In Reply to: Re: Beauhorn Virtuoso Ref. posted by adog on November 7, 2000 at 17:30:55:
Hi Jeffrey,> > you and I are a million miles away in our hearing < <
No I doubt that. Hard and thin is hard and thin. It makes the sound fatiguing and not very enjoyable. It sucks.
But you take 2 products which I know to be highly musical and the antithesis of hard and thin and accuse them of having characteristics which they do not. So why should that be?
Well firstly, lets get back to the first law of hi-fi. A product cannot sound better than it basically is. It can however sound a lot worse. Example. A low res. component can never produce high res. music but a high res component, when not properly matched and set up can sure produce low res. sound.
So lets take 'hard and thin'. This means that a component is lacking something somewhere in its bass region. Usually this lack of warmth and weight is caused by the component not being able to fully develop a complete and even bass response. The component is not reproducing the full signal. Given that the component has a problem in the bass, its not unlikely to suppose that if its missing bass, its also missing part of the signal in the mids or tops and usually the subtle air and detail are the first to go. The unit sounds closed in, compressed, hard. Taken all together, it sounds as you describe.
But a hi-fi is the sum of its parts. In the above example, it could be the component that's at fault, but is could equally well be another problem with the set up. Poor mains supply, high RFI in the vicinity, poor vibration control, a fault in one of the interconnects, difficult room acoustics, a bad system ground, poor component matching, in fact anything where the end result is some loss of signal will make a system sound hard and thin.
In this scenario I could insert a perfect component into the chain and if it is high resolution, like a CJ-14 for example, it will simply reveal more of the problem. I assume you bought the CJ-14 because you liked its sound. I also assume you got rid of it because you could never make it sound good in the context of your system.An example from my system:
I reported that the bass on Cafe Blue was overblown. Rich Morgan came back and said that on his full range Dunlavy system, the bass was powerful but not overblown. Given the first law above, I clearly had a problem.
I changed the power cables in my system back to the originals and the bass improved. I changed the speaker cables from high-end to some left overs from years back and the bass improved even more. Conclusion: My after-market cables were causing the bass problem.
Hmmmm. Actually it turned out that one of my input tubes had become microphonic and the increased bass introduced by the better cables was exacerbating the problem. Took a long time to find the problem
So to conclude, when someone logs onto the web and reports that a component that I (and many others) know to be highly musical sounds thin and hard, I immediately jump to the only logical conclusion i.e. the installation is losing information somewhere and the various components are doing a great job of revealing the loss. The better the component, the better the job it does.
Again Jeffrey, remember the first law of hi-fi. A thin and hard sounding component cannot sound rich and full. Period. But a rich and full sounding component can very easily be made to sound thin and hard.
> > I get the impression only you know how to properly set up a system < <
No, but I do have enough experience to know that when an allround exellent component sounds poor, one should look elsewhere for the problem.
Steve
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: A likely explanation... - Steve 11/7/0023:41:15 11/7/00 (0)