I
tend to have a somewhat contrary attitude towards some aspects system
setup. I don't know how many people have a similar point of view, so I
thought I would share it.
Unlike a lot of commentators, I find
myself to be quite tolerant of the category of sonic defects that fall
under the broad umbrella of "coloration". Which is not to say that I
can't hear the differences and recognize "tonal palette"
defects when I hear them. Its just that they don't upset me as much as
they seem to for many other people. When I compare A vs B, my personal
preference tends always to be for the most revealing and resolving, the
best micro-dynamics, and the cleanest imaging. If that comes with more
tonal coloration then so be it. This doesn't mean that I actively LIKE
coloration. All else being equal, I will always prefer a natural and uncolored sound. And my tolerance for coloration does have its limits.
Beyond a certain point, coloration does become an unacceptable defect
on its own, but is something seldom encountered these days (with the
notable exception of one of the most hyper-expensive SET/Horn setups on
display at this year's CES, whose 1960's level of coloration was
appalling).
I have always played every loudspeaker I have ever
owned with the grilles, fascias, and protective structures removed,
regardless of how that tilts the tonal presentation. My present
loudspeakers are B&W 802 Diamonds, and I prefer to listen to them
with the magnetically-attached mesh that protects the desperately
fragile tweeter removed. I know that this lifts the treble response out
of balance, but it gives me that itty-bitty increase in resolving
power. Actually, its not so itty-bitty! Experience has shown me that
if I get those things right, then the music tends to "communicate" with
me more. After an evening spent listening to a great recording with the
mesh removed, it sounds strangled with it back on again. Of course,
YMMV.
I tend to have the same reaction to sorting out bass
management issues. Bass management is a problem with the room and the
speaker's interaction with it. The solution should therefore be with
the room, the speaker's placement, and possibly with judicious use of
subwoofers. Room treatment involves many things. The choice and
placement of furnishings and decorations is a given. Once those are in
place, sound-absorbing panels and traps can be used to fine-tune the
sound. These can be cost-effectively constructed even by a walking
DIY-disaster like myself, but the design and planning is best done with
the assistance of an expert. This whole process can take weeks. Months
even. For example, introducing an absorbing panel can mean that the
speakers might work better in a slightly different position. Or it may
make things different, but not necessarily better, which can leave you
struggling with what to try next.
When it comes to getting the
mid-bass right, though, the interesting question is where I would choose
to end up compared with where you might choose to end up. There is no
absolute right or wrong here, even though some people will tell you
otherwise. Its all about what you prefer to listen to. My room would
end up with bass instruments like tympani having excellent stable
spatial location, and a clearly resolvable texture and tone. Voices -
male voices in particular - would emanate from a human-head-sized point
in space (I really dislike those sonic images that evoke a monster-sized
human head). Good, acoustic recordings are best for this. Heavily
processed studio-based recordings using electronic or amplified
instruments introduce an element of uncertainty regarding what it should
actually sound like. The bass region is also quite crucial to
achieving a sense of acoustic 'space' - the 'you are there' experience,
as opposed to the 'they are here' sound. So, ideally you want to listen
to the type of recordings that best capture that sense of space. But
if the overall sound which best exhibits those characteristics also has a
certain element of incorrect tonal colour to it, well I could - and
would - live with that. How about you?
[There is a rational
argument to be made that if you get the one, you are bound to also get
the other, but life is seldom either that easy or that fair.]
As an aside, why does nobody ever mention loudspeaker tilt? Getting the
tilt angle 'just so' can pay enormous dividends. My B&W 802
Diamonds are tilted forward at a quite alarming angle, an adjustment
which has allowed the sense of acoustic space (or image depth, if you
like) to spring more sharply into focus.
I have never liked the
application of EQ to address mid-bass management. Signal processing
affects the signal - duh! - but in insidious ways. It is an unavoidable
mathematical consequence that any change in the frequency response
brings it with a change in the phase response (and, by extension, in the
transient or impulse response). It is a fair point that you can argue
against the audibility of such issues, particularly if it is executed
well, but my experience is that in signal-processing your audio, you
inevitably pay a price in the revealing/resolving stakes. At least you
do if the original signal was half-decent in the first place.
For the specific problem of sub-bass management, maybe active EQ is the
way to go, but since I have never seriously tried that, I really don't
have anything helpful to say about it.
I want to end up by
suggesting that you need to build up an inventory of standard recordings
that you can go back to time and time again when doing system setup.
Each of these would highlight a particular aspect of sound reproduction.
Before doing anything else, take a handful of these down to your local
high-end audio dealer, and arrange to spend a couple of hours with the
best system he has available - something as far beyond your existing
budget as he can manage. (He will be happy to do this. If not, don't
worry, you'll be able to drop by again and maybe avail yourself of a
bargain or two during his going-out-of-business sale.) This will give
you a point of reference as to what these particular recordings can
(should?) sound like. Here are a few that I like to use:
Stravinsky - The Firebird Suite - Minnesota Orchestra, Eiji Oue, Reference Recordings
The Who - Quadrophenia - (I like the Japanese SHM-SACD version best)
Antonio Forcione & Sabina Sciubba - Meet Me In London - Naim Records
Johnny Cash - American IV; The Man Comes Around - preferably on LP
Mahler - Symphony No 2 - Budapest Festival Orchestra, Ivan Fischer, Channel Classics
The Hoff Ensemble - Quiet Winter Night - 2L
Shirley Horn - I remember Miles
Tchaikovsky - 1812 Overture - Cincinnati Orchestra, Erich Kunzel, (1999 version)
I'm listening to Quiet Winter Night as I type this:)
