Synergy

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Isn't it just a question of different peoples' subjective priorities?

Yup, that is very important, imo.

As an example, MartinT on AOS likes BIG music. I shared a few very enjoyable hours with him in his home recently. And his system is extremely capable of reproducing that. Fabulous, actually!

My preference is for somewhat smaller scale music. My system isn't bad at big, but it cannot do BIG the way that Martin's can. Which is a bit of a shame because I like big music, too. But my tastes and preferences extend more into smaller scale music than Martin's. And I would humbly suggest that my system does that end of the scale better than his does.

I am pretty damn sure that Martin would not swap his system for mine. And the same applies t'other way around.

All of us tune our audio systems for our own personal listening preferences.
No system or audio component is perfect (and we probably wouldn't agree on what 'perfect' was, anyway!), and we all have to satisfy our own personal set of listening priorities.

What the Fff is big music and small music - music is music, all we need to do is describe it as such, not daft hi-fi reviewer phrases. The music is the music, people trying to change it for what ever reason for me is the problem not the music.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

OR more to the point from his link.

Judge the Music

Judge the Music not the sound, or, why we can choose completely unsuitable hi fi systems by carefully listening to them.

The subjective evaluation of audio is ultimately the only sensible way to choose a system. Otherwise, like we discovered in the 1970s, you end up measuring the wrong thing, and consequently engineer ‘perfect’ equipment that sounds awful.

Once you decide to evaluate subjectively, you can choose two possible paths. Depending on the path you choose you are likely to end up with two completely different systems.

Evaluating by sound:

Listening to a system and relating to it through the noises it makes. Often this involves describing a performance through use of terminology invented by hi fi reviewers to describe what they hear. Terms like liquid treble, smooth midrange, holographic stereo imagery, subterranean bass …. will often be read in the course of a subjective review.

The alternative is…

Evaluating by music:

This is listening to a system and evaluating how effectively it plays the music. In this case we do not need to invent new words, a thousand years of western music has seen to the availability of descriptive terminology.

So what are these musical criteria?
Well, the basic elements of music are a very good place to start, namely: melody, harmony, rhythm, dynamic and timbre. When we develop a new MusicWorks product, it has to improve in these areas, for example:

tunefulness – are pitch intervals better reproduced. Does the musical interval ‘feel’ right as well as sound right.
harmonic accuracy - Do several coincidental, but differently pitched notes sound like harmony? More importantly does it ‘feel’ like better music because of the harmony?
timing – are simple time signatures more easily heard? Are complex time signatures rendered more understandable? Can subtle timing changes be heard as a musical or emotional effect?
dynamic – when a musician is playing quietly, does the piece still retain emotion? When several instruments play at different volumes, can they each be followed better? Can implied rhythms be heard by slight differences in how loud notes are played?
timbral accuracy – is the tonal envelope of instruments better conveyed? Are different instruments in the same section differentiated better?
performance – this is a measure of how involved the players are in the musical event. Can the energy of the performance be heard? Do instruments really sound like they are being plucked, bowed and hit?
These examples of what a MusicWorks product is designed to do, and we feel, represent the only ways in which any Hi Fi product can be evaluated.

Well I wish I had written it, though I have written something pretty similar lots of times.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

I really do want to re-iterate that it is musical differences that matter, not hi-fi differences. We need to get away from the stock reviewer speak phrases and start to refer to how it affects music not equipment. Equipment is just a means to an end - the end is music, and that is what we should be referring to when describing system performance.

No Richard, music is also a means to an end. It's how it makes us feel that is the end: Equipment is the start, music is the middle and the subjective effect on a human being is the end.

The thing is though, it gets a bit boring hearing about *someone else's* experiences so people tend talk mostly about the equipment and sometimes the music.

Why should someone get bored talking about music - I get bored hearing all the daft non sensical hi-fi phrase trying to describe my amps or any of my choices and designs. It is sooooo simple, listen to the music. Seriously Jason these products have been designed with ears and music not with hi-fi daftness, and if those pompous ego based platitudes as in a typical Ken Kessler type review are used to change or create new NVA product then I would prefer to see everything burnt when I give up.,

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

I have been searching the old forum for a typical Gromit review, with no success. If you find one here or at PFM then give a linky and you will see what I am talking about about emphasis. Though obviously being a musician gives him a head start.

For me it is part of the brainwashing that started in the 70's with the beginning of subjective reviewing. The problem with the publishing companies (Haymarket in particular) was cheapness, and hiring of incompetent buffoons like Chris Frankland who were basically just kids out of college (and not even that sometimes). People with knowledge about music would have cost so we just got a new bullshit vocabulary invented that has now become a norm.

Of course equipment can still be referred to and the musical results based on it. There was a period of reviewing where it was moving this way with reference to a piece of music and how the equipment influenced it. This was happening in the 90's and Jonathon Kettle and Dave Willey (nee Rosam) used to review this way very effectively, but now we seem to have gone back to the old ways of meaningless hack phrases.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Here is a small example from a 1996 Cyber-fi review on the NVA AP30. I am not sure if this was Kettle or Rosam, but it illustrates the point.

ALBUM ANALYSIS

Yuri Bashmet: Glinka, Roslavets, Shostakovich Viola Sonatas (BMG Music RCA Red Seal 9026-61273-2)

The most intense, controlled, sublimely realised recording of the Shostakovich sonata was powerfully conveyed by the AP30. The balance between viola and piano was convincing and the drama, dynamics, tonal clarity and sense of occasion forcefully projected

Purcelli: Dido & Aeneas Taverner Choir and Players Parrott (BBC MM129)

A difficult disc for any system to reproduce. The soloist and choral sections sounded well delineated with a vibrant, crisp projection. The sense of acoustic space and depth was strong, but somewhat contrived. The amp revealed some of the balance difficulties with this recording without allowing them to intrude too grossly with the enjoyable performance

Greig: Sons Anne Sofe von Otter, Bengt Forsberg (DG 437 521-2)

A stunningly beautiful album, precisely reproduced through the AP30. At times von Otter seemed within the same room as me. Some of the tiny flawed details such as cleared throat and manuscript noise from the piano were also captured, heightening the sense of realism

Abdullah Ibrahim/Africa - Tears and Laughter (Enja 3039 2)

The sense of solidity and weight to the sound of this roughly hewn album, particularly in the track Ishmael, was impressively preserved by the AP30. The intensity of the vocal lines and the drama of the percussion was dramatically realised, though the AP30 did not hide some of the strident qualities of the recording.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

I have been told I am being too forceful and people are scared to put their views unless they are thought of or described as idiots. This is so far from the truth as to be silly, we can only know what we have experienced, and that applies to all of us. If people describe and give their experience what more can you ask of them. The *ONLY* people I think are idiots is those that over inflate themselves and think they know everything.

My personality and writing style is forceful, that is the way it is, it will not change. BUT I enjoy disagreement as long as it is constructive as that way we learn, and this thread and the Class D threads are examples of this process at work. PLEASE everyone express a view or experience no matter how insignificant it seems, I am happy to be proved wrong as that way I learn.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

OK I understand your point but you are describing music, music is an emotional experience - or should be. There is NOTHING beyond the music, look at that old review, that is what tells me how the amp performed, not gobble-de-gook.

And before it starts again THIS IS MY OPINION!

[29mile]

Picking up on Richard's point re Gromit as a professional musician he understands how an instrument sounds real-time and how it should be played. But alas we are not all professional musicians so have to guage our hi-fi subjectively using our own personal reference points. A synergised system makes that much easier but again within our personal tastes and experiences.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

I accept your opinion and I understand it.

And my opinion is that music is not an experience, it creates an experience. And that experience lives inside each individual.
The music is objective and unchanging. The experience is subjective, individual and potentially different for everyone.
(which is why some people like class D amps and Tannoy speakers)

And that's my opinion.

Semantics!

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Picking up on Richard's point re Gromit as a professional musician he understands how an instrument sounds real-time and how it should be played. But alas we are not all professional musicians so have to guage our hi-fi subjectively using our own personal reference points. A synergised system makes that much easier but again within our personal tastes and experiences.

We can all do the same, it is a state of mind. OK Gromit has an advantage, but we need to get rid of a mindset that has been imposed on us. Neither JK nor DR are musicians, yet they can describe things in musical terms by referring to the music.