Paul, thanks for blending up-front honesty with good taste and diplomacy. I like how you summed up listening tastes at the end of this, "Your mileage may differ...etc." well put sir!
I have achieved a great sound stage. It took some work, it took some money, and most of all, I had to learn how to listen. The secret to all of it was the test track that I didn't know, I already knew. That track was Seal's song, Crazy. I was listening on a Denon 1913. I thought the world was good. But Andrew Robinson's wife Kristi pointed out. If he sounds like he's trapped in a box, your system sucks. That is what he sounded like. I changed speaker wires, and he grew a whole foot. Then changed out to an a7 aiyima amp. Then changed op amps. As my system changed, so did I, learning the difference in how things sound as the system changed. Now, when I play crazy on that system today, seal is 6 feet tall, when he crouches, you hear it, when he stands up, you hear his voice raise back up. He moves around effortlessly. It was a love and hate journey that taught me so much. You were a part of that journey, my speakers are out in the room, I have 2 subs, and most of all, great sound. Thank you for your efforts in teaching whoever is willing to learn the knowledge that you share. I really appreciate it. God bless.
Wow...certainly would like to listen to the FR30s. That you mention they are as resolving as the Quads is impressive. I own two systems for the simple reason that neither one alone satisfy all my "audio" needs. The Quads are the resolving speakers in my life. They disappear, and leave me alone with the music. Yes, bad recordings sound really bad but great recordings sound sublime. With the ESL 57's I'm quite often working out the recording location (the old Kingsway Hall had a great acoustic) as yes, you should be able to discern the type of room the recording was made in. My second system is a pair of Altec Lansing Santiagos. They go loud, they don't resolve in a significant way, but oh those horns make jazz recordings sound like they are playing in your room. Especially with the big Altec 1569A mono blocks pushing them. Great hobby this, isnt it?
So, a person more interested in the music than the equipment needs to use several models of speakers, each of which has a different power of resolution, to fit different qualities of recordings. Or, one could just live with a compromise, as I have done for over 40 years.
In a lot of cases, people perceive some level of elevated treble as “more resolving”. A truly resolving system does the magic while providing a proper neutral frequency response.
Which ironically, means a hot treble ... It take a hot upper end to remain linear beyond 8khz. I've done more than a few dozen (literally) measurements. Speakers are the sizes most don't play with the infinity rs1b , magnepan Tympani 1 (6x4ft per side ) you name it. Kappa 8 , kappa 9 , kappa 8.1, renaissance 80,rsII, rs4,rsB I mean the list is endless. And my main speakers ? Run hot on the treble when you see that graph. None of the others get to that type of fr throughout . They all drop off on the upper end (logically)
Great question! The better the system the worse the music. I had never considered this. At 71 you have shown me something new to consider! Thank you Paul.
I may only agree that better systems and speakers start to unveil any own disadvantages Opposite to those which produce only parts of full range. because parts are possible by listener to balance The more to balance the less possibility it will be enough done.
Thanks Paul. If one can afford it, I say the ultimate solution is to have 2 (or 3) systems that you accumulate over time - each system doing things you like, and nothing you hate. As for the individual amps/preamps/dacs/speakers, it just takes years and years of time to hone in on on what you love and hate. Once you start understanding your preferences, you will hopefully also be finding quality manufacturers (like Paul) and quality reviewers, and try out what they recommend - this has helped me immensely over time, being able to follow the more experienced ears out there and efficiently filter out subpar stuff.
When I visited PS audio with my son and we listen to the IRS some songs I knew were spectacular other songs I thought I knew were very disappointing and I could not listen to them. A resolving speaker truly brings out a bad recording. A resolving speaker truly brings out a beautiful perfect dynamic recording.
Along this same line, the BIGGEST thing i noticed about the difference between recordings was the sound stage. I built a set of 'mini' Carver/amazing loudspeakers, being a fully dipole design. I did it with separate subs and the difference between those and some Infinity towers was astonishing. The next week i sold the Infinity's because they sounded SO flat and uninspiring to say the least, nut up to that day, they were always my favorite. I'm one that's had some decent headphones but, i hate all of them because they all seem to miss the sound stage in a horrible way. Of course, my room is tuned too so, that does make a massive difference in your listening room. I'd say, start with your room and get it as tuned as you can. You'll thank yourself for years to come more and more if you do.
PAUL…as you know I listened to it and I thought you were using your iPhone and it was BEAUTIFUL AND HIGHLY RESOLVING…I heard the paperwork as she turned them and the “ sour note “ as she hit it….( on UTUBE and using my iPad and headphones 🎧…) SO NOW I AM VERY THANKFUL TO DISCOVER THAT THERE IS SO MUCH NEW VERY WELL RECORDED MUSIC 🎶 I FOCUS ON THIS 🤗😍😍😍
That was a great listen. I recently got a Lokius EQ for my headphone system and I really only use it so I can neutralize the kinks in some recordings. Thanks!
AND THE SIMPLE FIX IS 😜 you just have several systems. Keep a tiny system for playing old bad live concert cassettes & mono early blues. Keep a compressed system for playing pop and bad recordings. And have a 4 way speaker selector like I do on the audiophile system so when you can get away with just switching to one's like Paul's Revel speakers. No one should have less than 4 pairs of speakers hooked up.
@Douglas Blake yup...that's audiophile fun 😜 Once you're system evolves enough , the pursuit is then finding music recorded well enough to listen too! It's always been that way.
I believe speakers and the whole system should be as resolving as possible. Because the recording musicians or the recording engineers did a poor job in recording or the type of music in general is harsh on the ears it's not the stereo system's responsibility to dumb it down. Throw a towel over it or turn the tone down if you have tone controls or EQ.
Paul, I have dynaudio confidence 5 that were rated best in Europe for many years as yes … very revealing.. I will demo your new speakers soon.. Great job with this info…
In case of Sundaras it can be also a matter of not only their level of detail/being resolving, but rather just their sound signature - at least for me esp. early revisions (pre-somewhere in 2019) of Sundaras have actually quite piercing highs.
Yes, when the system is super resolving musicality plays a huge factor! It can make or break a not so good or even great recording. After upgrading my electronics to Luxman ♥️ to feed my Sopras I found myself listening to CD after CD and streaming more and more artists from all genres of music...metal to piano vocalists, and it's always been a treat. Now before my upgrade I still had great electronics, but certain music was not necessarily analytical or too revealing, but the band wasn't playing together and certain aspects of a recording were revealing and pleasing, but that would change on the type of music or it's complexity. So if you listen to Civil War or Knokin' on Heaven's Door by Guns N Roses. 1/2 of the band got lost depending on the mixing level points. Meaning you may hear only the more revealing parts of the recording (Macro details). Maybe it's Slash's solo and Axles Vocals that are at the front of the stage. But what about being able to hear the rhythm of Duffs bass in synch with the drummer in the background of the lead (micro details). Lol Luxman for me changed Music. What, in rock n roll??? Yes! And what about the drummer Steve doing his thing in perfect rhythm with Duff, Slash, and Axle or even in a live performance where drummers improv. to keep the vibe going, and you the listener are just loving what he's doing. Now put it all that together with out emphasizing 2 band members and let the other 2 or backup singers be part of the performance. Now the recording becomes musical and resolving and not just blairing or compressed. Same for Freya Ridings Castles or any track where now you have a choir come in, a poppy beat drum, guitars, and her beloved piano and sexy voice singing with the choir and piano. None of that soundstage gets lost. It's all perfectly captured in rhythm and time. The piano still has it's character, it still has it's sustain, nothing is smeared or compressed per say by the limits of the gear, speakers, or room. Theirs height, width, and depth. That's musicality and resolution in Harmony. But yes it's not cheap and even if it's expensive and not done with synergy, then it's a loss and the search continues. But get it right and Bravo in your listening room👏
@@connorduke4619 Thanks! I bought the 509x and D-03X CD player. The D-03X also lets me use it's internal DAC with a streamer and etc, or files using their software. Speakers are Sopra No 3
My system can be configured to be more or less revealing through hardware modifications on the fly. No wire pulling, and a minimum of speaker movement. No it's not a perfect system but it really adds to my enjoyment of all my music library, and allows me to make changes based on my moods and tastes of the moment. Down sides are more gear and the resultant problems that can occur and, of course, cost. If I could afford those PS Audio speakers, I might be pleasantly surprised. But that ain't happenin' in what's left of this lifetime.
Great suggestions! I like my dedicated audiophile system to be highly resolving, dynamic and above all natural. But that means 50% of my CD's I cannot listen to. I love listening to audiophile recordings of most anything. And sometimes I will listen kind of in background mode to the rest of my collection while I read or surf. Badly recorded music never gets played. I have a couple of other systems. The living room system has Totem speakers and Denon electronics. It never gets used. Once in a blue moon for background with guests in the living room. The other is in my car. A nice Bose system with a dozen speakers. Again, hardly ever use it. I prefer to hear the engine rowing through the gears and rev matching downshifts. But when I want music, it can play anything and make it sound good for a car.
I know exactly what you mean. Some pieces of music have almost become unlistenable. The more I improve things the worse they sound. Case in point Meatloaf's Bat Out of Hell. I have had several recordings over the years but none of them sound pleasant. You almost need garbage gear to play it.
I had a Quinpu A-8000 Mk II amplifier at one point in my active crossover- biamped studio monitors feeding the hi's and mids, It was so clear that I could hear so precisely the various reverb tails of the different instruments and buses fade and end like never before. Every single detail in the music was just there, Pragmatically. Technically that is supposedly the idea in a mixing/mastering studio , however I had to change amplifiers for that particular system to put my brain at ease... In this case, there was too much focus.
Was listening to Octave Records Audiophile Masters Vol I on vinyl last night. Blew me away!! Delivers on all the “hype!” Having 133 vintage cartridges, this record reveals which cartridges RESOLVE detail, and which ones don’t. Just superb record/recording/pressing/mastering!!!
What is it about vintage cartridges? Is it that you just collect them, or are they sonically different in some way? I know people are into vintage amps, and things like that but I never even considered vintage cartridges.
@@AT-wl9yq Every cartridge design has a “voice.” It’s a transducer, after all! No different than speakers. I have cartridges from 1955-2019. Most from 1955-2000. Modern offerings really haven’t moved the needle much. I’ve got 26 ADCs, 16 Empires, 20 Shures, 4 GE, Ortofons, AT, Nagaoka, Nagatron, Acutex, Piezo/Azden, others. I follow ADC by cart from 1963-1985, Shure from 1960-2018, Empire from 1961-1984, the best GE carts they made, so I can follow the technology. There really isn’t anything new since 1985. Just model numbers changed. Materials haven’t advanced. The best ADCs hold their own with a great many MCs, and trounce Nagaokas.
Very true and I noteced it only in last time. There is musicality when my volume is at lower range where my loudness is in much control. All happenings sound at simmilar level, readable and amazing with beauty. Then by turning knob up to levels 90 dB and going out from loudness it unveils unexpected dynamic beteween sounds and it is like uncovering hidden strong emotions All is in very near field and surprises. . Who's the best? No winner but due to uncomfortable loudness and tension in listening which is fatiquing in longer than one track time , I listen 95% to less dynamic kinds. .
tonal control is a great option for those instances where your system excedes your recording. a recording made to be revealing on veiled systems can sound painfull on revealing sytems (physicaly so, because of volume spikes) and a tonal control can mittigate that issue. algorythmic dsp tonal controls can even listen for frequency based volume spikes exceding a certain multiple of the average level and apply an eq based on that.
@@Chrisspru that’s why I listen to allot of 16/44 ‘original’ versions on Qobuz instead remastered or high res. To me that sounds more natural and less overexagerated. It’s a gimmick to let mediocre gear sound ‘detailed’. Most of the time when the signal travels through an extra circuit it will degree in SQ. I have tested this for example on some Mcintosh gear in the store. I don’t mean aspects like tonality, highs, mids bass, but audiophile qualities. Most noticeable to me the holographic/ 3D image is less impressive/ real. Like Paul says on most high end equipment you won’t find tone controls, it’s for another segment to my opinion. But If you like it, no problem at all. Everyone has to listen to music the way they like it! I'd rather play with two of those pink knobs ^^
@@nicktube3904 on originals it is indeed most often unnecessary. but a few songs are just mastered poorly from the begining. then a tonal control can improve it, not to the degree as if it would have been masteted properly in the first place, but still notably.
Love the 'little river band' (LRB) but now I'd finish building my system, there is one song that use to be my favourite (playing to win) that I now can't listen to as it's awash with too much reverb. Thanks for your channel!
Just smoke a few joints and your music will sound so much better, I promise.🤓 I hear things on my Bose system that I never heard before until the THC kicks in.😎
Similar time period, the '80's, I had moved from selling in the Audio industry into Broadcast Video. Sony was introducing their Trinitron tube technology into the broadcast level video monitor business. But it had two major technical problems. The inline slot matrix aperture-grille-based design, while increasing resolution compared to the Delta-Gun competitors, also decreased visible noise. While this was appreciated in homes. It reduced the ability for evaluation of visible noise in your studio monitors. Sony also used a "red" phosphor that was not industry standard. It was a more dramatic "red" than the official NTSC fire engine orange. Again people at home loved the extra deep reds. But it did not match industry standards for critical colorimetry evaluation in studio monitors. So the best video production houses refused to use Sony Trinitrons for critical evaluations. But their artificially dramatic enhancement of the images made them big hits in homes! I use a professional display instead of a TV to watch TV. It is set up based on standards. But when I visit others and see the color saturation and blooming most consumers prefer..... I also think about my Maggies!
@@Justin-fy7xk The "sharpness" was an illusion. The more conventional Delta guns could actually produce a higher resolution. But noise would be more visible. Sony's system hid the noise so it looked higher res and sharper. That is why the more detailed engineers like camera shaders, would not use a Sony. They wanted to see the imperfections. The analogy exists today in speakers. Some as discussed designed to make everything sound good no matter what. While those that resolve better unfortunately expose bad source material.
Some (not all) of this is a bit of a moot point, when you consider ALLLLLLLLLL of the never ending, great sounding, new music being created around the world, that we now have such easy access to. I am one of those “sound quality first” guys, so I merely let go of stuff that doesn’t sound good on my system. There is far more than enough new music out there to keep my speakers happy. I love Qobuz’s “new arrivals” - such a great and diverse collection of new music every couple of weeks…and half if not most of it sounds incredible!!!
Interesting how the mileage does vary. You mentioned your ls50s as not the most resolving but for me, someone that is just starting this journey, they are second to none. I've never heard anything like them and it makes me concerned about my future budget. Maybe I need to avoid exposure to super high end so I don't spoil my home experience.
Three signs the 'speakers you currently own are "resolving enough" : a) You'll notice how pitch perfect soprano Renee Fleming's performances are. b) You'll notice how thick Courtney Love's Valley Girl accent is. and c) Your Jazz pro drummer neighbor admires how your rig sounds like an actual drum kit. 🤘
Once again, it's "garbage in, garbage out." And believe it or not, there are other Doors songs besides LA Woman...Riders On The Storm is a fine example of analogue recording done right, a real gem to listen to on any hifi system.
Re Pauls comments about the ls50's... It's funny; I am fairly new to this hobby, and my Kef ls50's with kef kc62 sub sound really nice to me. Got it nicely set up, even using Paul's book, and get all the things like sound stage, etc. I think it's pretty resolving compared to what I was used to before. So I really don't use them for background music only. I sit and listen. Some friends came over and were impressed. It goes to show; lots of people (including me) haven't heard nothing yet. (I'm 37 btw) Same goes for my modestly priced Hifiman Sundara headphones, through my Hegel H95 amp. I just listened to Nirvana's Nevermind, and I never heard the initial grunting noise on the beginning of Lounge Act (not that that part is music, lol). it's great fun this, the journey. Now looking into room treatment.
If you are new to the hobby, don't let comments like that bother you. Every person is different, as are systems. Its just as likely that you could listen to Paul's big, expensive speakers and not like them. That's just the way it goes. Its not personal. Also, you can't listen to a pair of speakers. You can only listen to them as part of a system. So, when Paul listened to the Kef's, he couldn't have the exact same experience you do listening to them on your system, in your room. If you like what you hear, then its the right system.
The LS50 Meta may not be the most revealing speaker, they are transparent enough to expose poor recordings. They are revealing enough to offend certain kind of listeners. If you want a speaker that makes everything sound good you are probably better of with a pair of Wharfedale Linton Anniversary Edition speakers. If I would criticize the LS50 it would be the dynamics. Even they have pretty good micro dynamics the overall dynamic capabilities aren’t that good with a small speaker like the LS50. Of course that could be addressed with a good subwoofer. I think the LS50 is a balanced speaker in its price range with exceptional value for money. I would prefer them over many more revealing systems because most music will sound palpable in the right pairing on these speakers and good recordings sound really good. For me, not having a dedicated listening room, the huge ps audio speakers towers would be a no go, even if I was willing to spend that kind of money on a pair of speakers. I would not like to have these big monsters in my living room. I do own more then one hifi set, but I want both be a bit balanced and able to play a wide range of music well. Would I upgrade to a 10 or 20k speaker if I won the lottery? I might be, but it would be a very high quality stand mount speaker with a top notch sub and a very nice only add speaker solution. I would never want my audio system dominating my room with many separates and huge speakers, as much I like good sound quality, I also like a minimal setup that makes my environment look good.
Resolution can be a double-edged sword but, locating the better masters and pressings really does make a world of difference in most cases. For items that are either very old or too obscure, the love of the music over love of the quality of the sound can oftentimes carry a person through. On a more personal level, though, that’s when you must decide whether you’re an audiophile, a music-lover or both.
Hey Paul ,in one of your later videos “ Do audio files only listen to special music” you can elevate your system to the point where not so good recordings sound good. How come you don’t elevate your system to prove your theory. Maybe the doors were sound good.
After what Paul said about compression in FoxFeather, I had a listen to it (on Tidal) and was considering buying it. However, after hearing some of the lyrics, nah, they can 'go broke' as far as I'm concerned.
When playing my moon to 260 D Neo CD player through my threshold FET 10, I love listening to Norah Jones, but the Stone’s Goats Head Soup album showed issues with the recording
Room treatment, set-up, recordings, gear & synergy effects and so on....it all matters and anything being too resolving, is Perhaps more about the above?
I vote for speakers can never be too resolving. The job of the each component in the audio chain is to reproduce close to 100% of the information that it is receiving with no data loss. Anything else is signal loss or distortion in the form of coloration in my opinion. I don't believe it is the speaker's (or any component) job to suppress any data -- good or bad. Blame the recording engineer and their processes if the music medium sounds bad but you can't blame a speaker for being able to reproduce it. It's just doing its job (garbage in garbage out). If you're going to make a case of a speaker being too resolving then you end up making the case to add sound processors and signal boosters into your system and we probably don't want to go there.
It can be negative thing if you listen to bad recordings, thats what i feel about my b&w 702 s2, they can sound a bit poorly on bad recordings, but magical on good recordings
Of course. That's why there arises the need for _even more expensive_ speakers, carefully crafted and masterfully calibrated with just the perfect amount of resolution, therefore being superior in a way that can't even be measured. (Unless you're measuring in tens of thousands of dollars, or divorce filings from enraged wives.)
This is true about recording sounding worse only if you are buying resolution with excess highs. People that buy speakers like that deserve what they get. If you get real resolution from low noise and low distortion without excessive high frequencies, you will like more recordings than before. High End audio is well named-- most of it has too much top end. Distortion does not usually mask other distortion. Caveat emptor.
To me compressors take the life out of the music. Thats why I love my direct to disc LPs. Also after living with electrostatics for 40 years everything else just sounds distorted or muffled. I heard some spekers that were $40,000 recently and while the mids and top were pretty good (good enough to give me goosebumps) The bass was not good and had a hollow character. My stereo system is 40 years old but I have yet to hear anything new that I like better. I have also made some improvements (cap upgrading) that give me more resolution (A sound I thought was just a background sound now sounds like a chorus).
The best speakers are usually very unforgiving but that's not a fault. They just happen to need the best source and amplification to really sing. ..With that in mind it's a good idea to upgrade the speakers last.
Those PS Audio speakers of yours look fabulous, but they look to have inadequate width on the base outriggers to me. I can imagine accidents happening with that kind of height to base width ratio. Just engineering fundamentals perhaps, but yes they do look cool.
As I become older I increasingly find myself listening to older(20yr plus) recording of live music events. On the purist equipment it often sounds just awful, when I listen to the most pristine studio version layers are revealed where none had been before. Conclusion…. We humans are a complicated mix of often conflicted ideas, we are not philosophically perfect, if finances permit have 2 systems & enjoy the music.
I'm kind of surprised Paul isn't familiar with Jersey City. With 290,000 people it's the second biggest city in New Jersey, and about three times the size of Boulder where PS Audio is.
Unfortunately, not one speaker can do it all, no matter what say, The key is to listen to as many systems as you can with the music that you know & figure out what sound you like, the key to life is being honest with your self.
Hey Paul, As an equipment manufacturer, I understand you are trying to sell equipment. But, it should be mentioned that speakers will only resolve as much as the room will allow it. If one does not have a properly treated room (as well as properly set up speakers), they are not experiencing the full resolution of the speakers and equipment. My suggestion would be to make sure they have addressed the room. If not, I would start there. Everyone who has treated their room wished they had done it years ago.
I am afraid most of those who at first advice room tuning miss the reason in favour of not always applicable stiff rules. Not every room needs to tbe treated - of course as big as halls need. That is because they have big flat walls and floors and ceelings and a lot of free space to produce reverberation if not even echoes. Why it is bad ? Because regular studio recordings sounds there accordingly - like in music club which the room actualy represents. It is boring to listen the same environment all the time and with strong reflections not clear . If eventually recording is done in big stage version with own reverberation it will mix and additionaly puzzle listener. Othe bad side of big room has it's very low own resonance which is way below to what is proper for mantaining the lowest tones. Usualy listeners have room less than 25sqm which is damped enough with soft furniture and rag and its reverberation is not mixing with recordings. Listening sense is learned how not to notice such differently interacting room. And their resonance falls in obout 12 meters long standing vawe, - 25 Hz We have problem to understand peroson talking to us in a big hall but no any problems when talking with person visiting us and talking in our moderate home
Gotta take the good with the bad. Don’t play the game if you aren’t ready for the truth! Paul is right though there is a point where nothing sounds terrible, just not everything may sound great. Lower tier revealing systems usually let you know what’s there but in a harsh and in your face way. Like trying to let you know it’s “hi-fi”
Forget major equipment, learn to tune things, like the room acoustics, and, well if you're me, tubes, cables, op-amps, and everything else. My big system is nearly infinitely tunable... I just received a new preamp today and it's wildly different... and not long after starting to listen to it I've retuned the system to work with it. I look at my systems like my road-racing motorbike, you've got to fettle with stuff and tune it to the track to get it to perform it's best. You can't just plug something in and give it a thumbs up or down, you've got to work with the entirety of the setup, power supply, room acoustics, bass management, speaker setup... the actual choice of gear is, in a way, nearly irrelevant.
Ahem, what the? maybe Paul was referring to the orig Revel Salons (I never heard them) or is referencing the wrong speaker altogether? However, the latest version of the Salons (and Studio 2's for that matter) are prob some of the MOST revealing speakers around and are still two of the "best" hi-end speakers made imho. Thats a head scratcher.
First no speakers cannot be to revealing. First and foremost is the speakers ability to reproduce the natural balance of instruments. Musicality first, then its ability to resolve the detail from better equipment. Speakers themselves are not detailed but the associate equipment that is in front of them. Here is where I differ from Paul is there a number of really good budget friendly speakers that can be very revealing. I take a different approach is that the detail comes from the recording, source equipment, preamplifier and amplifier. Revealing speakers are only as good as the source recording and source equipment. So personally I believe in putting more emphasis on the equipment side rather than spending a large of your budget on speakers. The only time it makes sense to spend a large amount of your budget on speakers is when you plan to upgrade the rest of the system to complement what the speakers are capable of producing.
i think your general ide is sound and i agree with you. but i can also think of speakers designs that can be too resolving in a general term. for example a bump in the high frequencies can be perceived as more resolving, with it has drawbacks. other example is a highly focuses tweeter, narrow radiation pattern horn or something, you get the detail that can be perceived a resolving but lack the large and deep imaging a speaker can do.
@@sudd3660 your absolutely correct. I should have stated that as long as the speaker is musical and natural sounding and not overemphasizing any part of the spectrum. Any colorations will tend to overemphasize sounds within that bandwidth. There are also drivers that even know might measure flat will add there own colorations.
@@Hal9000Comp Paul this his little short explanations and we think and comment about our thoughts. all we can do in this type of short format. its a pretty short video. i like 1 hour videos so i actually learn something.
Paul, I think it would look better if the BHK-300 mono and the P-20 power plant that you have in the room were black in color, it would look much better with the FR-30 speakers and also the acoustic panels on the front wall, but of course it just matter of taste.
Speaking of "resolving" , I think, just brings back the old time-honored saying, "You Can't Have Everything" (or maybe You Can't RESOLVE everything?). After all, a hi fi system (to coin an old term) doesn't produce music, it *reproduces* it. So in playback, you're hearing sound coming from surfaces that are not the original surfaces that produced them, of course. So there is ALWAYS going to be something that's not perfect in *some* way or another, regardless of how much money you're willing to throw at it.
Love to know what your hearing capabilities are as to your ears frequency response,have you recently had your ears checked and if so can you hear above 12k?
@@WindomRettes What kind of difference? I'm not sure why you're asking Paul this question. From watching his videos his descriptions, he doesn't seem to have any hearing issues.
To answer your question since Paul did not most of the time if you hear a recording and it sounds fine on one system and not the other could be that one is more resolving than the other but it’s most of the time it’s not the recording or the electronics it’s a disturbance in the electronics most of the time bad grounding or dirty current being revealed check those things first before blame it on your gear most of the time a harsh sounding playback that’s the problem
Yup, they can give you a headache 🤕 They can irritate you. They can be fatiguing to listen to. They can ruin half the listening pleasure you had previously with your music collection that you normally listened to.
Triangle Esprit line is odd in that they are detailed hornloaded titanium tweeter but still forgiving with bad recordings. Att the same time sensitive to electronics matching. Check out Zero fidelity yt channel for a review.
once a speaker is naturaly resolving, its naturaly resolving. every bit of extra "resolution" is just compression, transient overpronounciation and frequency boosts that makes things artificialy present and unnaturaly harsh. going overboard might be good for those hard of hearing or studio engineers that need beyond analytical speakers, but it moves further from plausibly- live sound
I demo'd them back in the day when they came out...they were a bit more then normal for the price but it seemed to be in a small frequency range...but it's wasn't the best or most ideal demo truth be told. The PR on those speakers was a bit over done big time IMO.
I believe every recording is good recording, but why there is good and bad recording?? because the problem is in tonal balance on our system especially on speakers. I try to solve this problem for years in designing speaker..
Unfortunately Adele’s last album isn’t really done or mixed that well. If it’s mixed by Tom Elmhirst a whole another story. Don’t kill the messenger though
80's TV looks like crap, super harsh on a LED TV. On a 40 year old Zenith CRT it looks great. If you're into seeing more detail watch on the best modern panel. If you want to enjoy the show, use whatever and watch the show. If you're into what the artist intended sent $39.95 to Glen Larson Productions.
With the irs being what he's been using to design his electronics all these years, must be all of his electronics are crap and has to go back to the drawing board, right?
Why this hate for compressor limiters? It's invented by DBX a US company to make recording easier. And to prevent you from clipping. You can also do fun stuff with it during recordings for instance to make tails longers in a bassguitar or piano. I really like to use it to soften the topends to make it nicer for MY ears. On the master you should only use it as clip prevention, set the threshold as such if everything is below clipping do nothing. Btw clean music is boring.... there should also be some rough edges!
@0:11 "A lot of pop songs are, understandably, mastered to sound good on as many devices as possible..." That is a popular misnomer. I find it to not be understandably acceptable. Songs are not mastered to sound good on stereos of all kinds. Rather, songs are mastered to sound good to the individual that is doing the mastering on his specific equipment. And when the crummy end result is what Nigamba wrote about the Adele song, it is due to the recording engineer being incompetent. Never give those incompetent engineers a pass for their crummy work. Let's assume you are listening on a price-no-object, dream stereo in a treated room. Now let's say that you discovered 3 songs that are the best you have ever heard. They sound amazing in every respect. Now let's say you found 3 songs that sound kind of crummy on that same great stereo. So now you have 3 great sounding songs and 3 crummy sounding songs, on your dream stereo. Now let's come down to Earth, and listen to those 6 songs on other mass produced stereos. Of the 6 songs, which 3 do you think will sound the best? The answer is the ones that sounded amazing on the dream stereo. There is no truth to the made up fact that bad songs sound better on bad stereos. If you had two sandwiches, one that was super delicious, and one that was hard to stomach... Would it matter where you ate them? Would the hard to stomach sandwich taste better on a smelly bus? Of course not. The delicious sandwich would always taste better than the other one, no matter where you ate it. The same for music. A great sounding song will sound better than a crummy sounding song, no matter where you play it. Feeding bad sound into a bad stereo is not a recipe for better sound. The misunderstanding comes from crummy stereos not being capable of revealing all of the flaws in the crummy sounding song. But put on an amazing sounding song on the crummy stereo, and that crummy stereo will sound much better. The fix to all of this is to shame the individuals that create the crummy sounding songs. For example, it would be helpful if we knew the name of the person responsible for ruining the Adele song. They are doing a huge disservice to the hard work, time, and effort that Adele put in to her song. And they are doing a huge disservice to countless millions (perhaps billions (due to streaming)) of people that have no choice but to hear what that one, single person in the studio screwed up. We would not put up with TV shows and movies that looked crummy. We should not put up with music that sounds crummy. TV shows and movies display the credits of the people that created the visual work of art. The same information should be broadcast for the people that create our music. We should know who the culprits are, and we should also know who the engineering artists are. We should know, based on who in the studio created the mix... we should know who to avoid and who to seek out. There should not be anonymous people ruining our music. There should not be a get-out-of-jail-free card (so to speak) for doing a lousy job, when that lousy job affects countless customers. Other than government jobs, no company would allow an employee to continually produce shoddy work. Paul understands this, and is why he started his own record label. I hope that one day he will gain access to initial capture tapes and create new, amazing sounding masters of our favorite songs.
Some CDs just sound worse and worse the more you improve the system. Almost becomes a trade off. Do I get enough improvement on these pieces of music to sacrifice these ones sounding worse.
Asking loudspeakers to be resolving is like asking a brick to be a space shuttle. It's all subjective and open to interpretation unless you were there at the recoding and using exactly the same equipment in your home you have absolutely no idea how 'resolving' your speakers are. After years of working in music and being an 'audiophile' I finally released that the two are so loosely related ad 'hifi' cannot be used in the same concept when it comes to resolution/neutrality and accuracy.
If you play the same music on 2 systems and you hear more details on one system over the other, how is that subjective? More information is objective. If you like the difference or not is subjective.
I have a pair of Castle Winchester's (flagship model) and a pair of Magnepan 3.7's with dual REL S510 subs. (Accuphase front end) Neither system can compare with my 50 year old, $650. JBL Century 100's when it comes to resolving. Sorry--THEY JUST DON'T! It drives me crazy that this old speaker has way more performance than my two $30K audiophile systems-- which simply don't cut it. I think a lot of it is due to compressed streaming; I only have heard the JBL's through vinyl. Now, the two audiophile systems do other amazing things-- 3 dimensional imaging in particular. But, one of the best sounding albums of all time Carly Simon's 'No Secrets' sounds like absolute crap. And that is an album that should shine-- the texture is so rich you could cut it with a knife. Which brings me to my biggest beef and mystery: No matter the streamer, MQA or not, recordings of that era are horrible in the digital realm and I don't know why.
That is why I would never buy such resolving speakers, a gross waste of money. You need resolving components in addition to those speakers. Not all components you mix and match will play well together with resolving speakers. You have limited music options to listen to. Even some of those could drive you nuts listening to, fatigue and irritation.
@@Stan_the_Belgian its cheap to get resolving system so your point is invalid. then after that, why not make the recording better in the first place? all recordings should be made at a high standard, no excuses.
I think my system is too resolving from time to time. I can only listen to really good recordings to find nirvana and be pleased of my system. A lot of my music collection is no longer fun to listen to. The recordings are so badly managed it is scary... But without my resolving system I will miss the goodies. Yes, it is a double sided sword thing for sure... Perhaps tweaking of listening position and a little bit of eq can make it more balanced - we´ll see. Pop music genre is one of the worst sounding, produced to please the large crowd that does not care about sound quality and that is where the money are. Lucky me that I don´t like pop music.
Paul, thanks for blending up-front honesty with good taste and diplomacy. I like how you summed up listening tastes at the end of this, "Your mileage may differ...etc." well put sir!
Thanks!
I have achieved a great sound stage. It took some work, it took some money, and most of all, I had to learn how to listen. The secret to all of it was the test track that I didn't know, I already knew. That track was Seal's song, Crazy. I was listening on a Denon 1913. I thought the world was good. But Andrew Robinson's wife Kristi pointed out. If he sounds like he's trapped in a box, your system sucks. That is what he sounded like. I changed speaker wires, and he grew a whole foot. Then changed out to an a7 aiyima amp. Then changed op amps. As my system changed, so did I, learning the difference in how things sound as the system changed. Now, when I play crazy on that system today, seal is 6 feet tall, when he crouches, you hear it, when he stands up, you hear his voice raise back up. He moves around effortlessly. It was a love and hate journey that taught me so much. You were a part of that journey, my speakers are out in the room, I have 2 subs, and most of all, great sound. Thank you for your efforts in teaching whoever is willing to learn the knowledge that you share. I really appreciate it. God bless.
Wow...certainly would like to listen to the FR30s. That you mention they are as resolving as the Quads is impressive.
I own two systems for the simple reason that neither one alone satisfy all my "audio" needs. The Quads are the resolving speakers in my life. They disappear, and leave me alone with the music. Yes, bad recordings sound really bad but great recordings sound sublime. With the ESL 57's I'm quite often working out the recording location (the old Kingsway Hall had a great acoustic) as yes, you should be able to discern the type of room the recording was made in.
My second system is a pair of Altec Lansing Santiagos. They go loud, they don't resolve in a significant way, but oh those horns make jazz recordings sound like they are playing in your room. Especially with the big Altec 1569A mono blocks pushing them.
Great hobby this, isnt it?
So, a person more interested in the music than the equipment needs to use several models of speakers,
each of which has a different power of resolution, to fit different qualities of recordings.
Or, one could just live with a compromise, as I have done for over 40 years.
Perhaps one just needs a box with a knob where you can turn down the resolution.
In a lot of cases, people perceive some level of elevated treble as “more resolving”. A truly resolving system does the magic while providing a proper neutral frequency response.
Which ironically, means a hot treble ...
It take a hot upper end to remain linear beyond 8khz. I've done more than a few dozen (literally) measurements.
Speakers are the sizes most don't play with the infinity rs1b , magnepan Tympani 1 (6x4ft per side ) you name it. Kappa 8 , kappa 9 , kappa 8.1, renaissance 80,rsII, rs4,rsB I mean the list is endless.
And my main speakers ? Run hot on the treble when you see that graph. None of the others get to that type of fr throughout .
They all drop off on the upper end (logically)
i never use treble speaker.Only paper cone mid range and woofer/sub.
Live music sounds trebly as fuck, if you want 1:1 treble is a big part of it.
Great question! The better the system the worse the music. I had never considered this. At 71 you have shown me something new to consider! Thank you Paul.
I may only agree that better systems and speakers start to unveil any own disadvantages Opposite to those which produce only parts of full range. because parts are possible by listener to balance The more to balance the less possibility it will be enough done.
Thanks Paul. If one can afford it, I say the ultimate solution is to have 2 (or 3) systems that you accumulate over time - each system doing things you like, and nothing you hate. As for the individual amps/preamps/dacs/speakers, it just takes years and years of time to hone in on on what you love and hate. Once you start understanding your preferences, you will hopefully also be finding quality manufacturers (like Paul) and quality reviewers, and try out what they recommend - this has helped me immensely over time, being able to follow the more experienced ears out there and efficiently filter out subpar stuff.
I have many stereo systems I could put together. But I got the sound I wanted by buying used high-end stereo equipment and modifying them.
When I visited PS audio with my son and we listen to the IRS some songs I knew were spectacular other songs I thought I knew were very disappointing and I could not listen to them.
A resolving speaker truly brings out a bad recording.
A resolving speaker truly brings out a beautiful perfect dynamic recording.
"Resolving speaker" with amazing us sounds brings out also "bad" from recordings.
Along this same line, the BIGGEST thing i noticed about the difference between recordings was the sound stage. I built a set of 'mini' Carver/amazing loudspeakers, being a fully dipole design. I did it with separate subs and the difference between those and some Infinity towers was astonishing. The next week i sold the Infinity's because they sounded SO flat and uninspiring to say the least, nut up to that day, they were always my favorite. I'm one that's had some decent headphones but, i hate all of them because they all seem to miss the sound stage in a horrible way. Of course, my room is tuned too so, that does make a massive difference in your listening room. I'd say, start with your room and get it as tuned as you can. You'll thank yourself for years to come more and more if you do.
Great video, Paul. Love your channel a lot.
Thanks!
@@octaverecordsanddsdstudios1285 No problem 😉 You all have lots of knowledge when it comes to anything audio.
PAUL…as you know I listened to it and I thought you were using your iPhone and it was BEAUTIFUL AND HIGHLY RESOLVING…I heard the paperwork as she turned them and the “ sour note “ as she hit it….( on UTUBE and using my iPad and headphones 🎧…) SO NOW I AM VERY THANKFUL TO DISCOVER THAT THERE IS SO MUCH NEW VERY WELL RECORDED MUSIC 🎶 I FOCUS ON THIS 🤗😍😍😍
That was a great listen. I recently got a Lokius EQ for my headphone system and I really only use it so I can neutralize the kinks in some recordings. Thanks!
AND THE SIMPLE FIX IS 😜 you just have several systems. Keep a tiny system for playing old bad live concert cassettes & mono early blues. Keep a compressed system for playing pop and bad recordings. And have a 4 way speaker selector like I do on the audiophile system so when you can get away with just switching to one's like Paul's Revel speakers. No one should have less than 4 pairs of speakers hooked up.
@Douglas Blake yup...that's audiophile fun 😜 Once you're system evolves enough , the pursuit is then finding music recorded well enough to listen too! It's always been that way.
I believe speakers and the whole system should be as resolving as possible. Because the recording musicians or the recording engineers did a poor job in recording or the type of music in general is harsh on the ears it's not the stereo system's responsibility to dumb it down. Throw a towel over it or turn the tone down if you have tone controls or EQ.
Paul, I have dynaudio confidence 5 that were rated best in Europe for many years as yes … very revealing..
I will demo your new speakers soon.. Great job with this info…
Good question.
I have heard some harshness with my Dali NAD system on some tracks, but fine on my old Marantz 6g speakers.
Couple glasses of wine will definitely improve the listening experience
3-1/2 glasses in a Standard Bottle of Wine and most people won't really care from there on! 🍷
In case of Sundaras it can be also a matter of not only their level of detail/being resolving, but rather just their sound signature - at least for me esp. early revisions (pre-somewhere in 2019) of Sundaras have actually quite piercing highs.
Yes, when the system is super resolving musicality plays a huge factor! It can make or break a not so good or even great recording. After upgrading my electronics to Luxman ♥️ to feed my Sopras I found myself listening to CD after CD and streaming more and more artists from all genres of music...metal to piano vocalists, and it's always been a treat. Now before my upgrade I still had great electronics, but certain music was not necessarily analytical or too revealing, but the band wasn't playing together and certain aspects of a recording were revealing and pleasing, but that would change on the type of music or it's complexity. So if you listen to Civil War or Knokin' on Heaven's Door by Guns N Roses. 1/2 of the band got lost depending on the mixing level points. Meaning you may hear only the more revealing parts of the recording (Macro details). Maybe it's Slash's solo and Axles Vocals that are at the front of the stage. But what about being able to hear the rhythm of Duffs bass in synch with the drummer in the background of the lead (micro details). Lol Luxman for me changed Music. What, in rock n roll??? Yes! And what about the drummer Steve doing his thing in perfect rhythm with Duff, Slash, and Axle or even in a live performance where drummers improv. to keep the vibe going, and you the listener are just loving what he's doing. Now put it all that together with out emphasizing 2 band members and let the other 2 or backup singers be part of the performance. Now the recording becomes musical and resolving and not just blairing or compressed. Same for Freya Ridings Castles or any track where now you have a choir come in, a poppy beat drum, guitars, and her beloved piano and sexy voice singing with the choir and piano. None of that soundstage gets lost. It's all perfectly captured in rhythm and time. The piano still has it's character, it still has it's sustain, nothing is smeared or compressed per say by the limits of the gear, speakers, or room. Theirs height, width, and depth. That's musicality and resolution in Harmony. But yes it's not cheap and even if it's expensive and not done with synergy, then it's a loss and the search continues. But get it right and Bravo in your listening room👏
Cool story - which model Luxman amp did you get?
@@connorduke4619 Thanks! I bought the 509x and D-03X CD player. The D-03X also lets me use it's internal DAC with a streamer and etc, or files using their software. Speakers are Sopra No 3
@@LuxAudio389 Sounds like one heck of a system!
Just in case you are listening with streaming or CDs: definitely Checkout the MFSL masters of the Use your Illusion I and II CDs. Thank me later ;)
@@econautx tx I definitely will👍
My system can be configured to be more or less revealing through hardware modifications on the fly. No wire pulling, and a minimum of speaker movement. No it's not a perfect system but it really adds to my enjoyment of all my music library, and allows me to make changes based on my moods and tastes of the moment. Down sides are more gear and the resultant problems that can occur and, of course, cost. If I could afford those PS Audio speakers, I might be pleasantly surprised. But that ain't happenin' in what's left of this lifetime.
Great suggestions!
I like my dedicated audiophile system to be highly resolving, dynamic and above all natural. But that means 50% of my CD's I cannot listen to. I love listening to audiophile recordings of most anything. And sometimes I will listen kind of in background mode to the rest of my collection while I read or surf. Badly recorded music never gets played.
I have a couple of other systems.
The living room system has Totem speakers and Denon electronics. It never gets used. Once in a blue moon for background with guests in the living room.
The other is in my car. A nice Bose system with a dozen speakers. Again, hardly ever use it. I prefer to hear the engine rowing through the gears and rev matching downshifts. But when I want music, it can play anything and make it sound good for a car.
I know exactly what you mean. Some pieces of music have almost become unlistenable. The more I improve things the worse they sound. Case in point Meatloaf's Bat Out of Hell. I have had several recordings over the years but none of them sound pleasant. You almost need garbage gear to play it.
I had a Quinpu A-8000 Mk II amplifier at one point in my active crossover- biamped studio monitors feeding the hi's and mids, It was so clear that I could hear so precisely the various reverb tails of the different instruments and buses fade and end like never before. Every single detail in the music was just there, Pragmatically. Technically that is supposedly the idea in a mixing/mastering studio , however I had to change amplifiers for that particular system to put my brain at ease... In this case, there was too much focus.
Was listening to Octave Records Audiophile Masters Vol I on vinyl last night. Blew me away!! Delivers on all the “hype!” Having 133 vintage cartridges, this record reveals which cartridges RESOLVE detail, and which ones don’t. Just superb record/recording/pressing/mastering!!!
What is it about vintage cartridges? Is it that you just collect them, or are they sonically different in some way? I know people are into vintage amps, and things like that but I never even considered vintage cartridges.
@@AT-wl9yq Every cartridge design has a “voice.” It’s a transducer, after all! No different than speakers. I have cartridges from 1955-2019. Most from 1955-2000. Modern offerings really haven’t moved the needle much. I’ve got 26 ADCs, 16 Empires, 20 Shures, 4 GE, Ortofons, AT, Nagaoka, Nagatron, Acutex, Piezo/Azden, others. I follow ADC by cart from 1963-1985, Shure from 1960-2018, Empire from 1961-1984, the best GE carts they made, so I can follow the technology. There really isn’t anything new since 1985. Just model numbers changed. Materials haven’t advanced. The best ADCs hold their own with a great many MCs, and trounce Nagaokas.
I actallylike my old Kef 201/2's more than the New style Kef ref 1-ould like to hear the Ref 1 meta...nice video btw
Very true and I noteced it only in last time. There is musicality when my volume is at lower range where my loudness is in much control. All happenings sound at simmilar level, readable and amazing with beauty. Then by turning knob up to levels 90 dB and going out from loudness it unveils unexpected dynamic beteween sounds and it is like uncovering hidden strong emotions All is in very near field and surprises. . Who's the best? No winner but due to uncomfortable loudness and tension in listening which is fatiquing in longer than one track time , I listen 95% to less dynamic kinds. .
tonal control is a great option for those instances where your system excedes your recording. a recording made to be revealing on veiled systems can sound painfull on revealing sytems (physicaly so, because of volume spikes) and a tonal control can mittigate that issue. algorythmic dsp tonal controls can even listen for frequency based volume spikes exceding a certain multiple of the average level and apply an eq based on that.
Using tone control the sound will collapse, even on 10k + amps..
@@nicktube3904 not on overexagerated records. then its not collapsing, but ironing out the spikes
@@Chrisspru that’s why I listen to allot of 16/44 ‘original’ versions on Qobuz instead remastered or high res.
To me that sounds more natural and less overexagerated. It’s a gimmick to let mediocre gear sound ‘detailed’.
Most of the time when the signal travels through an extra circuit it will degree in SQ. I have tested this for example on some Mcintosh gear in the store. I don’t mean aspects like tonality, highs, mids bass, but audiophile qualities.
Most noticeable to me the holographic/ 3D image is less impressive/ real.
Like Paul says on most high end equipment you won’t find tone controls, it’s for another segment to my opinion. But If you like it, no problem at all. Everyone has to listen to music the way they like it!
I'd rather play with two of those pink knobs ^^
@@nicktube3904 on originals it is indeed most often unnecessary.
but a few songs are just mastered poorly from the begining.
then a tonal control can improve it, not to the degree as if it would have been masteted properly in the first place, but still notably.
@@nicktube3904 Yup 24/96,24/192 make the speakers sound metallic. When you find the right mastering with 24/48 though. Just amazing
Love the 'little river band' (LRB) but now I'd finish building my system, there is one song that use to be my favourite (playing to win) that I now can't listen to as it's awash with too much reverb. Thanks for your channel!
Nope, if one can hear the artist in the next studio recording their album too, then that's a 2 for 1 deal. Lol 😉
Just smoke a few joints and your music will sound so much better, I promise.🤓 I hear things on my Bose system that I never heard before until the THC kicks in.😎
Similar time period, the '80's, I had moved from selling in the Audio industry into Broadcast Video. Sony was introducing their Trinitron tube technology into the broadcast level video monitor business. But it had two major technical problems. The inline slot matrix aperture-grille-based design, while increasing resolution compared to the Delta-Gun competitors, also decreased visible noise. While this was appreciated in homes. It reduced the ability for evaluation of visible noise in your studio monitors. Sony also used a "red" phosphor that was not industry standard. It was a more dramatic "red" than the official NTSC fire engine orange. Again people at home loved the extra deep reds. But it did not match industry standards for critical colorimetry evaluation in studio monitors. So the best video production houses refused to use Sony Trinitrons for critical evaluations. But their artificially dramatic enhancement of the images made them big hits in homes!
I use a professional display instead of a TV to watch TV. It is set up based on standards. But when I visit others and see the color saturation and blooming most consumers prefer..... I also think about my Maggies!
Interesting Glenn. I always preferred Sony. The picture seemed sharper too.
@@Justin-fy7xk The "sharpness" was an illusion. The more conventional Delta guns could actually produce a higher resolution. But noise would be more visible. Sony's system hid the noise so it looked higher res and sharper. That is why the more detailed engineers like camera shaders, would not use a Sony. They wanted to see the imperfections.
The analogy exists today in speakers. Some as discussed designed to make everything sound good no matter what. While those that resolve better unfortunately expose bad source material.
“Temple of Sound” I love it. 😄
He’s right you have to pick and choose what to listen to with high resolving speakers system etc
Some (not all) of this is a bit of a moot point, when you consider ALLLLLLLLLL of the never ending, great sounding, new music being created around the world, that we now have such easy access to. I am one of those “sound quality first” guys, so I merely let go of stuff that doesn’t sound good on my system. There is far more than enough new music out there to keep my speakers happy. I love Qobuz’s “new arrivals” - such a great and diverse collection of new music every couple of weeks…and half if not most of it sounds incredible!!!
Paul, are you comparing the FR30 to other 30K$ Loudspeakers or to P.Ex. to Focal Master Utopia EVO at a price Tag of 75.000$?
“I can’t see what’s ahead when I’m looking my feet, when I take a walk” no shit lol 😝
Interesting how the mileage does vary. You mentioned your ls50s as not the most resolving but for me, someone that is just starting this journey, they are second to none. I've never heard anything like them and it makes me concerned about my future budget. Maybe I need to avoid exposure to super high end so I don't spoil my home experience.
I was thinking the same thing. You know you have shit hot speakers when you can say the ls50s are only average 😅
Three signs the 'speakers you currently own are "resolving enough" : a) You'll notice how pitch perfect soprano Renee Fleming's performances are. b) You'll notice how thick Courtney Love's Valley Girl accent is. and c) Your Jazz pro drummer neighbor admires how your rig sounds like an actual drum kit. 🤘
Once again, it's "garbage in, garbage out." And believe it or not, there are other Doors songs besides LA Woman...Riders On The Storm is a fine example of analogue recording done right, a real gem to listen to on any hifi system.
I have those headphones. Highly recommended!
Re Pauls comments about the ls50's...
It's funny; I am fairly new to this hobby, and my Kef ls50's with kef kc62 sub sound really nice to me. Got it nicely set up, even using Paul's book, and get all the things like sound stage, etc. I think it's pretty resolving compared to what I was used to before.
So I really don't use them for background music only. I sit and listen. Some friends came over and were impressed. It goes to show; lots of people (including me) haven't heard nothing yet. (I'm 37 btw)
Same goes for my modestly priced Hifiman Sundara headphones, through my Hegel H95 amp. I just listened to Nirvana's Nevermind, and I never heard the initial grunting noise on the beginning of Lounge Act (not that that part is music, lol).
it's great fun this, the journey. Now looking into room treatment.
If you are new to the hobby, don't let comments like that bother you. Every person is different, as are systems. Its just as likely that you could listen to Paul's big, expensive speakers and not like them. That's just the way it goes. Its not personal. Also, you can't listen to a pair of speakers. You can only listen to them as part of a system. So, when Paul listened to the Kef's, he couldn't have the exact same experience you do listening to them on your system, in your room. If you like what you hear, then its the right system.
The LS50 Meta may not be the most revealing speaker, they are transparent enough to expose poor recordings. They are revealing enough to offend certain kind of listeners. If you want a speaker that makes everything sound good you are probably better of with a pair of Wharfedale Linton Anniversary Edition speakers. If I would criticize the LS50 it would be the dynamics. Even they have pretty good micro dynamics the overall dynamic capabilities aren’t that good with a small speaker like the LS50. Of course that could be addressed with a good subwoofer. I think the LS50 is a balanced speaker in its price range with exceptional value for money. I would prefer them over many more revealing systems because most music will sound palpable in the right pairing on these speakers and good recordings sound really good. For me, not having a dedicated listening room, the huge ps audio speakers towers would be a no go, even if I was willing to spend that kind of money on a pair of speakers. I would not like to have these big monsters in my living room. I do own more then one hifi set, but I want both be a bit balanced and able to play a wide range of music well. Would I upgrade to a 10 or 20k speaker if I won the lottery? I might be, but it would be a very high quality stand mount speaker with a top notch sub and a very nice only add speaker solution. I would never want my audio system dominating my room with many separates and huge speakers, as much I like good sound quality, I also like a minimal setup that makes my environment look good.
Someone left a carrot on the floor
Tis only a bit a squash.
Resolution can be a double-edged sword but, locating the better masters and pressings really does make a world of difference in most cases. For items that are either very old or too obscure, the love of the music over love of the quality of the sound can oftentimes carry a person through. On a more personal level, though, that’s when you must decide whether you’re an audiophile, a music-lover or both.
I too I’m trying to upgrade from my Revel speakers. I too find them not resolving enough. Absolutely a great speaker though.
Hey Paul ,in one of your later videos “ Do audio files only listen to special music” you can elevate your system to the point where not so good recordings sound good. How come you don’t elevate your system to prove your theory. Maybe the doors were sound good.
Maybe a different headphone cable may do the trick. Because in the end it all equates to a sum of the parts.
After what Paul said about compression in FoxFeather, I had a listen to it (on Tidal) and was considering buying it.
However, after hearing some of the lyrics, nah, they can 'go broke' as far as I'm concerned.
When playing my moon to 260 D Neo CD player through my threshold FET 10, I love listening to Norah Jones, but the Stone’s Goats Head Soup album showed issues with the recording
Room treatment, set-up, recordings, gear & synergy effects and so on....it all matters and anything being too resolving, is Perhaps more about the above?
I vote for speakers can never be too resolving.
The job of the each component in the audio chain is to reproduce close to 100% of the information that it is receiving with no data loss. Anything else is signal loss or distortion in the form of coloration in my opinion.
I don't believe it is the speaker's (or any component) job to suppress any data -- good or bad. Blame the recording engineer and their processes if the music medium sounds bad but you can't blame a speaker for being able to reproduce it. It's just doing its job (garbage in garbage out).
If you're going to make a case of a speaker being too resolving then you end up making the case to add sound processors and signal boosters into your system and we probably don't want to go there.
It can be negative thing if you listen to bad recordings, thats what i feel about my b&w 702 s2, they can sound a bit poorly on bad recordings, but magical on good recordings
Of course. That's why there arises the need for _even more expensive_ speakers, carefully crafted and masterfully calibrated with just the perfect amount of resolution, therefore being superior in a way that can't even be measured. (Unless you're measuring in tens of thousands of dollars, or divorce filings from enraged wives.)
somebody is salty because they can't afford the speaker they want lol
@@djfirestormx He didn't want them anyway, so there.
This is true about recording sounding worse only if you are buying resolution with excess highs. People that buy speakers like that deserve what they get. If you get real resolution from low noise and low distortion without excessive high frequencies, you will like more recordings than before. High End audio is well named-- most of it has too much top end. Distortion does not usually mask other distortion. Caveat emptor.
This makes me wanna hear the Revels.
To me compressors take the life out of the music. Thats why I love my direct to disc LPs. Also after living with electrostatics for 40 years everything else just sounds distorted or muffled. I heard some spekers that were $40,000 recently and while the mids and top were pretty good (good enough to give me goosebumps) The bass was not good and had a hollow character. My stereo system is 40 years old but I have yet to hear anything new that I like better. I have also made some improvements (cap upgrading) that give me more resolution (A sound I thought was just a background sound now sounds like a chorus).
The best speakers are usually very unforgiving but that's not a fault. They just happen to need the best source and amplification to really sing.
..With that in mind it's a good idea to upgrade the speakers last.
Yes, built system around 1.7is. Cables, power conditioner. VWDU panels. Then moved up to 20.7s.
Those PS Audio speakers of yours look fabulous, but they look to have inadequate width on the base outriggers to me. I can imagine accidents happening with that kind of height to base width ratio. Just engineering fundamentals perhaps, but yes they do look cool.
As a subscriber I demand you answer me on the time-align 12s by Paradox speakers. The only thing close to them is a real band, in a garage.
As I become older I increasingly find myself listening to older(20yr plus) recording of live music events. On the purist equipment it often sounds just awful, when I listen to the most pristine studio version layers are revealed where none had been before.
Conclusion…. We humans are a complicated mix of often conflicted ideas, we are not philosophically perfect, if finances permit have 2 systems & enjoy the music.
I'm kind of surprised Paul isn't familiar with Jersey City. With 290,000 people it's the second biggest city in New Jersey, and about three times the size of Boulder where PS Audio is.
Unfortunately, not one speaker can do it all, no matter what say, The key is to listen to as many systems as you can with the music that you know & figure out what sound you like, the key to life is being honest with your self.
Hey Paul,
As an equipment manufacturer, I understand you are trying to sell equipment. But, it should be mentioned that speakers will only resolve as much as the room will allow it. If one does not have a properly treated room (as well as properly set up speakers), they are not experiencing the full resolution of the speakers and equipment. My suggestion would be to make sure they have addressed the room. If not, I would start there. Everyone who has treated their room wished they had done it years ago.
I am afraid most of those who at first advice room tuning miss the reason in favour of not always applicable stiff rules. Not every room needs to tbe treated - of course as big as halls need. That is because they have big flat walls and floors and ceelings and a lot of free space to produce reverberation if not even echoes. Why it is bad ? Because regular studio recordings sounds there accordingly - like in music club which the room actualy represents. It is boring to listen the same environment all the time and with strong reflections not clear . If eventually recording is done in big stage version with own reverberation it will mix and additionaly puzzle listener. Othe bad side of big room has it's very low own resonance which is way below to what is proper for mantaining the lowest tones.
Usualy listeners have room less than 25sqm which is damped enough with soft furniture and rag and its reverberation is not mixing with recordings. Listening sense is learned how not to notice such differently interacting room. And their resonance falls in obout 12 meters long standing vawe, - 25 Hz
We have problem to understand peroson talking to us in a big hall but no any problems when talking with person visiting us and talking in our moderate home
Gotta take the good with the bad. Don’t play the game if you aren’t ready for the truth! Paul is right though there is a point where nothing sounds terrible, just not everything may sound great. Lower tier revealing systems usually let you know what’s there but in a harsh and in your face way. Like trying to let you know it’s “hi-fi”
Forget major equipment, learn to tune things, like the room acoustics, and, well if you're me, tubes, cables, op-amps, and everything else. My big system is nearly infinitely tunable... I just received a new preamp today and it's wildly different... and not long after starting to listen to it I've retuned the system to work with it. I look at my systems like my road-racing motorbike, you've got to fettle with stuff and tune it to the track to get it to perform it's best. You can't just plug something in and give it a thumbs up or down, you've got to work with the entirety of the setup, power supply, room acoustics, bass management, speaker setup... the actual choice of gear is, in a way, nearly irrelevant.
Please write the number you are talking about in the description, thanks 👍
Ahem, what the? maybe Paul was referring to the orig Revel Salons (I never heard them) or is referencing the wrong speaker altogether? However, the latest version of the Salons (and Studio 2's for that matter) are prob some of the MOST revealing speakers around and are still two of the "best" hi-end speakers made imho. Thats a head scratcher.
First no speakers cannot be to revealing. First and foremost is the speakers ability to reproduce the natural balance of instruments. Musicality first, then its ability to resolve the detail from better equipment. Speakers themselves are not detailed but the associate equipment that is in front of them. Here is where I differ from Paul is there a number of really good budget friendly speakers that can be very revealing. I take a different approach is that the detail comes from the recording, source equipment, preamplifier and amplifier. Revealing speakers are only as good as the source recording and source equipment. So personally I believe in putting more emphasis on the equipment side rather than spending a large of your budget on speakers. The only time it makes sense to spend a large amount of your budget on speakers is when you plan to upgrade the rest of the system to complement what the speakers are capable of producing.
i think your general ide is sound and i agree with you.
but i can also think of speakers designs that can be too resolving in a general term.
for example a bump in the high frequencies can be perceived as more resolving, with it has drawbacks.
other example is a highly focuses tweeter, narrow radiation pattern horn or something, you get the detail that can be perceived a resolving but lack the large and deep imaging a speaker can do.
@@sudd3660 your absolutely correct. I should have stated that as long as the speaker is musical and natural sounding and not overemphasizing any part of the spectrum. Any colorations will tend to overemphasize sounds within that bandwidth. There are also drivers that even know might measure flat will add there own colorations.
@@Hal9000Comp Paul this his little short explanations and we think and comment about our thoughts.
all we can do in this type of short format. its a pretty short video. i like 1 hour videos so i actually learn something.
The letter sender set an example on an onkyo amp and a headset. Oooomph, I guess not all knows how to adjust equipment. And contented with head sets🙈
Paul, I think it would look better if the BHK-300 mono and the P-20 power plant that you have in the room were black in color, it would look much better with the FR-30 speakers and also the acoustic panels on the front wall, but of course it just matter of taste.
i couldnt agree more.... alas, Paul prefers silver. he even made the fr30s grey, not black. booo
Beryllium Tweeters. More detail with less fatigue.
Speaking of "resolving" , I think, just brings back the old time-honored saying, "You Can't Have Everything" (or maybe You Can't RESOLVE everything?). After all, a hi fi system (to coin an old term) doesn't produce music, it *reproduces* it. So in playback, you're hearing sound coming from surfaces that are not the original surfaces that produced them, of course. So there is ALWAYS going to be something that's not perfect in *some* way or another, regardless of how much money you're willing to throw at it.
Love to know what your hearing capabilities are as to your ears frequency response,have you recently had your ears checked and if so can you hear above 12k?
What difference does it make?
@@AT-wl9yq All the difference in the world.
@@WindomRettes What kind of difference? I'm not sure why you're asking Paul this question. From watching his videos his descriptions, he doesn't seem to have any hearing issues.
@@AT-wl9yq Reason is simple,I'm probably 15 years younger than Paul and I can't hear above 9K so I'm guessing Paul is close to my hearing ability.
Not hear just the good and bad, but everything in the audio chain… with their sound signature and varying synergies…
To answer your question since Paul did not most of the time if you hear a recording and it sounds fine on one system and not the other could be that one is more resolving than the other but it’s most of the time it’s not the recording or the electronics it’s a disturbance in the electronics most of the time bad grounding or dirty current being revealed check those things first before blame it on your gear most of the time a harsh sounding playback that’s the problem
Yup, they can give you a headache 🤕
They can irritate you. They can be fatiguing to listen to. They can ruin half the listening pleasure you had previously with your music collection that you normally listened to.
Our skills of tooting our own horns have also improved
I'm pretty sure the ls 50s are pretty resolving as well.
Triangle Esprit line is odd in that they are detailed hornloaded titanium tweeter but still forgiving with bad recordings. Att the same time sensitive to electronics matching. Check out Zero fidelity yt channel for a review.
The double edged sword of high end audio . Lol , Could we have a wee bit more drama plz . Lmao , Thank u .
"temple of sound"
Ha - I've head compressors come in and out since the vinyl days. Haven't had to have megabucks systems to hear it either.
I hope Paul covers more on compressors...because I haven't heard much on them yet.
once a speaker is naturaly resolving, its naturaly resolving. every bit of extra "resolution" is just compression, transient overpronounciation and frequency boosts that makes things artificialy present and unnaturaly harsh. going overboard might be good for those hard of hearing or studio engineers that need beyond analytical speakers, but it moves further from plausibly- live sound
just out of curiosity I looked up a stereophile review of those original revel salon's.. they are supposedly very resolving.
I demo'd them back in the day when they came out...they were a bit more then normal for the price but it seemed to be in a small frequency range...but it's wasn't the best or most ideal demo truth be told. The PR on those speakers was a bit over done big time IMO.
I believe every recording is good recording, but why there is good and bad recording?? because the problem is in tonal balance on our system especially on speakers. I try to solve this problem for years in designing speaker..
Unfortunately Adele’s last album isn’t really done or mixed that well. If it’s mixed by Tom Elmhirst a whole another story. Don’t kill the messenger though
80's TV looks like crap, super harsh on a LED TV. On a 40 year old Zenith CRT it looks great.
If you're into seeing more detail watch on the best modern panel. If you want to enjoy the show, use whatever and watch the show. If you're into what the artist intended sent $39.95 to Glen Larson Productions.
Jersey City! Home of WFMU, arguably the most "audiophile" radio station in current existence. 75% of their daily content is played off vinyl!
So , has Paul just been designing electronics for the IRS system all these years?
With the irs being what he's been using to design his electronics all these years, must be all of his electronics are crap and has to go back to the drawing board, right?
Why this hate for compressor limiters? It's invented by DBX a US company to make recording easier. And to prevent you from clipping. You can also do fun stuff with it during recordings for instance to make tails longers in a bassguitar or piano. I really like to use it to soften the topends to make it nicer for MY ears. On the master you should only use it as clip prevention, set the threshold as such if everything is below clipping do nothing. Btw clean music is boring.... there should also be some rough edges!
Not be a turd but isn't the bottom driver too close to the floor? Pretty sure it's causing distortion
@0:11 "A lot of pop songs are, understandably, mastered to sound good on as many devices as possible..."
That is a popular misnomer. I find it to not be understandably acceptable.
Songs are not mastered to sound good on stereos of all kinds. Rather, songs are mastered to sound good to the individual that is doing the mastering on his specific equipment. And when the crummy end result is what Nigamba wrote about the Adele song, it is due to the recording engineer being incompetent. Never give those incompetent engineers a pass for their crummy work.
Let's assume you are listening on a price-no-object, dream stereo in a treated room. Now let's say that you discovered 3 songs that are the best you have ever heard. They sound amazing in every respect.
Now let's say you found 3 songs that sound kind of crummy on that same great stereo. So now you have 3 great sounding songs and 3 crummy sounding songs, on your dream stereo.
Now let's come down to Earth, and listen to those 6 songs on other mass produced stereos.
Of the 6 songs, which 3 do you think will sound the best?
The answer is the ones that sounded amazing on the dream stereo.
There is no truth to the made up fact that bad songs sound better on bad stereos.
If you had two sandwiches, one that was super delicious, and one that was hard to stomach...
Would it matter where you ate them? Would the hard to stomach sandwich taste better on a smelly bus? Of course not.
The delicious sandwich would always taste better than the other one, no matter where you ate it.
The same for music.
A great sounding song will sound better than a crummy sounding song, no matter where you play it.
Feeding bad sound into a bad stereo is not a recipe for better sound.
The misunderstanding comes from crummy stereos not being capable of revealing all of the flaws in the crummy sounding song. But put on an amazing sounding song on the crummy stereo, and that crummy stereo will sound much better.
The fix to all of this is to shame the individuals that create the crummy sounding songs. For example, it would be helpful if we knew the name of the person responsible for ruining the Adele song. They are doing a huge disservice to the hard work, time, and effort that Adele put in to her song. And they are doing a huge disservice to countless millions (perhaps billions (due to streaming)) of people that have no choice but to hear what that one, single person in the studio screwed up.
We would not put up with TV shows and movies that looked crummy.
We should not put up with music that sounds crummy.
TV shows and movies display the credits of the people that created the visual work of art.
The same information should be broadcast for the people that create our music. We should know who the culprits are, and we should also know who the engineering artists are. We should know, based on who in the studio created the mix... we should know who to avoid and who to seek out.
There should not be anonymous people ruining our music.
There should not be a get-out-of-jail-free card (so to speak) for doing a lousy job, when that lousy job affects countless customers.
Other than government jobs, no company would allow an employee to continually produce shoddy work.
Paul understands this, and is why he started his own record label.
I hope that one day he will gain access to initial capture tapes and create new, amazing sounding masters of our favorite songs.
hi Paul take a, look at Yamaha ns 10. disgustingly transparent great for testing gears.
7:01 He is comparring LS50' 1500 $ to those FR30 30 000 $. haha . LOL
Do I need clean glasses because if they are clean I can see bad painting as well as good ones? Duh?
Just have 2 systems. One like the average one for average music. One resolving system for all the high end audiophile music. Simple.
Some CDs just sound worse and worse the more you improve the system. Almost becomes a trade off. Do I get enough improvement on these pieces of music to sacrifice these ones sounding worse.
Asking loudspeakers to be resolving is like asking a brick to be a space shuttle. It's all subjective and open to interpretation unless you were there at the recoding and using exactly the same equipment in your home you have absolutely no idea how 'resolving' your speakers are.
After years of working in music and being an 'audiophile' I finally released that the two are so loosely related ad 'hifi' cannot be used in the same concept when it comes to resolution/neutrality and accuracy.
If you play the same music on 2 systems and you hear more details on one system over the other, how is that subjective? More information is objective. If you like the difference or not is subjective.
I have a pair of Castle Winchester's (flagship model) and a pair of Magnepan 3.7's with dual REL S510 subs. (Accuphase front end)
Neither system can compare with my 50 year old, $650. JBL Century 100's when it comes to resolving. Sorry--THEY JUST DON'T! It drives me crazy that this old speaker has way more performance than my two $30K audiophile systems-- which simply don't cut it. I think a lot of it is due to compressed streaming; I only have heard the JBL's through vinyl.
Now, the two audiophile systems do other amazing things-- 3 dimensional imaging in particular. But, one of the best sounding albums of all time Carly Simon's 'No Secrets' sounds like absolute crap. And that is an album that should shine-- the texture is so rich you could cut it with a knife.
Which brings me to my biggest beef and mystery: No matter the streamer, MQA or not, recordings of that era are horrible in the digital realm and I don't know why.
maybe the question should be reversed, how about this way: why is the music so bad that resolving systems show how bad it is?
That is the perfect answer. Garbage in garbage out.
That is why I would never buy such resolving speakers, a gross waste of money. You need resolving components in addition to those speakers. Not all components you mix and match will play well together with resolving speakers.
You have limited music options to listen to. Even some of those could drive you nuts listening to, fatigue and irritation.
@@davidfromamerica1871 buying badly recorded music is the problem here, how are we going to have nice things if we support the shit?
If 99% of people do not have 20k usd systems, why tailor the recording to that 1%?
@@Stan_the_Belgian its cheap to get resolving system so your point is invalid.
then after that, why not make the recording better in the first place? all recordings should be made at a high standard, no excuses.
That's why you need tone controls to fix what a producer or artist f_'ed up.
I think my system is too resolving from time to time. I can only listen to really good recordings to find nirvana and be pleased of my system. A lot of my music collection is no longer fun to listen to. The recordings are so badly managed it is scary... But without my resolving system I will miss the goodies. Yes, it is a double sided sword thing for sure... Perhaps tweaking of listening position and a little bit of eq can make it more balanced - we´ll see. Pop music genre is one of the worst sounding, produced to please the large crowd that does not care about sound quality and that is where the money are. Lucky me that I don´t like pop music.