2. misc-audio
  3. 1351604460

neutrality vs musicality

I start this thread hoping people will say their views - there are clearly no answers, and this is pure forum banter, but it will be nice to have such discussion.

I had always thought that the 'the Absolute Sound' is the correct sound model - ie based on fidelity to the original source. To this end I have bought products to attain these goals.

However, I do wonder if this aspiration to neutrality is in fact complete nonsense. I say this for the following reasons:

1. In typical living room here in the UK (9 x 4m) the idea of having a system create a rock concert or full orchestra is not possible. We are in essence creating an illusion - and that is the starting point of detraction from the original sound/source;

2. The SPL of live musicians and the dynamic swings, cannot be reproduced unless in the rarified cases of those who can buy large Rockports (or the like) and have sufficient space;

3. When was the last time any of got to hear wholly unamplified live music - Small London Jazz clubs amplify drums, vocals, horns, and pianos in venues no larger than half a tennis court.

When we go on the upgrade path, we tend to get more of something - whether it be more bass, cleaner treble, whatever - so does that take us closer to neutral - or does it bring about the emphasis within that part of the recording.

I had the chance of hearing a modified Lenco and a Funked up Linn on the same day. I had never really given much either attention - always dismissing the Linn for being 'musical' but if truth be told I thought it was absolutely wonderful - truly enjoyable. It may have been musical, but perhaps being musical is actually closer to neutrality than any other perceived notion on the simple basis that Musicians ordinarily seek to communicate a musical message, and no doubt some enjoyment through their medium of music.

So I guess I leave it at this - is 'Musical' the true neutrality?
lohanimal
viridian's avatar
viridian
4,184 posts
 
Neutrality is a fiction. And it is primarily a fiction because we are dealing with so many complex distortion mechanisms within the recording and playback chain. The reason that there are so many systems and so many components is that we are all matching the distortion type and spectra to a paradigm of music that we have in our head.

If we have two identical systems and one has 3% second harmonic distortion, decreasing linearly with each harmonic out to the 7th and another system with .1% second harmonic distortion .3% third, .1% 4th, .9% 5th, .2% 6th and 1.2% 7th, which is the more "neutral" neutral reproducer. The first has a very linear distortion spectra yet the second has much lower aggregate distortion. I would posit that some of us would find each system more "neutral".

More often than not, I find the concept of neutrality in audio reproduction to be a cloak that justifies buying decisions by the insecure.

Which brings us to fidelity to the source. And if the source is live music in the studio it could be that the el cheapo op amps and miles of wire used in the recording process add odd order harmonics, bleaching the sound. And here comes Johnny Audiophile with his single ended amp that adds second harmonic distortion. Well the amp may be rebalancing the harmonic envelope in some crude way that actually makes the aggregate system of recording and playback closer to the sound in the studio than if a more "neutral" amp was used. This whole concept is a loser's game IMHO.
tmsorosk
1,013 posts
 
As far as building a great system, neutrality is something we need, musicality is something we like. Finding a satisfactory amount of both is the trick.
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
newbee is correct. neither state can be attained. so the issue is academic.

one can aim toward one or the other, but it doesn't matter,as both are elusive goals.
tmsorosk
1,013 posts
 
Maybe there elusive to you Mrtennis. But many of us have found a near perfect balance. I won't say it was cheap or easy.
tubegroover
2,279 posts
 
I agree with Newbee. This whole debate is an exercise in futility as inferred in Viridian's post. To me it is always about accessing the performance. Every system I have heard is different in some way. Some access the music better than others. The other issue that is quite clear is taste. In the absence of "absolute sound" we each make choices. Over time these choices may be replaced with new choices. One man's "neutrality" is another's "musical". The real difficulity for me to accept is that replicating live music is impossible but enjoyment and engagement in the performance of music reproduced is not and at the end of the day that's all that matters. Sounds natural = less fatigue = more listening = more enjoyment and less analysis.
More to discover