Reviewing the reviewers ...

I agree with Paul. Synergy is a duff concept. Components are either transparent (bugger the signal up minimally) or they aren't. A collection of reasonably transparent components should work together in most any combination.

Speakers are a bit different, since they have to work in a specific space, and vary a lot according to room and position IME.

-- Ian

 

Iain -

Im suprised that you think that. Not that I dont understand the point of view - u sure you arent smoking naimana leaves?

My opinion is close to that of Marcos - I listen to something, and the only thing I ask is ... does this make my music sound better?
.. and thats better as in more enjoyable, more listenable, more like the way it sounds when I play a song in my head when Im walking down the street.


Im not looking for ''the one true light' ... I dont want to be a recording engineer. I want to be a man in his house with a hifi that adds to his listening pleasure.

I wouldnt agree with 'engineering in' a compromise... but correct me if Im wrong Marco please - perhaps you dont think this is a good starting point for putting a system together either, just that two particular components iron out each others flaws?

Asking a question - the Linn LP12 was designed in its original form in the 1970s. In 2003 it is still a very popular model, and world renowned. Who feels that the 'well tempered deck' will attain such a status in 10 years, nevermind 30?

The LP12. Its British, its world famous. Youve gotta love it for that. Its the hifi equivelant of an E type Jag - ideosyncratic, kind of cool, technically a bit behind the times, but still a classic.



Chris

 

Chris, I'm not a Naimie at all. They're some of the least transparent components at their price points I can think of, TBH. Possibly why they have such a following - if you like their colourations, you won't get them anywhere else. Fair enough, if that's what you like, it's what you like, much as if you prefer SETs and horns, or whatever. If you're really after high fidelity you don't want colour of any sort. (Note that this is not necessarily a statement of my own preference, just a general comment about the concept of "synergy". My system is not uncoloured, but I like the way it is.)

-- Ian

 

What does 'hifi' mean?

I've never been aware of the notorious LP12 mid-bass colouration or emphasis, but if I were I'd rather hear it than obscure it.

Paul

 

There's nothing wrong with this concept, but it's often the case that in order to create the most musically satisfying system, the individual talents of a particular component (or components) are of such importance to the listener that they warrant inclusion despite the component (or components) having obvious 'weaknesses' in other areas. These 'weaknesses' can often be successfully counter-balanced by the effect of the partnering components making up the rest of the system.

Taking my system of Naim CDS2/XPS2/52/135s/Spendor SP100s as an example, I chose the Spendors to introduce an element of neutrality to help dilute the well-known 'mid-forward' coloration of Naim electronics and therefore produce a more musically rewarding experience from my own perspective. I love the 'exciting' sound of ('Olive' era) Naim electronics, and will quite happily live with the undoubted midrange coloration in order to experience their (IMO) unique music-making ability, but I'd rather not have this coloration further emphasised through a pair of Naim speakers! It's a question of achieving the right balance for one's own needs.

Assembling a system of 'reasonably transparent' components doesn't automatically guarantee the most desirable result - I would regard this as simply a 'safe' option. In my experience, the rewards are often far greater if one is willing to experiment and look at the bigger picture.

Marco.

 

Also, let's not forget that there are also other reasons why different components go or don't go together.

For example some speakers present a load that some amplifiers can't handle very well while others are much easier to drive.

Steve

 

Absolutely correct, Chris. One doesn't go looking for compromises, but sometimes a component's talents vastly outweighs its deficiencies, and one simply must have these talents regardless of anything else (with the hope of minimising the deficiencies elsewhere in the system).

I get the feeling some people can't be bothered going the extra mile to obtain optimum results, and instead would rather take the safe option and lose out on that extra bit of magic.

"My opinion is close to that of Marcos - I listen to something, and the only thing I ask is ... does this make my music sound better?"

That is always my only concern :MILD:

Marco.

 

Well, I did make an exception for speakers in my original comment.

Marco: you're not talking about component synergy, just personal preference. You like the way Spendors sound with Naim. I like the way valves sound with ATC active speakers. Neither is a "synergy" from which anyone can draw general conclusions, both are just expressions of particular tastes. People tend to draw all kinds of odd conclusions about how component x is "made" to go with component y, when what they really mean is that particular combination is what they themselves like. Reviewers do this all the time.

The point stands, that if you're really after high fidelity you should aim for transparency. Doesn't mean many of us actually go that route, myself included.

-- Ian

 

transparent, compensation, colouration

Interesting development of this thread.

The problem about any colouration or anything else is the amount.

It is nice to say that you compensate this and that but with components which have a lot of colouration (and in this thread there are enough listed) more you try to compensate more you get out of the reality and go into your own world. That is not bad but just keep it for yourself and don't expect that that's something also for somebody else.

I would compare it with the salt in the food. Today most of the people have got used to eat food with salt. Even the quantity is getting more and more even if the doctors are trying to sensibilize us to put less because it could cause health problems.
If you put in a pinch too much salt in the food it is possible to compensate it with other ingredients. The result is not eliminating the excess of salt but just putting another flavour on it so you notice the overdosis of salt less. This way of compromise maybe can work when the colouration is not so intensive, but when you talk about some of the equipments mentioned in this thread, then you are talking about lot of colouring. Trying to compensate this amount with other equipments then you will have a very nice cocktail. You maybe will like the result because you anyway get used to the mixture day after day you do your "experiments". For somebody who is used to hear live music or music with a "transperent" equipment, the result is ... terrible (positively said).
What I know is that people who eat food without adding salt seem to enjoy much more the flavours of the different ingrediants which they also can recognize better than those who eat with salt.
If you want to make yourself a cocktail then good for you but those people who have heard a system, which goals is to have the less colouration possible, would never, never appreciate a cocktail-system unless other factors which have nothing to do with music are involved.

In this context there are two other points which I would like to consider quickly.
- what does transparent mean
- how do we listen to music

I have noticed that lots of people believe that transparency is synonym of without colour and therefore associate a system which is very transparent to a system which reproduces music without "colours". Well that's not what I mean by transparence.

Listening to music can be done in many ways and can give diametrical opposite opinions about the same system. When we listen to a system, think also about all the disturbing factors like lights on, persons around other sources of sound and also the volume.
How often did you have the opportunity to be able to concentrate completely on the music played in a demo or even at your place when you had a unit to be tested? How often is it that you are really alone with the music? This is a very important point when we want to compare systems or also interpretations.

 

Heuristic for determining 'transparency'. Various recordings sound different.

Heuristic for determining 'good transparency'. Recordings of good music work regardless of their technical quality.

Heuristic for determining 'good dynamics' or 'uncompressed'. As you turn the volume up the system sounds the same. You can only tell it is loud when you turn it down and it sounds quiet for a while. Take care with this sort of system not to make yourself deaf.

Paul

 

Heuristic is a great word. However, even after looking it up in a dictionary, I still don't know what you mean!

 

I'm not sure about your transparency definition. I though it meant that if the recording's no good you'll hear it.

I like your other definition though with one proviso. Because of the Fletcher Munson curves (that illustrate that human hearing is more sensitive in the mid-range) there is a subjective increase in the amount of bass and treble as you turn up the wick.

Steve

 

<< Heuristic >> Chambers Huge Dic: 'Unfortunate, but very rare condition affecting Linnies [sick] whereby all sense of timing disappears.