Your definition of 'musicality'.
|
Silver Member Username: VarneyBirminghamEngland, UK Post Number: 451 Registered: Sep-04 | when talking about audio electronics; their ability to reproduce 'musical' sounds, to please our 'musical' tastes, what is that you are thinking about, when you read the word 'musical' in the review of an amplifier or source unit you're interested in buying? I personally take it to mean that the unit may colour the sound to 'warm', or round off the more vicious treble notes to bring about a more aesthetically and balanced nature to the sound. I am probably biased, in the sense that I would go for what some call an 'analytical' sound. The idea being, that If the recording is in good order, the musicians play well and the mixing engineer considered his/her recording levels, to suit the mood, then an analytical-sounding unit will give me insight to those very intentions, as layed down by the artist. I think some people will disagree, on the basis of personal taste - but that is fine. I'm just interested to know what others here think and feel about this. Later, V |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1287 Registered: Nov-05 | V, People use the term PRaT a lot (Pace, Rhythm and Timing) and if one can discern that a player does well in terms of PRat then I think it must be doing things pretty well right to be classed as musical. From my observations, well er hearing, things like well controlled bass, clean detail right up into the highs, an airy spacious sound that enables one to identify various instruments/sounds, dead quiet breaks, the right amount of attack and decay all help to create PRat. And then there's timing itself. A case in point: I noticed when comparing the NAD542 to the Apollo, apart from the smoother sound and blah, blah, blah, one other thing that really seemed obvious was that the 542 sounded like it needed to be fueled with high octane gas. You can bet the time counters would be indentical spinning the same disc, and although the 542 is a superb machine for the money, it just seemed to lag behind musically after the swinging Rega. I have, in the past, thought of the 542 as musical, but on hearing the Apollo, it isn't, or it is not as musical as I thought. So, we can get used to what we are hearing. I guess if one was to hear live music much more often or on a consistant basis, one may detect more easily whether or not a player is musical. Maybe? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10072 Registered: May-04 | . If you're dancin', it's probably "musical". If you're sittin', it probably ain't. |
|
Gold Member Username: Arande2Extreme SQ FTW Post Number: 2022 Registered: Dec-06 | I like that one ^^^ |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1294 Registered: Nov-05 | Well there you go Varney - yer just can't have a serious thread no more. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10074 Registered: May-04 | . I'm serious. It drives me nuts that audiophiles sit still to listen to the tiniest details and 3-D imaging from their music. There are more than enough compositions that require serious attention. But the purpose of most music is to invigorate your spirit and body. You can't do that sitting still. . |
|
Bronze Member Username: StryvnPost Number: 67 Registered: Dec-06 | I agree JV.....ya gotta feel it, man! |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1295 Registered: Nov-05 | Of course you should feel it - otherwise why bother? But, here was the question put to us by Varney: "what is that you are thinking about, when you read the word 'musical' in the review of an amplifier or source unit you're interested in buying?" Well, when I read such things, I would try to take notice of the component's attributes that would make the reviewer suggest that virtue. Sorry, sometimes there's nothing more relaxing than SITTING and listening to your favourite music. And for all intents and purposes one cdp (which I used as an example) can sound more musical than another without one having to gyrate simply to prove it. Surely you can hear it. Wearing out those blue suede shoes must cost you the earth, Jan. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1296 Registered: Nov-05 | "I sat there taking it all in. In each case Emma was now bringing these musicians into my room. I sat there in my chair, in my room, while one after another came to play with Emma. I knew they weren?t real but still this was too much fun." But the purpose of most music is to invigorate your spirit and body. You can't do that sitting still. |
|
Bronze Member Username: StryvnPost Number: 69 Registered: Dec-06 | It ain't no sin to take off your skin and dance around in your bones! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10076 Registered: May-04 | . Rantz - Why don't you pull up another out of context quote in an attempt to disprove my point. If you read my entire review of Emma, you will not find I said the speaker was "musical". In fact, I felt the general lack of emotion was a failing of the speaker despite its many strengths. This was most particularly so when compared to the Ling, which Tim had sent a few months previous to Emma. Bringing musicians into your room is not the same as having them play their heart out while there or playing well for that matter. Emma went more to the "accurate" school of speaker design. Such an approach is quite fine for someone looking to dissect a musical performance but is usually recognized as the antithesis of a musical speaker - or amplifier or cartridge or etc. - and should not be confused with a component of nothing more egregious than lesser musical capabilites. If you wish to look for specific qualities which the reviewer suggests makes the component musical, you will need to know whether that reviewer values musicality before proceeding. Someone who values tiny bits of information and seeing into the soundstage width and depth over all other things might not find musicality high on their list of values and possibly some might. I submit musicality makes you want to dance. Now, should you be suggesting someone can't dance even while seated, you will unfortunately have a large handicapped lobby beating on your door. As I said, I have sufficient numbers of compositions which are best experienced sitting with some degree of concentration focused on the composition and the performance. Many of those compositions were intially intended to be played for a crowd that was in the mood to dance, even if ever so discretely. I have music for relaxation and I have music that does anything but relax me. I find a system which has the musicality to invigorate me also has the power to relax me without irritation creeping in. Therefore, a system which can excite me into movement can also put my mind off other matters with the greatest of ease. While on the whole I find a system which is balanced toward accuracy above musicality insists upon my undivided concentration to its attributes in order to perform at its best. Constant concentraion is not relaxing to me and gets in the way of relaxation. Maybe you feel differently about this subject. What musicality in a system is not would be a rolled high end which merely masks the missteps of a poorly planned system or component. But I have heard inexpensive and even cheap systems with limited frequency extension which sound magically musical to my ears while having also experienced systems with extraordinary on paper response which leaves me uninterested. If you remember, Rantz, this is all a rehashing of themes which were explored in "Do you listen". There are car radios which are musical and multi-thousand dollar systems which are not. More recently I expressed the same values with the interconnects Nuck graciously sent out to several forum members. In the thread commenting on the performance of the interconencts when used in my system I said, "It's what you want from your system and the Dared cables should suit any system and make it sound good - exceptional in some cases. Sometimes I just wish they were a bit more of a spitter under the chin with a man on third." I gave those same cables to Mike Wodek who posted, "OMG, OMG, OMG, OMG, OMG ... ". Mike's system is quite differently balanced than mine and, while I'm not claiming my system to be superior in any way, the Dared cables fit his system's balance better than they did mine. In my system, they lacked some degree of drama compared to the inteconnects I have chosen while in Mike's system they brought out the very qualities he seeks. Mike's system is musical. Mine is different than his. So, muciality in a system or component can take various forms and exist in varying degrees. When I said, "If you're dancin', it's probably "musical". If you're sittin', it probably ain't", I was answering what comes to my mind when I read a system is musical, as the original post requested. That is, those are the qualities which come to my mind if I know the reviewer values many of the same qualities I find important. If I read a review claiming musicality for a component and I feel the reviewer and I share only a few values in a component, I will take that claim with some regard as to how I might respond to the same equipment. . |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 4357 Registered: Feb-05 | "But the purpose of most music is to invigorate your spirit and body. You can't do that sitting still." This I agree fully with. Whether I'm listening to classical, jazz, or funk...music moves me. I'm not necessarily dancing with my feet, but some part of me whether it be by singing, moving my hands as conducting, or jumpin' up off the couch to get my groove on, in some way I'm moved. Music brings to the fore the relationship between spirit, body, and mind in a way that nothing else can for me. If it don't it ain't musical. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1298 Registered: Nov-05 | It's very easy to quibble over words Jan, but I still refer back to Varney's original question. It's not that I disagree with your statement, it just doesn't relate to Varney's question in my opinion. Yes, if a component sounds musical naturally it will move me in some way that will make me feel at one with the rhythm, but if I'm reading what a reviewer is describing about a component being musical, I'm thinking of those attributes that make it so. Listening to music in relation to a component is vastly different to reading what a reviewer is describing about a component. Oh, and if a component makes me feel the musicians are in my room, I would think that component is doing a pretty good job of being musical. If not, then the musicians must not be too good. But that's me. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1300 Registered: Nov-05 | Meant to say: If not, then either it's the component or the musicians must not be too good. But why bother? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10077 Registered: May-04 | . Rantz - You say it's easy to quibble over words. Is that why we always end up doing just that? What else is there on a forum based upon the printed word? Complete acquiescence to the norm? Neither you nor I seem to fit that mold, Rantz. I think you're missing my point somewhat. First, you must know what the reviewer finds of value before you can assess anything they place in print. There have been scores of audio writers who I wouldn't trust as someone I would want picking any component to suit my tastes. A reviewer of the "everthing sounds the same" school might tell me a component is musical but that is virtually written while the amplifier plays test tones on their bench. Those words are of no value to me. That is why I read comments from those who have lived with a component for several months and experienced its highs and lows and many moods in between. Even there I find too many of the writers just that, no more than writers of words, for my purposes. I am not obssessed with the amount of ice in the glassess of the front row audience during Bill Evans playing at the Vanguard. I do not hear the ultraprecision and definition of space which many reviewers seek out when discussing imaging or the ability to pull single voices out of massed chiors or instruments. If I don't hear it during a live event, why seek it out for reproduction at home? The act of reproducing the music is not the event itself. Should I be interested in why Jack Bruce chooses one electric bass rather than another on the Cream at Albert Hall sessions? Probably. Am I interested in a system capable of displaying the variations in playing style and tone between the two instruments used? Definitely. Some reviewers would have me listen to the brand of strings used. A bit too much for me. Some would prefer to hear the creaking of the floor boards under Ginger Baker's drum set. OK, but probably not something I'm interested in for more than a few seconds. Hear the hall's air conditioning system kick on during "Crossroads"? No, don't bother me, I'm listening to the music. I understand the value of a system capable of reproducing such detail but they are of little to no interest to me. I sent John A. a copy of an excellent Living Stereo recording when we were discussing surround formats on Old Dogs and he heard a car being started and pulled away from the recording venue. Yes, I could hear it but it meant nothing to me musically. If the reviewer is content with those moments, I can appreciate their values but not share them. If that writer tells me a component is "musical", I would question their assessment for inclusion in my system. On the other hand, a writer such as Sam Telliig or Art Dudley writing for Stereophile will consistently focus on many of the same aspects of the performance (both of the artists and the equipment) which I would say I share with them. The current issue of Stereophile discusses this situation somewhat in the "As We See It" column written by John Atkinson. The column speaks of " .. . delightful immersion in the musical experience" and "stirring the soul". Atkinson, a one time performer now a part time player, states, " ... you feel a part of something far larger than anything you could achieve alone. ... Sadly, my attention these days is focused on the how to play rather than on the what to play and when to play it." JA admits to sliding toward a mechanical style of making an instrument work rather than finding what makes the music work. Unfortunately, many pieces of equipment are meant for an audience who have been fed the idea that a superior system is one that reproduces the tinkle of ice in a glass, the sound of a HVAC system running in the background or traffic outside the venue. I feel a disappointment when I hear someone say now that they have become an "audiophile", they can only listen to certain recordings or that they find lesser systems uninteresting. It's not the system you should be listening to and my feeling is a great system at any price lets the music shine through even the worst recording techniques. As I have suggested before, those people caught up in the mechanics of their system and Jones-ing over the next equipment fix need to find a good table radio. Focus on the music, not the system. Go buy a mono recording. Remember when you danced around your room to the sound of a flip down turntable and fold out speakers. Musicality should not be wasted on the rich. Regarding those reviewers who are dedicated to the exploration of arcane audiophile artifacts or who are fascinated by the mechanics of music reproduction rather than the mysticism and magic of musical performance, I find their words to be of little value when assessing what "musical" might mean in relation to any component. However, when Dudley compares the timing, intensity and momentum of a performance reproduced by an amplifier as musical, I understand what he is saying. When he intimates that during the time spent with the component he played air guitar or just sat and boogied his soul until he was exhausted or invigorated, I feel this is a component I should audition. So firstly, you must know the writer's predilections before making any guess as to the meaning of their words. Second, if the reviewer never once during the review period got outside of their world and themself and into the performance and the spirit of the event, I have no interest in what they may find "musical". . |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1301 Registered: Nov-05 | I appreciate the effort that went into your post Jan. I don't think there's anything there I disagree with - so maybe you miss my point also. But later - have not got time now. |
|
Silver Member Username: VarneyBirminghamEngland, UK Post Number: 452 Registered: Sep-04 | Hehe  So, I was right in thinking starting such a thread would bring about a level of pleasant, relaxed conversation... But is that an actual level I see, or just the odd peak? I'm still marvelling at the wonderful image I have of Jan Vigne, breakdancing on the floor of his listening room Ohhh... I like it. Some very interesting points raised though. Yes, I could tell you were being serious, Jan. I guess musicality can be gauged by an involuntary foot-tapping, which will, as the funky-stuff gets into it's stride, possibly break into a series of upper-body movements. When you just wanna stand up and dance around, I guess the needle's off the gauge, on that old, inner 'musicality' meter. Then, as one starts to slip-slidey-schloop-de-bop around the room, one may complain about a slight 'shift', away from a nicely centred soundstage. Damn! I just can't win! This 'audiophile' business is a rocky path, indeed. V |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 72 Registered: Mar-06 | I personally take it to mean that the unit may colour the sound to 'warm', or round off the more vicious treble notes to bring about a more aesthetically and balanced nature to the sound. This is exactly what many reviewers of audio gear mean with "musical". The term is often used in contrast with "analytical" You'll read something like this: "What it lacks in delivering the upmost insight and detail, it makes up in sheer musicality" For me personally the term has no meaning when defining audio qualities. Whether I listen to music on the radio, iPod or television, it is all musical to me, for the simplest reason: it is music you're listening at isn't it? It is like stating the obvious, expressing a bold "Duh!" I may describe a person's talent as "musical", or I may even use it to describe a painting: Kandinsky's work for instance is very musical to me. |
|
Silver Member Username: VarneyBirminghamEngland, UK Post Number: 457 Registered: Sep-04 | "Whether I listen to music on the radio, iPod or television, it is all musical to me, for the simplest reason: it is music you're listening at isn't it? It is like stating the obvious, expressing a bold "Duh!" " Not really, it isn't, because we are not talking about obvious things here. When you hear music through a blurred transistor radio, you are only hearing a portion of the music, I feel. You are not hearing the entire range of sounds. I think this is typical of most modern pop 'muzak' you hear on radio today. To the average listener, it is not important that the full dynamic range of the music is present in their experience. You've heard the words, no doubt: "I don't care about sound qaulity - as long as I hear the music, I am happy..." I feel this thinking misses the point. Most of the 'atmosphere' is lost, which to me, is all part of the 'musical experience'. Only if you're talking in the most basic terms, can we say "Yes, I can hear the TUNE... Therefore I am hearing music". Of course, this is true. It is different to all people. To me, this is the same as looking at a photograph of a painting. I'm not looking at a painting, I am looking at a photograph of it. To fully appreciate the brushstrokes, I must view it in the 'flesh', or at least look at a higher-resolution photo, which has been taken with a close up lens, near the surface. Even then, I see the painting only so far as the 3rd party medium will allow. In other words, it's an illusion, which is what hi-fi is all about. It's all about trying to strengthen the illusion. But then, it all depends on many things... and what is important to the individual differs from person to person, of course. V |
|
Silver Member Username: VarneyBirminghamEngland, UK Post Number: 458 Registered: Sep-04 | This: "When I said, "If you're dancin', it's probably "musical". If you're sittin', it probably ain't", I was answering what comes to my mind" Although it may seem *too* obvious, it is EXACTLY what I was interested to see. The exact thing which springs to mind, the second you run the question through your brain. So, for anyone who critisized it, I still feel it is the most honest, succint and useful answer, which has been explained sufficiently through more detailed writing since. It doesn't matter if it seems stupidly obvious... because sometimes, the very answers to everything are just under our noses. It's just a case of looking (or in this case listening) out for them. V |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1302 Registered: Nov-05 | Although there is much to agree with in JV's follow up, his first response which you quoted above Varney, did not in any way relate to your question imo. Re-read your question - it had nothing to do with listening to a component. It was to do with what you were thinking when you read the word 'musical' in a review of the component you were interested in buying. My response described what attributes I think would help identify the term 'musical'when used in relation to the review. Any old favorite song can get you dancing whether it comes out of a tin can or a $100,000 hi-fi kit. It's the emotion or the nostalgia - then there's the attributes of a component that simply come together to make a tune truly musical in the sense that it sounds very real - in your room real. That to me, is musical. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10078 Registered: May-04 | . "Re-read your question - it had nothing to do with listening to a component." Pray tell, Rantz, how then the reviewer did his or her job if they didn't listen to the component. One of my many objections to audiophilia nervosa is the ability of many - usually those well heeled and/or uninformed - to look at a component and declare it worthy of inclusion in their or other folk's system. Of course the op meant listening to the product and listening to the product of the product. It did not refer to listening only in the sense that my reference point for a musical component is one which does not imply merel listening to the sound emmanating from one or more speakers, but suggests something more zen-like occurred while the reviewer did their job. While uncommonly brief my first post here indicates what I think of when I read a descriptive account of "musicality". To have the test bench jockey tell me an amplifier is musical means little since in all likelyhood neither the writer nor the amplifier moved anything more than a cursor across a screen. When applied as a comparison against an "analytical" component - especially when I know the writer to prefer the more incisive approach, the term musical very well might mean rolled off and less than bright. That is still not my concept of musical though "musical" the component might be. However, when the word musical is applied by reviewers I tend to know and agree with ("know" meaning I have read their prose and feel I have a grasp of their priorities), those writers who admit to break dancing in the middle of the afternoon to the incessant beat of Schubert Sonatas, I understand how the component affected them and not just what they heard. That comes closest to my concept of "musical" when applied to a consumer audio component. To make a short story long, if the writer claims musicality and yet I feel the writer's concept of the term doesn't match mine, then I am suspect of all claims for the product other than it operates as intended. "Then, as one starts to slip-slidey-schloop-de-bop around the room, one may complain about a slight 'shift', away from a nicely centred soundstage. Damn! I just can't win! This 'audiophile' business is a rocky path, indeed." Yes, and one which too often keeps the budding and aged audiophile alike glued to their perfect soundstage listening chair. I'm not advocating breaking a hip while listening to Bach or Cash, but this "soundstage" and "imaging" stuff are highly overrated by reviewers and hence by audiophiles who believe everything they read. As one thing leads to another, however, so much of this has to do with audiophiles who never hear live music. Their reference is in this case worse than their car stereo, it is what they read about reproducing music. Dogma delivered to their mailbox once a month! Without it they wouldn't know soundstage from macrodynamics. With it they seek out the rumble of an underground subway to compliment the romantic accoustic signature of first, second and third arrival times within some grand concert hall in an unknown and far away land. I'll stop here before I put another thousand words into this particular topic. Let me just say, as a former audio salesperson, you don't know how I've suffered. On to, "What it lacks in delivering the utmost in insight and detail, it makes up in sheer musicality." I think this would be a fairly decent description of how musicality can be achieved in any component while not ascribing the actual thing - the affective quality - to the end result. In my mind there are few components which are as "musical" as the original Dynaco Stereo 70 tube amplifier. I always suggest, as I did with Kegger when he first began exploring tubes, the vacuum-curious should first own a ST70. If you cannot find what is musical about that amplifier, then you need to stick to solid state. The amplifier's loosely regulated power supply swings along with the music in all cases even to the point of making John Cage sound "musical". And yet the amplifier's resolving power and frequency extension at both ends is severely limited when in its stock form. Double Advents were shockingly musical though admittedly rolled above 12kHz to accomodate the source material of the day. Audiophiles today have at best a short memory if not a total disregard for what came before and are always looking for the next best fix. Why for God's sake do you think single ended triode amplifiers are so highly regarded by a subset community of listeners? This is "ancient" technology, folks! Why do you always read the word musical when the reviewer is faced with a well designed and executed SET? Why do you think your grandparents and parents could dance their shoes off to the sounds of Benny Goodman coming from their General Electric table radio with its single full range driver back in the 1930's? The frequency response was drastically curtailed, if not by technology, then by the very restraints of AM broadcasting with nothing below 100Hz and nothing above 7k. Take that idea and fast forward to "modern" times and the downfall of many a component is an inability to balance the requirements for musicality. When a reviewer writes, "What it lacks in delivering the upmost insight and detail, it makes up in sheer musicality", I am going to hope they mean the designer has shrewdly and intelligently balanced the component's strengths to cover its weaknessess based on the designer's concept of the real thing. In other words an act of omission is generally more forgivable than an act of commission. I can think of dozens of components which have been "musical" without revealing the smallest bits and pieces of a recording. But their balance of high frequencies to low or clarity through the midrange or dynamic expression, etc, etc., etc. and so on left the impression of music being performed. I'm reminded of the admonition from the British designers of the last mid-century to get the midrange right and all else will follow. Anyone who has ever experienced an original Quad electrostatic will understand the value of that idea. Or a Bozack Concert Grand, JBL Paragon or Spendor BC1. Dare I say, the classic LS3/5a does an admirable job at this very thing while having no real in room bass beneath 50Hz (just to note, my 3/5a's respond to a 28Hz signal though it is well below the level of an 80Hz note - thank goodness for a second order filter due to the sealed enclosure system, a design concept I typically find "musical" while not so often the same applies to a ported enclosure) - though the high frequencies of the BBC design and KEF driver easily extend to 22kHz. Each of the above examples have different frequency balance points and various strengths among the many required to achieve a musical performance. But they are all emminently "musical". If you are standing in the lobby of a great hall and the music is drifting out through an open door, do you not feel the immersion in magnificent music making (assuming it is happening) without most of the many accouterments audiophiles value most highly? What is musical there? Just the fact the music is being created in the moment? Certainly not the soundstaging! I can also think of numerous components and systems which have brought the performers into the room where I sat - and sat - and sat. Nada! Nothing! No soul! No momentum. No music. The original Wilson Watt comes to mind here. A speaker designed as a mobile monitor, much like the intent of the 3/5a, its design goal was not to portray music so much as it was to display the mechanics of recording the performers. With a proper recording performers occupied a "palpable space" in the listening room limited only by the front end components and the room itself in their ability to convince the listener of an emphemeral reality which contained all the components of real music other than the thing itself. Bringing the performers into the room hardly implies the sound will be musical. Without the thing itself, there is no music. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10083 Registered: May-04 | . 'Tis not the review but the preface which is of value here; http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/trends/ta10.html |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1303 Registered: Nov-05 | Jan, of course the reviewer listened to the component, but a particular reviewer wasn't mentioned nor was any other term or insight of the said reviewer referred to other than the term 'musical'. So my comment was based purely on that term and what virtues I would think the component must have for that term to be justified. The question was not about what my favourite reviwer might think or say or how they might review a component, it asked me simply what I would think about if I read the word 'musical' in the review of an amplifier or source unit I was interested in buying? Yes, I read reviews from Stereophile, 6 Moons and others from time to time and while there are many things I agree with and learn from them, I'm not obsessive about the language, the cliche's or anything else other than getting our hi-fi gear to the point where I feel it is portraying the music in a way that sounds 'real' to me. I don't have your knowledge about various components from years past, nor do I recall anyone in my family dancing their shoes off to the sounds of Benny Goodman eminating from the speaker of an old bakerlite Astor valve radio. Apart from a grandfather who had a wonderful tenor voice, no one else in my family showed much interest in music. I live in the here and now and strive within (and sometimes without) our modest income to reach a point where our music brings satisfaction to my ears. Things I've learnt here and elsewhere have helped me do that - or at least to where it is within reach. You say potatos and I say potatoes - it doesn't matter. I thought your original comment was just you being flippant whereas I would have expected more (in which case I certainly got). I answered in the way I read the question, your comments did not appear to address the same question, instead they were based firstly, on what music should do for one and then on how your trusty reviewers describe what made some component sound 'musical'. "Bringing the performers into the room hardly implies the sound will be musical." Again, I agree with you - But I think you know what I was getting at. If they didn't sound musical their appearance would have been very brief. Anyhow, again your articulate lecture has been educational to say the least, but you must remember that some of us humble folk here can only elucidate within the bounds of our our mediocre understanding of this thing called audio. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10085 Registered: May-04 | . "The question was not about what my favourite reviwer might think or say or how they might review a component ... " The question might not have specifically referred to any particular reviewer but knowing the preferences of the reviewers you read is, I think, imperative to understanding the vocabulary the reviewer utilizes to make points. Otherwise you're reading with a dialect at best if not a totally foreign language at worst. That is one reason many magazines run "associated components" lists with a review. If you understand what the reviewer values and what they are willing to throw away, you will get more from any review of any component. There are components such as the Rega Apollo which are simply outstanding products and that might be all you need to read from another listener. Unfortunately, just assembling a collection of well reviewed components won't always lead to a musical system. You don't have to be obssessive about the language - certainly not if you have the opportunity to audition plenty of equipment before making a decision - but what one person might call "warm", "musical" or "analytical" might not be so to another listener. We've found that out on this forum. The reason I repeated the Six Moons review is it demonstrates the many ways listeners can find musicality and the concept has as much to do with how you listen as what you listen through. There is no trademark on musicality and it is hardly a new thing in components. Whether your predecessors danced or not is beside the point, someone's grandparents danced till they dropped to Goodman or Armstrong or Sinatra playing on the radio. Even if you've never heard any of the components I've mentioned, the common tie is their ability to portray music as a believable event. The uncommon bond is each managed the feat in a dissimilar fashion to the others. No one would mistake the Paragon for the BC1. So, when a reviewer says a component is musical, you should know what they mean by that term before you begin applying your own take on the matter. If not, you may have a listen and think, "What's the big deal?" Your disagreement with my original post seems to stem from how you read the intent. Based on what the music does for one? OK. In my audio shorthand, if the music isn't doing something for you or to you, then don't tell me it's musical cause you probably mean its just rolled off. There doesn't seem to me to be a first and second there. " ... if a component makes me feel the musicians are in my room, I would think that component is doing a pretty good job of being musical. If not, then the musicians must not be too good." I strongly disagree with that idea. That's my point. Po-tay-to or po-taut-o, making gnocchi ain't making music. . |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 6471 Registered: Dec-04 | My grandparents never danced, they were Amish. No wait, they never had sax standing up, it might lead to dancing. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10087 Registered: May-04 | . How did you have grandparents if they never had sax? |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1304 Registered: Nov-05 | " ... if a component makes me feel the musicians are in my room, I would think that component is doing a pretty good job of being musical. If not, then the musicians must not be too good." "I strongly disagree with that idea." So do I! That was not what I meant. I was typing in wee hours of the morning. I can't even remember what I was thinking then, but it was something to do with allowing the music into the room. Although I agree with most of what has been stated, I still stand by my original comment about what attributes I think a component would have to help make it sound musical TO ME. Whether my interpretation of that term differs with yours is not important as the poster asked for anyone's views - which you could have easily supplied instead of marking mine (please not an 'F'). As I have previously stated more than once, I defer to your superior knowledge on this subject and I take from it whatever I think I can learn. But I can't keep going around in circles here, if what I think doesn't gel with you or anyone here I'm not going to lose sleep. I'm done. I know what I hear. I know what sounds musical to me. And I know if something sounds more musical than something else - the term itself is wide open: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/musical There's a rainbow lorikeet singing in the tree outside my window as I type. It sounds musical and it there ain't a cable in sight. Next please. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10089 Registered: May-04 | . I too answered the op with the first thing that crosses my mind when I read the term "musical. I don't remember saying anything about your first post, let alone "marking it". I disagreed with your later statement regarding bringing performers into the room. And this, " ... if a component makes me feel the musicians are in my room, I would think that component is doing a pretty good job of being musical. If not, then the musicians must not be too good", came from an earlier post of yours, Rantz, in this thread. I found it posted on Friday, March 23, 2007 - 11:38 am. I don't make this stuff up but, no, I guess I didn't know what you were getting at. Let me just explain for a moment why I disagree with the idea that a system capable of "bringing the performers into the room" does not immediately imply a musical performance from a component. If we agree that "bringing the performers into the room" would rely on a tightly matched balance between the two front channels, were phase integrity and frequency response were closely paired between left and right channels, many amplifiers today can accomplish this task, though at a steep price for the most part. If the electronics of the system however, are composed of gain devices which an individual finds less than musical, the result will still be a non-musical performance. If a listener finds bipolar transistors to always have an edge due to their high odd order harmonic distortions, then an amplifier which might be capable of a three dimensional soundstage would still be grating to that particular listener. If the infamous MOSFET fog is present, a listener bothered by this quality of FET's will find little to enjoy. Should vacuum tubes be the device of choice, a non-tube lover might find the presentation to syrupy or too sweet to handle. To another listener, and possibly to the critic at hand, the sound could easily fall into a musical performance by their standards. Many a reader was lured to the "musical" performance of a SET amplifier when the design style re-entered the market a few years back. When the high output impedance of the SET amplifier caused wild frequency response fluctuations with certain speakers, many listeners were unimperssed by the "musicality" of the SET designs, blaming the amplifier rather than understanding the nature of the pairing they had made. The person reading "musical" and expecting PRaT who then gets TIM distortion from bipolar transistor outputs is going to be very disappointed by the audition. By familiarizing yourself with the reviewers concept of "musical" and other tems used in the review, you can guide yourself toward a system that suits your needs. Until you know the reviewer, however, you really can only guess at what is meant by descriptive terms. . |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1305 Registered: Nov-05 | Okay, "marking" may have been a bit harsh. When someone goes to the trouble to respond so informatively I feel I must go on. I had just about written an essay in reply J, but fortunately for you I guess, I hit a key and lost it all - and I ain't gonna repeat it, let alone remember it - so I won't bore you. I think we can agree that various folk have a different idea of what is musical since it really only means pleasant to the ear anyway. I understand there is more to something being 'musical' than just PRaT and all the other terms and including 'in the room realism' but many of those things combined go a long way towards making the component(s) sound musical to me. I don't place a lot of importance in learning what reviewer's concepts of various terms are as I cannot hear most of the items they discuss anyway. We are in an audio desert here (to steal from Dave) but I do sit up and take notice when something within my grasp is consistenly given decent reviews and I have a chance to audition it for myself. All I need to satisfy my needs in the realm of audio and music is really my own ears (not to mention a fatter wallet). I consider myself a music enthusiast not an audiophile and while I may have made a mistake or two along the way, I have learnt and still like to learn, though I don't have the time or inclination to place too much importance on this pastime other than being in a place where I can really immerse myself in my music . . . . . . without the need for dancing. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 10090 Registered: May-04 | . You get to read and listen as you like, Rantz, but why don't you pick a piece of music and dance with your wife tonight. Find out how pleasurable it can be to move your bones. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 1306 Registered: Nov-05 | Oh we dance. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 6479 Registered: Dec-04 | Although not as fleet of foot as in the days of yore, before the knee ops, a rug begs to be cut. Or the matress dance, hehe. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics