In another thread, spence wrote of the Timepiece 3.0:
They are seamless and reproduce everything perfectly (perfectly of course if it was recorded that way).
If your tunes were recorded bad, you'll hear it.
I replied in the thread, but I would like to ask about this
for all of the SP Tech speakers:
Are they ruthlessly revealing?
Can I play poorly recorded CDs without hearing etch, grain, tizz, shrieking, etc.?
Can I play R.E.M., the Beatles, and Motown along with quality classical CDs?
I used to have Aerial 10Ts and Apogee Stages, which were nice and forgiving,
at the expense of some detail. Wilson Watt Puppies drove me crazy on anything but
the best Reference Recordings. Thank you for your comments on your experiences.
After reading your two threads I'll toss this in for what it's worth.
What you're trying to balance is valid - high fidelity vs 'too much truth', and it might depend on what one wants in general. I see two distinctly different aspects at work -in music at it's simplest and basic level vs the pursuit of perfection, in the recordings, the reproduction, the enabling of the illusion, right down to the joy and pride of superb tools and systems. Sort of like a left brain vs right brain thing.
But ask this. Are there songs, and times, where the music connects -regardless or in spite of ridiculously poor fidelity? On the other hand there are countless recordings out there -not surprisingly, that are full of imperfections. Whether they 'deliver the goods' might depend more on which of our perspectives (or blend of both) are in play, less so the relative level of accuracy' down the recording chain.
I want to be up font here as to how I faced this, and what drove me. And it may sound (and be) completely atypical, inverted reasoning. I was lead to SP after deciding rather than looking for speakers
to like, to get the most, flat, plain fidelity I could find and afford -
and to like that -to take that chance.
Now my needs are weighted heavily on the technical side for neutrality, as I use them in recording and mixing in my home studio. This is where IMHO SP's engineering and design pay off and make perfect logic to me- a coherent, controlled disperse point source down to 700, large drivers doing what large drivers do well. 'Right brain is happy.
The recordings; The clear differences in the tone qualities are there, the un-cloudy definition in the low and upper bass ranges, right on up the top, are a joy -in fidelity, and to work with.
When we are creating a mix' on the way to becoming a finished recording, part of the task is to minimize the tone faults individual instruments and to find their balance within the song. Knowing this it is easy to extrapolate (by my sick methodology
) to the point of thinking that all (most?) recording are contrived 'best efforts' of the engineers to present the end product -musical illusion, to the target. They will pick one mic over another with rises or dips in the response to hide or favor a singer or instrument's traits, making these pushes and pulls' at each stage in the process right on down the line, literally dozens, sometimes hundreds of 'moves,
manipulations.
The final result of this- From project to project- Tone, presentation, -the
presentation of reality' and illusion -are all over the map.Knowing this may spoil in some way, for some, the pursuit of the 'high fidelity' game. Or it may liberate. Knowing there are 'faulty recordings of great music, some will only 'fly' for you when in the left-brain moods at best. But I am more at ease with turning them off when the don't 'fly for me, or turn a tone control if if that fits- rather than chase
again with a 'speaker specific' solutions.
And yes, the old/crude off kilter stuff survives as well, (perhaps even more likely?), on the SP's I believe specifically due to the 'low hype' factor.
aa
