Playground for practical listening exercises

[tokenbrit]

I don't recall a bit of incredulity on my part, but my memory isn't what I like to think it was... I hope & trust that no offence was taken. I don't think that any would have been meant, just as none was meant by disagreeing with beck. It would be weird if we all agreed all of the time, and it's cool that there are options to suit one's own even if it means swapping pre- & rad- from time to time ;)

I was going to suggest that I found the difference between Lack and Archidee to be like a jigsaw puzzle where the Archidee puts the pieces together neatly to create the picture, whereas *I felt* the Lack left some pieces stacked on top of each other, but that's probably an unfair analogy. Just as there's a number of ways to do a jigsaw - work in from the edge; out from the centre; focus on one area of the picture or develop different areas of the picture at the same time / in turn - it makes sense that there are different ways to listen... Even though we may like to think there's a method to agree on what's musical that allows for a comparison and respective ranking of musicality, that's no guarantee that we apply the method & listen in the same way or to the same things within a performance to determine what we think of as more musically engaging and, for some, that may change with different tracks, and days... Each to their own enjoyment. Have fun with it. And thanks for posting the clips Charlie1 - very interesting and much appreciated

[Charlie1]

I don't recall a bit of incredulity on my part, but my memory isn't what I like to think it was... I hope & trust that no offence was taken. I don't think that any would have been meant, just as none was meant by disagreeing with beck. It would be weird if we all agreed all of the time, and it's cool that there are options to suit one's own even if it means swapping pre- & rad- from time to time ;)

Sorry tokenbrit - I should have been more careful in my wording. Definitely no offence was taken or ever taken by any of your posts. And I was only referring back in a matter of fact way cos I thought it was interesting. I don't recall you exact wording either. I don't think you ever wrote that you don't believe me or anything like that.

We have definitely been here before with these clips, yet still complete understand eludes me. My hunch is that the tune is more important to yourself and Tom than me, albeit still important to all. Similarly, there is something timing/rhythm related that I'm picking up on at times in the other option. I can't really speak for Beck - maybe he hears something else altogether :)

[beck]

I do think we all hear the same but make different interpretations.

The above clips reminds me of another thing that has struck my mind. Bonzo actually pointed me in that direction in the “Into the heart of digital versus analog” tread.

When I listen to music I am seeking a clear understanding of the musicians intent. I want to feel the direction of the music being played.

If we think of light I am a “wave” person more than a “particle” person.

When I listen to a good analog recording I can “see and feel” the person behind the instrument even if the “sound” from the instrument is less separated from the rest when comparing it to a digital recording of the same. That “feeling” disappears when I listen to the digital recording. Then I just hear clear sound from an instrument.

I do not think I can come it any closer.

[Charlie1]

I do think we all hear the same but make different interpretations.

Sorry, yes, this is much better wording.

When I listen to a good analog recording I can “see and feel” the person behind the instrument even if the “sound” from the instrument is less separated from the rest when comparing it to a digital recording of the same. That “feeling” disappears when I listen to the digital recording. Then I just hear clear sound from an instrument.

Interesting. I think I know what you mean too.

[Charlie1]

I took several more recordings today, using pre-1st/Archidee vs rad-1st/Lack. I think on balance I will stick with the former. However, I will leave the Lack in a while and then see what it's like going back. Then, I just want to put this to bed and forget about it all, as I'm sure other members do too :)

Here's one recording I think highlights how Rad-1st/Lack is better than Pre-1st/Archidee:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n5kf8js3gb6ip ... h.MOV?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/m8f79lzmph4ms ... k.MOV?dl=0

For me, the guitar and cymbols at the start are more 'as one' and playing together more, more in-time / in-sync, but there is not doubting the benefits of the other setup, probably more of the time too.

[lejonklou]

Regarding the four Archidee/Lack clips: This was not an easy one for me.

Although I find the Archidee clips better in most respects, there's something about them, like a hardness or stiffness, that isn't quite right to my ears. I find the Lack clips more messy, but they lack that thing that "annoys" me on the Archidee.

Overall I vote Archidee.

[Charlie1]

Although I find the Archidee clips better in most respects, there's something about them, like a hardness or stiffness, that isn't quite right to my ears. I find the Lack clips more messy, but they lack that thing that "annoys" me on the Archidee

Yes, that's there to some extent in the room too. Could easily be another aspect of the system and the archidee is just revealing that. I know if the mattress is removed from the room then the treble is less harsh.

[beck]

Here's one recording I think highlights how Rad-1st/Lack is better than Pre-1st/Archidee:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n5kf8js3gb6ip ... h.MOV?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/m8f79lzmph4ms ... k.MOV?dl=0

For me, the guitar and cymbols at the start are more 'as one' and playing together more, more in-time / in-sync, but there is not doubting the benefits of the other setup, probably more of the time too.

Great clips and spot on comments. Rad-1st/Lack is my kind of sound (music). :-)

[Spannko]

To balance things up a bit, I’m with beck in preferring the Lack.

The Archidee seems to have an impressive, dynamic presentation which puts the emphasis on leading edges which is immediately appealing but ultimately tiresome to listen to. If I stop focusing on the music and think about something else, the music in the background starts to become a bit noisy.

The lack is less impressive but more coherent to my ears. Only on the Lack did I find the crescendo really exciting and I could easily imagine as if I was hearing the performance live, even after a few listens.

By the way, has the base been removed from the Lack Charlie1.

[beck]

We all know that it is difficult to share our listening experiences because we all have different setups and rooms and records.
That is the reason for sharing clips but they will only take us some of the way. We have to hear it to believe and understand.

So I do not expect you to believe or understand but I will tell my story anyway.

What has struck me is that nothing is as it seems. In general the hifi community is searching for more detail, 3d space and see through sound. This will only lead to hunger for more (quite handy for the industry).

Many of us have been to the cinema enjoying a film in 3d. I use to teese my oldest son by saying that he should just go for a walk and enjoy real 3d in real life. It is out there and you do not have to pay for it. It is actually fantastic if you open your eyes. We just never recognise it as such.

Thinking of this and having for a while now been listening to the differences I hear between analog and digital recordings on vinyl the coin dropped on me.

The recordings that seem the least 3d, detailed and see through like are in fact the opposite.

They are so dense that they show themselves as something so normal that we do not hear it. Just like walking down the street or through the woods not recognising the wonderful real 3d we walk around in. They are as close to the real deal as we will ever get.

That is the reason why I do not feel any urge to upgrade my system. It gives me a feeling of “realness” that fills me up with human emotion and stories of lived life in a very satisfying way.

Sure there are better systems than mine but I do not need more.

[Charlie1]

By the way, has the base been removed from the Lack Charlie1.

I read that the mod doesn't go well with the Trampolin - i.e. the modified Lack top has some give in it which interferes with the Tramp2 suspension, but if you've heard otherwise then please say so.

Played Daft Punk earlier and it was very enjoyable. Maybe the Lack / Rad-1st just offer a better set of compromises as my system stands today. I certainly would not part with the Archidee as I might want it back in later.

Beck, nice description above. I see what you are saying and like the analogy. Worth emphasising that I don't think anyone here is talking about hi-fi / 3D, only musical pros and cons.

[Spannko]

I think you’re right Charlie1.

[Charlie1]

OK, last clips from me on this. Inevitably I had to compare the Lack with the Isoblue. I've made up my mind already but here's some nice analogue recordings for anyone interested...

The Isoblue is at a slight disadvantage in the first clip cos I forgot to level the deck.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xk9s7pzmwrztq ... D.MOV?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nvygjhk0ui6w5 ... D.MOV?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i6gmadsq5g24w ... D.MOV?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2ezn4vxtpk508 ... D.MOV?dl=0

[beck]

You are going to end up with a neat looking system Charlie1. Listening to the last set of clips it is isoblue for me. :-)

[lejonklou]

I took several more recordings today, using pre-1st/Archidee vs rad-1st/Lack. I think on balance I will stick with the former. However, I will leave the Lack in a while and then see what it's like going back. Then, I just want to put this to bed and forget about it all, as I'm sure other members do too :)

Here's one recording I think highlights how Rad-1st/Lack is better than Pre-1st/Archidee:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n5kf8js3gb6ip ... h.MOV?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/m8f79lzmph4ms ... k.MOV?dl=0

For me, the guitar and cymbols at the start are more 'as one' and playing together more, more in-time / in-sync, but there is not doubting the benefits of the other setup, probably more of the time too.

To me, Pre-Arch is better. It's a whole different song on Rad-Lack; less focused, more caffeine, more childish and messy.

It can be tricky changing two unrelated parameters at once. I suspect that I'd find Pre-Lack pretty interesting.

[lejonklou]

OK, last clips from me on this. Inevitably I had to compare the Lack with the Isoblue. I've made up my mind already but here's some nice analogue recordings for anyone interested...

The Isoblue is at a slight disadvantage in the first clip cos I forgot to level the deck.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xk9s7pzmwrztq ... D.MOV?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nvygjhk0ui6w5 ... D.MOV?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/i6gmadsq5g24w ... D.MOV?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2ezn4vxtpk508 ... D.MOV?dl=0

Lovely clips! I hate it when they suddenly end.

I think Lack is better in both. Isoblue may have a more "correct" sound and Lack is a little muddy and sloppy in comparison. But there's more emotion in Lack, evident already in the first two notes in the Rickie Lee Jones song; daa, daa - twack! On the Isoblue they're shorter, drier and lack tension. And when Rickie comes in with "Here I'm going", her singing goes right through my defenses with Lack.

Are these Pre first or Radikal First in the power strip?

[lejonklou]

To balance things up a bit, I’m with beck in preferring the Lack.

The Archidee seems to have an impressive, dynamic presentation which puts the emphasis on leading edges which is immediately appealing but ultimately tiresome to listen to. If I stop focusing on the music and think about something else, the music in the background starts to become a bit noisy.

The lack is less impressive but more coherent to my ears. Only on the Lack did I find the crescendo really exciting and I could easily imagine as if I was hearing the performance live, even after a few listens.

I agree with what you're saying here, Spannko. On my first listen, I was on an errand and not fully focused. And my first impression was that Archidee was more annoying than Lack. And in particular the crescendo. I later listened more carefully and felt there was something right - and something wrong - in both.

I wish Charlie could have had a Harmonihyllan as well, perhaps the support that would rule them all. *GRIN*

[Charlie1]

I think Lack is better in both. Isoblue may have a more "correct" sound and Lack is a little muddy and sloppy in comparison. But there's more emotion in Lack, evident already in the first two notes in the Rickie Lee Jones song; daa, daa - twack! On the Isoblue they're shorter, drier and lack tension. And when Rickie comes in with "Here I'm going", her singing goes right through my defenses with Lack.

Are these Pre first or Radikal First in the power strip?

This is Radikal first. Many thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I think now that my deck is sounding so much better, I don't feel the need for every drop of tunefulness in order to be engaged by the music. Therefore, I'm ready to let some go. In return, I get back something which, for me, has been missing somewhat, that connection between the instruments, like they are happy to all be in the same recording with one another, if that makes sense. Having listened more this morning, I'm really happy with this outcome. The music has more swing and boogie, like the instruments are in perfect time with one another, rather than recording separately and stitched back together a fraction out of sync.

Many thanks to everyone for their responses and interesting thoughts and impressions.

[lejonklou]

"Let some go" - ?

"This outcome" - ?

[Charlie1]

"Let some go" - ?

"This outcome" - ?

I've let some tunefulness go in order to get 'other' musical advantages. I think you're right, Archidee is more tuneful than Lack, and probably Lack is more tuneful than Isoblue, and pre-1st is definitely more tuneful than rad-1st.

And the outcome is that I'm now happily using Isoblue and rad-1st again, so my system is less tuneful, BUT (for me) overall more musically satisfying. Should I get my coat :)

Of course, I would prefer the best of both worlds.

[lejonklou]

OK, fine.

I think it's important to separate two objectives in this exercise:

1. Which support is the most musical?
NB: Might need further specification, as it can vary with floor below it and component placed on it.
NB2: We might disagree, which can be educational and lead to new developments.

2. What will I be using in my system?

Number two is influenced by many other factors, such as aesthetics, space and perhaps even a preference for a certain sound.

By the way: Judging from your clips, I'm not completely convinced that Archidee is better than Lack.

[beck]

As Lejonklou states there are many variables at play here: stands, setup, cable dressing, other components and so on.
I have re listened to the Lack, Isoblue compare and have changed my mind. I find that overall it is easier for me to enjoy the music using the Lack. The Isoblue has an immidiate appeal to the sound but I do not relax the same way into the music as with the Lack.

Who said that this would be easy!

Whatever you do enjoy your music. :-)

[matthias]

It can be tricky changing two unrelated parameters at once.

+1
I would never change two parameters at once for comparisons.
For me Lack is most enjoyable.

Matt

[Charlie1]

I would never change two parameters at once for comparisons.
For me Lack is most enjoyable.

Agreed. However, I've very familiar with the pros and cons or pre-1st vs rad-1st and thought it might help others hear what I'm hearing because both changes take the system in the same overall direction, but I will skip that approach in future :)

[Spannko]

I would never change two parameters at once for comparisons.
For me Lack is most enjoyable.

Agreed. However, I've very familiar with the pros and cons or pre-1st vs rad-1st and thought it might help others hear what I'm hearing because both changes take the system in the same overall direction, but I will skip that approach in future :)

My view is that it doesn’t matter if two things are changed at the same time. We’re simply comparing A with B to determine which is the better combination. Knowing why one is better is almost impossible to know, but this doesn’t diminish the value of the comparison.