Does better Tune Dem always mean more musical enjoyment?

[Charlie1]

I've been putting this post off for a while hoping I was missing something or the situation would change, but it hasn't so here we go...

There is no doubting I often find my cheapo AKG K24P headphones connected to Majik Kontrol more musically engaging than my 6100 and aktiv Ninka's. The reason I've been apprehensive about posting is that the latter combination is clearer better at Tune Dem - by a significant margin. So, why - particularly on rock music - are the headphones more enjoyable and involving? I should add that I particularly appreciate the AKGs superior pace and timing which just seems to make it easier to be drawn into the performance despite the inferior Tune Dem. I always thought that better Tune Dem automatically meant more musical enjoyment, but this instance appears to buck that trend.

I presume that replacing the 6100 with 4200 would help narrow the gap, but am not sure it would really make that much difference in this respect.

I should also add that the headphones are physically uncomfortable after an hour or so listening, so I can't say if the headphones would be musically fatiguing over a prolonged listening session when the 6100/Ninka's are rarely so.

Any thoughts/comments anyone? Have I got this all wrong or am I missing something here?

[ledcam]

I have a large collection of rock music in addition to a lot of other types of music - Led Zep, Aerosmith, The Stones and so on. I rarely play those artists on the main system preferring to listen to them on iPod and Bose phones.

The only thing I can think of is that the aktiv system we have ruthlessly reveals recordings - good and bad and truth is most rock ( not all!!) recordings are poor. So I think our system just reveals these discs as poor and well, unlistenable. The iPod blursthe detail just feeding the energy of the sound to you. That's my twopence worth!

[Charlie1]

The only thing I can think of is that the aktiv system we have ruthlessly reveals recordings - good and bad and truth is most rock ( not all!!) recordings are poor. So I think our system just reveals these discs as poor and well, unlistenable. The iPod blursthe detail just feeding the energy of the sound to you.

Many thanks for your input and what you said makes good sense to me. However, the headphones, despite their low value, actually reveal more detail than the 6100/Ninka's, so I guess that rules that one out. The headphones also sound more open and punchy which I think also aids rock music in particular. Thanks once again.

[lejonklou]

I have the opposite experience with bad recordings. I mean: The better the system performs, the more I enjoy the recordings I previously considered bad. The system doesn't need to be expensive, but it needs to be carefully adjusted and installed in order to let the musical content make a stronger impression than the sound! Strangely enough, the more expensive the system is, the more awkward and sound-oriented it can sound when incorrectly adjusted.

I don't know the reason why some people get such strong emotional responses when listening to headphones, but I have noticed it's an individual thing. I know many that swear by their headphones and love "music on the move". Others just get tired when directly feeding their ears, and feel that speakers are vastly superior.

I feel that when I sit in my sofa, my current Linn/Lejonklou system is much more enjoyable than listening through headphones. No comparison! But I can sometimes get some insanely strong kicks out of biking fast - preferably at sunset - with music in my ears. I use an old portable CD player and a pair of AKG K24P's (thanks again for that tip Linnofil!) and right then and there, it's simply fantastic.

Thanks for bringing the portable music issue up again! I just got reminded of how cool it would be with a really good portable source. Like a Klimax DS on batteries and a great headphone amp feeding the K24P's. Got to experiment some more with battery powered power supplies...

[lejonklou]

To answer the question in your subject line:

Given the same conditions, I believe the answer is yes. I regard the Tune Method as a short cut to what will bring the most musical enjoyment in the long run.

But if you change the conditions, it might be debatable. Like when going from speakers-in-room to headphones-into-ears. If the headphones win although you feel they are inferior, isn't something disturbing you - or missing - in the speakers-in-room presentation?

[Charlie1]

If the headphones win although you feel they are inferior, isn't something disturbing you - or missing - in the speakers-in-room presentation?

Well partly, because I do find the 6100/Ninka's a bit 'polite' and less exciting at low to medium volume with rock music. Turn up the volume and the excitement and involvement is equal the headphones. Or at least, the 6100/Ninka's make up the difference through shear power, presence and room filling sound.

Maybe rock music only works for me if I feel immersed in a wall of sound or using headphones. I don't think I'm as competent as yourself at analyzing the components of music, so I think this one will remain a mystery for the time being. I just thought maybe it could be the fact that headphones are faster (i.e. don't have to move big bass units) and so timing is better which could be the key factor. But from what you've said I think perhaps it is more to do with presentation. Perhaps I'd need to have an amp/speaker combination with similar tonal balance to the headphones to be able to draw any firm conclusions.

By the way, I do prefer classical, jazz and anything laid back on the 6100/Ninka's.

Many thanks for your comments Fredrik and I think a portable Klimax DS sounds interesting - I'd like one for my car.

[Charlie1]

But I can sometimes get some insanely strong kicks out of biking fast - preferably at sunset - with music in my ears. I use an old portable CD player and a pair of AKG K24P's (thanks again for that tip Linnofil!) and right then and there, it's simply fantastic.

I meant to pick up on this, but forgot. I know exactly what you mean. There is something about the sensation of speed and listening to up tempo music that can be such a buzz. For me, it's when driving, especially on the way home if I've been stuck in the office all day.

[ThomasOK]

I have to agree with Fredrik on several points. I find that the better the system the more enjoyable are records and CDs that I thought were fairly poor - up to a point. Really bad albums still sound bad.

I also have found that better Tune Method performance = more musical performance.

And I find headphone listening to be a poor substitute compared to listening to speakers and I hardly ever use headphones if I'm not in an airplane or similar. But I think I might have the reason you find this works for you. You mention that you "find the 6100/Ninkas a bit polite at low to medium volume..." but "Turn up the volume and the excitement and involvement is equal to the headphones."

I think the problem is the listening level. I remember reading a most interesting theory in the manual for the QUAD 33/303. Peter Walker stated that the purpose of the volume control was to set the system to the proper level for the recording being played. His assertion was that there was one, and only one, proper level for any piece of music that you play which is set by the producer when the recording is made, mixed and mastered. He further states that you can turn the volume up or down from that point and get interesting effects but only the one level will be correct.

I have to say that my experience tends to agree with this. When I am listening to a piece of music (and here I mean really listening - just sitting with my full attention on the music) I find that there is one specific level where everything sounds right - and it is usually up there a bit. Set it above or below that level - often even by .5dB - and it just doesn't sound quite as right as it does at the correct level. The level will change from record to record, and in some cases even from cut to cut, but it is consistent for each piece of music - in other words, it doesn't change with my mood or the day on which I listen to it.

If you think about it logically it makes perfect sense that this should be the case. The the harmonic structure - the quality of tone - of musical instruments and voices change depending on how loud they are played or sung. Therefore, in order to have the most tuneful performance you would need to have the playback level on your system match the level the instrument was played when it was recorded. Obviously, this may not work as much with music played on electronic instruments when they are poorly mixed as different instruments might be best at different levels. But I find that even things like Nine Inch Nails will have an optimum volume level - usually quite loud - where they sound best. When mixing and mastering any kind of music the producers have a certain sound they are wanting to put on the album and if they have any competence it will tend to sound best at whatever level they were setting it up for.

Just a few thoughts I thought might explain why you find yourself connecting to the music less at low to medium levels. I wonder if anyone else has noticed this same tendency for each piece of music to have a preferred listening volume?

[Music Lover]

I wonder if anyone else has noticed this same tendency for each piece of music to have a preferred listening volume?

Not yet but I 'm going to check.
Normally I prefer it loud.
The better system, the louder - so with all upgrades during the years its now quite loud.
On the other hand, the better system the better it is on VERY low volumes. Great as I like to play "DADDY's music" late/early when the others are sleeping. :mrgreen:

Headphones vs. speakers - I think it's due to the volume. Headphones produce high volumes without the body feeling it (vibrations etc)
Try to adjust so the headphones produce same volume as the speakers and compare again.
It's easy to think the louder is the better in a comparison!

[ThomasOK]

Normally I prefer it loud.
The better system, the louder - so with all upgrades during the years its now quite loud.
On the other hand, the better system the better it is on VERY low volumes. Great as I like to play "DADDY's music" late/early when the others are sleeping. :mrgreen:

I find the same. With a system that maintains pitch control (the tune) at high levels, for which active is almost a requirement, the listening level I enjoy goes up as the normal fatigue doesn't set in. Certainly, my current system can output extremely high levels without fatigue. But even with my heavy hand on the volume button I find that there is a place where it sounds like everything clicks. It does still play music quite well at low levels, and is quite enjoyable for when it is needed, just not quite as well.

I also find that the better the system is set up - speaker positioning, torque of the drivers, quality of cables, etc. - the more fun the system is at any level.

[Music Lover]

Hmmm, can it be that at this VERY level, the bass, mid, treble is correct?
Remember the loudness factor...

[ThomasOK]

Yes, I'm sure the loudness factor, our ears' reduced sensitivity to bass and, to a lesser extent treble, at lower volume levels, plays into this as well. Unfortunately, even the most thoroughly researched "cures" for this loudness sensitivity change have screwed up things much worse than the sensitivity change itself.

[Lego]

I find if I listen to it really loud for a long period of time,your ears start to get used to it that level and then you want it LOUD ...not good! Dont mistake wanting it loud with cannae hear it(going deaf).My 4 and 2 year old girls tell me when its too loud: 65+ on the kairn.I wished I had my system when I was 14 when I could really hear things.
Congratulations Charlie thats great news hope all are well,I got married a week last Friday!!??

[lejonklou]

Interesting thoughts... Actually it never occurred to me that it could be just the level that makes headphones more enjoyable than speakers. It does make some sense, but I'm not yet convinced it's all about that.

I have to give that idea about an absolute optimal listening level a try as well - I have never made such an observation in my own listening, although I remember reading Peter Walkers ideas on this long ago.

[Charlie1]

I got married a week last Friday!!??

Congratulations Leo. It must have been nice to have your kids at your own wedding I think.

When I am listening to a piece of music (and here I mean really listening - just sitting with my full attention on the music) I find that there is one specific level where everything sounds right - and it is usually up there a bit. Set it above or below that level - often even by .5dB - and it just doesn't sound quite as right as it does at the correct level. The level will change from record to record, and in some cases even from cut to cut, but it is consistent for each piece of music - in other words, it doesn't change with my mood or the day on which I listen to it.

I can relate to this. I often tweak the volume up and down quite small amounts until I'm happy with it. I'm not listening for anything specific, just searching for a setting that seems most comfortable. I'd never really questioned what I was actually doing though, so can't recall if I tend to go back to that same level next time I play the same LP. If I had to guess then I'd say I did approximately use the same level. There are some songs that are just not right until the volume is set to LOUD! :D Inversely I find other recordings are the opposite. Sorry to refer to Norah Jones again (as I do listen to other music!), but I'm happiest with the volume quite low, somewhere in the 30s on my Majik Kontrol.

Coming back to the headphones, I do tend to turn them up (because I can) and gravitate towards music that I enjoy loud for the same reason. I think you are right Thomas and that this is the main reason, but as Fredrik says, I also think there is some other factor involved too. Could be the balance as suggested previously (the AKGs are brighter sounding and unlike the 6100/Ninka's don't soften any rawness in the recording that often suits up tempo rock music I think) and of course they are much faster than any loudspeaker could ever be which is something I often appreciate when moving straight from the full system to the headphones. It's actually why I asked some months ago if smaller speakers were generally better at Tune Dem, because I thought the improved timing might make the difference - Fredrik said they are usually not by the way. Even my old Kan's were never as quick as a pair of phones. Perhaps fully Aktiv Komri's with Klimax Solo's has the answer - maybe I'll take the plunge :mrgreen: - Even my dreams don't stretch that far!

Try to adjust so the headphones produce same volume as the speakers and compare again.
It's easy to think the louder is the better in a comparison!

I will give it a go to make sure.

I find if I listen to it really loud for a long period of time,your ears start to get used to it that level and then you want it LOUD ...not good! Dont mistake wanting it loud with cannae hear it(going deaf).

Yes, I know what you mean and so do my neighbors!

[lejonklou]

I got married a week last Friday!!??

Congratulations Lego! I read your post too fast and missed that last part.

It does sound like you're not quite sure, though, with those question marks in the end. Haven't fully grasped it yet?

[Charlie1]

Right - This is mostly, if not entirely, down to listening level. I've just compared one of my favorite Norah Jones tracks (Rosy's Lullaby) at low volume. As the title suggests, it's a very gentile and tuneful song, better suited to low volume. The 6100/Ninka was much much better. The headphones were cumbersome and plodding by comparison and didn't draw me into the music. Also listened to Roxanne by Police which I prefer played loud. Again, the 6100/Ninka's were better at low volume, although it didn't seem so obvious this time. Maybe because I prefer the balance of the AKGs with this song. Interestingly, the headphones didn't seem much faster or to have any better timing either (in fact I think the main system timed better), so I'm not sure what's going on there. Perhaps perception of speed and timing is also linked to listening level?
I can't listen to the system loudly cos everyone is asleep, but I would like to check this too at some point. Can't believe I didn't think of this before! - but thanks anyway to everyone for their contributions.

[Lego]

Maybe room acoustics come into play when the music levels are high

[Music Lover]

Maybe room acoustics come into play when the music levels are high

(A VERY interesting subject this one!)
I dont think so. If you have an issue at high volume, you have it also at low.
So if the musicality is changing following the volume, I think it's more likely origin from the system having issues reproducing it correct.


According to my experience, the impression of bad acoustics is normally addressed with feeding the speakers a better signal and tuning the speakers better.

[Lego]

I'd rather listen to kans in a cupboard than Isobariks

[Charlie1]

I'd rather listen to kans in a cupboard than Isobariks

You kairn listen to Kans in a cupboard on your own, but tukan listen and then it's majik.

...I really must go an play a record or do something vaguely constructive with my evening.