose speakers...

And exactly why I love your avitar.

[Dan Banquer]

Good sound in a system is when there is no "sound " so to speak. The recording is the "sound".

[DVV]

Good sound in a system is when there is no "sound " so to speak. The recording is the "sound".

I'll drink to that. Hear, hear!

Cheers,
DVV