Tune dem

We use the Tune Method to evaluate performance

Moderator: Staff

Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Azazello wrote:It sounds a bit strange, usually when things get better, it feels like the music is slower (allthough it isn't).
Fredrik wrote:And by the way, I don't agree with Azazello's opinion that music will usually appear slower when the reproduction is better. I think it's rather individual and can differ between occasions how we perceive this.
I stumbled across these posts again recently. The topic is something that I've wondered about since. Also, I've personally found inconsistency between various upgrades. Sometimes the music seemed slower and sometimes faster, yet each upgrade was more tuneful with improved sound reproduction.

This is just a suggestion, but one that fits in with my experience: An upgrade that improves tunefulness will usually make the music seem a little slower.

However, a more tuneful upgrade that also increases the speed at which sounds can appear and disappear (is this called 'transient' speed?) is an exception. I particularly noticed an improvement of this nature when I upgraded my Ekos 2 to an SE and also when I Tune Dem'd my speakers first time. To summarise, I'm suggesting that both these upgrades improved transient speed which in turn over-shadowed the normal effect of slightly slower music and gave the overall impression that it was faster.

I realise this is pretty 'dry' stuff, but I find it quite interesting. Another thing that reminded me of this was when I recently bought a copy of a 1980s 12". I also have the same track on LP, but the 12" sounded a bit slower, albeit better sounding and easier to follow musically. For reference, I personally found that the Keel, KK and Linto all seemed to slow the music slightly. Can't recall the Akiva's affect in this respect.

Isn't music weird? I should perhaps read that book Fredrik mentioned on the subject of how the brain understands music.
User avatar
sommerfee
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 337
Joined: 2007-02-02 17:40
Contact:

Post by sommerfee »

Charlie1 wrote:Also, I've personally found inconsistency between various upgrades. Sometimes the music seemed slower and sometimes faster, yet each upgrade was more tuneful with improved sound reproduction.
This is also my personal experience, sometimes "slower" is better in terms of tune dem, sometimes "faster". E.g. if I use too less weight on my tonearm, it will be "slower" for my ears, if I use too much, it will be "faster", but both are of course worse than the optimal setting (and both make my wife nervous while listening).

Furthermore I made the expericence that "slower" and "faster" depend on personal preferences. When I make comparisons together with other people, I often disagree in terms of "slower" and "faster", but always agree in terms of tune dem.

So my personal conclusion is: "Slower" is irrelevant :mrgreen:
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

sommerfee wrote:This is also my personal experience, sometimes "slower" is better in terms of tune dem, sometimes "faster". E.g. if I use too less weight on my tonearm, it will be "slower" for my ears, if I use too much, it will be "faster", but both are of course worse than the optimal setting (and both make my wife nervous while listening).

Furthermore I made the expericence that "slower" and "faster" depend on personal preferences. When I make comparisons together with other people, I often disagree in terms of "slower" and "faster", but always agree in terms of tune dem.

So my personal conclusion is: "Slower" is irrelevant
Interested to read your experiences. I have not had the benefit of another person listening at the same time, but from what you're saying, my nice neat theory does not quite fit reality. Oh well - it was just an idea :)
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

I suspect the Tune Method is not quite so widespread in scope as I’d previously thought and wonder what other members think of this. My understanding had always been that it encompassed all aspects of musicality in one go. I still think it can tell you which is the better (A or B) in allowing you to follow a melody and I find this affects my ability to appreciate musicianship. However, what about other aspects of a system's musicality such as how easy it is to dial into a performance and enjoy it? I think in some situations (possibly rare) it’s possible for 'A' to be better at tune dem/musicianship but for 'B' to be more accessible with less effort required to zone into the music. So did I misunderstand Tune Dem in the first place or is it more complicated than I first thought?
Lego
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1147
Joined: 2007-04-18 11:42
Location: glasgow

Post by Lego »

I think if its easier to 'follow the tune' then its easier to 'zone into the music'.....is zoning into the music not the same as followig the tune...!!??
All I know is ..I don't know..
I must admit this tune demming thing and following the tune etc has made me less of a hifi nazi..ie I dont judge any hifi or music player by its label ;its not a linn so its sh..te etc ..I just try and follow the tune and ignore the terrible sound....I must point out this is impossible with the Sansas with the dodgy firmware..
I know that tune
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Lego wrote:I think if its easier to 'follow the tune' then its easier to 'zone into the music'.....is zoning into the music not the same as followig the tune...!!??
That's what I used to think.
I guess I'm hampered by language in using terms like 'zone into the music'. After all, this is subjective and whilst it means something to me, it's very difficult to put into words. I suspect I'll have to leave it there and forget about it.
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

charlie, don't think so much, just feel the music. :wink:
If it's better it's better.
It's all about musical understanding!
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

Im no expert but Im really trying to learn to tune dem properly to set up my hifi by myself and tune dem'ing a lot alternative placement, cables, tighten screws, equipment etc etc to get as much out as possible from my soundsystem. I really must say it is quite hard even tough it sounds very easy, just feel it :) Especialy when it comes to finetuning your system with all this small differences.
I have never tought of music getting slower or faster when tune deming, I rather would say that the music get a calm over it when you getting close to optimal, but not slower. One thing I recently discovered was how much easier things got when I used music very far away from what I normally listen to. I only listen to reggae and have been tune deming a lot with reggae that I haven't heard before but I got lost quite often. When I then tried music from a distant music genre I was not at all used to it was so much easier to select better from worse. Im not so cleaver not trying this for so long, but it really takes some time to get this tune dem thing right I think, including some trial and error as FL use to say.
Sommerfree wrote:
(and both make my wife nervous while listening)
This is really good with a well tuned system, I can now have records spinning for hours without any complaints from my empress. The tolerance level has clearly increased as the system is getting upgraded and more in tune.
the players of instruments shall be there..
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Efraim roots wrote:One thing I recently discovered was how much easier things got when I used music very far away from what I normally listen to. I only listen to reggae and have been tune deming a lot with reggae that I haven't heard before but I got lost quite often. When I then tried music from a distant music genre I was not at all used to it was so much easier to select better from worse.
I usually use classical which is a genre I listen to least, so maybe we're the same.
Efraim roots wrote:This is really good with a well tuned system, I can now have records spinning for hours without any complaints from my empress. The tolerance level has clearly increased as the system is getting upgraded and more in tune.
:D I think I've had similar experience but not to the same extent - The Management is still mostly sensitive to the artist I play.
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

sommerfee wrote:
This is also my personal experience, sometimes "slower" is better in terms of tune dem, sometimes "faster". E.g. if I use too less weight on my tonearm, it will be "slower" for my ears, if I use too much, it will be "faster", but both are of course worse than the optimal setting (and both make my wife nervous while listening).

Furthermore I made the expericence that "slower" and "faster" depend on personal preferences. When I make comparisons together with other people, I often disagree in terms of "slower" and "faster", but always agree in terms of tune dem.

So my personal conclusion is: "Slower" is irrelevant :mrgreen:
I have also found that when finding the best torque for a given bolt that too loose makes things sound a little sluggish whereas too tight does tend to make things sound a little faster but also either more strident or somewhat compressed sounding. When I find the right torque the music sounds neither "fast" or "slow" but it just flows smoothly and "sings".

On the idea of how much you get into the music I find that the better something is in terms of tune dem the more I can get into the music and the longer I want to listen. However, I do think you have to be careful when starting to evaluate by how much you "get into" the music. I have found that just concentrating on how much emotion I feel from a song that I have an emotional connection with can lead me away from what is truly the best performance. A cable or a setup change might make me feel the emotion more because it brings the voice forward and gives it more impact. But then I find that other aspects of the musical performance suffer and the entire performance is not as convincing - it has become less tuneful and the piece as a whole is harder to follow. This is why I always go back to the tune method whenever there is a question about what is the better way to go. When the tune is the best everything else always seems to be optimized as well.
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

I agree with Thomas here. And this is the reason why I don't recommend judging by "feeling" on quick dems. I have numerous times been moved and impressed by some change, only to soon realise that it was actually a lot worse.

I have noticed, however, that the exact way we perform the Tune Method does vary a bit from person to person. One can be good or bad at performing it, and it helps to practice it. One "Tune Method trap" is when the sound gets a tiny bit sharper and more detailed. It's easy to experience that this makes the tune easier to follow, but when listening more carefully it can turn out to be the opposite: Sounds appear to be more distinct, but they relate less well to eachother. So when judging the whole, it's actually more difficult to understand what the music is trying to say.

I recently fell into this trap when trying a "clever thing". My immediate reaction on a rock track was that it was better. More dynamic and alive, not unlike a balanced connection in comparison with an unbalanced. But as I listened a bit more, I started getting doubts.

Eventually some recordings from the 60's revealed the problems: The "clever thing" made those songs sound like they were much younger. They seemed to have been recorded with better equipment, everything was more exact. But something was also lost: The interplay between the musicians was more stiff and studio like. Without the "clever thing" they went back to sounding stoned at Woodstock; perhaps a bit less exact, but more inspired and gradually building up the song and the emotions rather than wearing headphones and looking at eachother through a window.
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Music Lover wrote:charlie, don't think so much, just feel the music. :wink:
If it's better it's better.
I know what you're saying, but raising this point about tune dem is more of a personal interest than anything else. With the exception of the odd test, I do put all this aside when I'm simply enjoying music.
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

ThomasOK wrote:However, I do think you have to be careful when starting to evaluate by how much you "get into" the music. I have found that just concentrating on how much emotion I feel from a song that I have an emotional connection with can lead me away from what is truly the best performance.
I didn't mean it that way - i.e. trying to gauge my emotional connection to the music. I find this really hard to articulate and I think my wording was misleading. If I'm honest, what I heard is something I normally associate with better tune dem performance - flowing musicality and ease. I guess I was hoping someone had experienced something similar.

Thanks everyone from responding.
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Thought I'd fire this one in and see what comes back. As already mentioned, I've been trying 109s passive (without stands) instead of aktiv Ninkas. The latter is slightly better using Tune Dem, but at times the 109s seem more tuneful in the mid-bass. So I wonder if it's possible that I'm just perceiving the 109s bass as more tuneful rather than it ACTUALLY being more tuneful? Perhaps the clearer 109 sound allows me to better 'notice' how tuneful the bass is, so I in turn make the assumptionn that it must be more tuneful when in fact it is not - using tune method. Writing this now I realise that I shouold have done a tune dem just using the bass notes, but this is an after-thought and the 109s are now boxed up and Ninkas tuned into position.

I sometimes think perhaps the term Tune Dem or the Tune Method as slightly misleading. After all, it's the process of following music silently in your head that matters, and not necessarily how tuneful the music 'seems' to be, but that's just me being picky.

I recall someone saying to me that listening to a system with better pre-amp was more tuneful than swapping for better source. I didn't hear this myself, but knowing how robust source first is, I wonder what would explain such an experience. Maybe the above is one possibility and it just seemed more tuneful when in fact a tune dem would have returned the opposite result.
Chris Morton
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: 2008-02-15 00:25

Post by Chris Morton »

I remember when I bought my first Linn amps, an LK1 and LK280. I think this was before the Tune method was written down on paper by Linn. At the time, I was invited into the Sound Organization in York to listen to a Naim pre- power- combination that they had available second hand: maybe a 62/90, pre-dating the olive series (I think the chrome bumper version with a grey volume control and input selector).

I was dead set on the Naim at the time and was sceptical about the LK1/280 combination, largely because it had been torched by the press.

There was total impartiality from the SO team and we began to listen. The Naim pre-power combination was clear and dynamic. There was a real sense of impact and I remember the sound being quite impressive. Then we played the Linn amps. I sat back, not wanting to rush, interested to see what all the fuss was about in the press about the difference between Linn and Naim electronics. To begin with I though oh yes the Naim is obviously better. It had a clearer top end and a more explosive impact. I kept listening. Then I started to notice some things that I didn't expect. There was a freedom and flow in the music that at the time I felt brought me closer to the real music, like it was more "live". I couldn't put my finger on what it was but I knew there was something there. I kept listening. Yes, there was a sense of more natural flow to the music and it also sounded more harmonious. We went back to the Naim and then I realized the Naim sounded more flat in pitch. The Naim seemed fast and yet somehow artificial in time. Words like the Naim is "fast" but the Linn has better "rhythm", the Naim is "out of tune", the Linn has a "sweet" sound were used. In fareness the Naim was definitely more revealing.

As time went by, it became apparent that everyone in the shop was in the Linn camp (yikes, I don't know if I should put that on the record). Anyhow, this was a long time ago now. One of the shop guys commented that with the Naim it sounds like someone was grabbing the drummer's arms, not with Linn.

I understand that nowersdays Naim amps have changed a lot and have moved more towards the Linn philosophy (even though I doubt anyone on the Naim side would agree). I haven't heard a Naim amp in a long time so I won't comment further.

I think I know what draws me into the music and I believe this is consistent with the philosophy of the Tune Dem. I'm fairly sure the Tune Dem was used to design the LK1 / 280. I also remember that when the Kairn was introduced that this took the Linn preamp solution even further in terms of these merrits and this was exactly how the Kairn was demonstrated even against the LK1.

Boy, have things moved on since then. :D

Chris.
Last edited by Chris Morton on 2010-04-04 16:52, edited 2 times in total.
LP12 SE/Radikal/Urika,KK, Aktiv Isobariks
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Enjoyed reading that - thanks Chris.

I had a similar experience when dem'ing the Linn Majik pre/power against similar Naim pre/power a few years ago.
donuk
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 406
Joined: 2010-02-21 13:25

Post by donuk »

Yes, an interesting post Chris. Describes almost exactly what I went through three years ago at the same shop!
Easterly greetings,
Don
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

Chris Morton wrote:I was dead set on the Naim at the time and was sceptical about the LK1/280 combination, largely because it had been torched by the press.
I don't know why, but many audio reviews portray Linn components as being marginal perfomers. And most audio reviews in the United States won't even acknowledge Linn as a competitor. As such, I don't read many audio magazines now - but the magazines I do read come from the U.K. 8) .
Tony Tune-age
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

I am currently using Naim amps and I have a real hard time to choose between Naim and Linn amps. Source (LP12) and speakers (M109) are no question but the amps is a hard one I think. I have audioned both Naim 202/HC/PSC/200 and Kikkin2/A2200 in my home and I can clearly hear that Kikkin/Akurate amps is better by tune dem.

The problem is that it still isn't good enough IMHO and therefor I chose to stay with the Naim amps for a while, they give me that kind of energy I want from music even if they are not as right in terms of musicality. The problem with Linn is that I get very provoked by the 'nice' way of musical presentation, I don't agree that Linn sound more live, not at all. I think it sounds too tuneful and nice very often, not real or live! I was very annoyed by my previous amps Kolektor/LK140 because of the cozy sound and I am now very afraid of that. When I put on some warrior style hardcore DUB tunes it should sound hardcore and not 'nice'. The raw energy is not there, it is replaced by this 'niceness'. This is the main problem with Linn sound and tune dem I think. Ofcourse tune dem isn't the problem, just that the equipment don't get good enough.

I recently realised that my LP12 with Lingo2 is a big part of the problem. When I got the demo between Lingo2 and Radikal I realised that Lingo2 makes the sondek sound cozy and nice. My Naim amps are hiding this niceness with it's more energetic nature that's why I kept them. The radikal is thankfully soo darn good and transforms the sondek sound to be real instead of nice. If I get the radikal maybe everything change and the kikkin/A2200 combo maybe is the way to go after all?? I don't know what to do, I'm so afraid of that horrible niceness :|
the players of instruments shall be there..
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

I have experienced what you mean also and struggled with my LP12(Lingo1/Cirkus/Ekos2/Arkiv)/MK/6100/Aktiv Ninkas a while, predominantly on rock music which lacked edge and bite, dulling the aggression and energy vital to much up-tempo rock. I certainly understand the niceness you mean and also heard this in the Linn/Naim dem, although it wasn't enough of an issue to stop me opting for Linn on balance.

Moving forwards about 3 years and that trait has gone from my setup or at least lessened to the point where I no longer notice it. The answer for me wasn't Naim amplification, but several upgrades mostly to my LP12. Spending thousands more on your system is probably not a great answer, but I certainly know where you're coming from. Unfortunately, I don't recall any particular upgrade making the most impact in this area - it's been a small chipping away if anything.

Maybe this is what people mean when they talk about system synergy and getting a balance to the sound that can cover all musical genres without any obvious weakness. Like you said, I don't think it's really about tune-dem either as the Linn kit in my dem was clearly better anyway.
Efraim roots wrote:My Naim amps are hiding this niceness with it's more energetic nature
Maybe they are compensating for this is another way of looking at it and this could turn into over-compentation with a better source. I have wondered before if I'd now find Naim amps just TOO much and tiring after a short listen with my current LP12.

In additional to Radikal, a Dynamik for 2200 should help if you try the dem again.
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

Charlie1 wrote:
Maybe this is what people mean when they talk about system synergy and getting a balance to the sound that can cover all musical genres without any obvious weakness.
That's how I view a really good audio system...at least in part 8)
Tony Tune-age
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

This is an interesting discussion. I must say that I understand your complaints about niceness, Efraim. To me it indicates a system that for some reason isn't good enough for your demands.

The main problem could be anywhere; in the source, in the speakers, in the installation. It doesn't necessarily have to be in the choice of amps that you've compared. And it's great to be aware of the compensatory mechanisms: One character (dynamics) can be exaggerated to compensate for a weakness in the system (nice, non-dynamic sound). But this kind of compensation doesn't really improve things, it just hides some problems and often create a few others. You're probably already aware of this and the need to stay focused on musicality instead of chasing faults.

I can't resist mentioning that when developing an amplifier, I often come across choices that are really tempting for reasons of sound. Let's say that a prototype has a slightly harsh and edgy sound and some component values can be varied within a certain range. At one end of this range, I hear that the harshness is completely removed; the sound is more like I think it should be. But in the middle of the range, the prototype performs better tune-wise; it's easier to understand the musical message, despite sounding a bit more harsh and edgy.

Which do I choose? I go with the more tuneful setting, always. And experience has taught me that it's the only way to do it. Because very soon, another choice will appear in that same prototype, with a different impact on sound. And this time, that initial harshness might go away when I, once again, choose the most musical setting.

If instead I had first chosen the nice sounding setting (thinking that I need to sacrifice a bit of musicality in order to make it sound good), the second setting would most likely have become different as a result. And in the end, after many tuning sessions of different parameters, I would have a prototype that sounded OK but made a complete mess of the music. I know, because I've tried it! :lol:

Sorry to ramble, but I think that often it's the same thing with systems. When we really wish to trade musicality for a certain sound, it's best done at the end of the chain; the speakers. Compromises there doesn't affect musicality as much and has a really strong impact on the sound character. Also, it usually doesn't result in a chain of compensatory changes.
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Interesting read about your product development Fredrik and also the idea of any tweaking the sound at the end of system building, especially speakers. Obvious now you mention it, but never considered it before. When does it ever end though! :D

Since this topic is back on the radar, here's two more thoughts. I wonder if use of tune dem and attention to musicality can lead to development within the brain and lead to further ability to appreciate and understand music. An odd thought I guess, but don't see why not. Maybe tune dem is not only a skill aquired through practice, but also through our own physiological development.

Secondly, does anyone every try listening to music using tune dem outside of comparing products? I now do this at times, especially when feeling a bit 'hyper' after a busy day at work. I feel it helps me stop mind wandering (no Snorah Jones jokes please!) Although I initially tried it because when using unknown items of classical music for tune dem purposes, I kept thinking this is really interesting music and felt that I wasn't normally appreciating Classical to the same degree as that experienced during the brief tune dems. I've read Ivor quoted as saying that when we 'really' listen to music we are subconsciously using tune dem anyway. Not sure I go with that, but when I'm really enjoying music and totally into it then I'm not analyzing my listening so can't be sure.
Lego
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1147
Joined: 2007-04-18 11:42
Location: glasgow

Post by Lego »

Tune dem?!What's that..?
I know that tune
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Lego, you provocateur! :wink:
Post Reply