Texture

I plead indulgence on two counts. First, I risk being accused of lighting fires irresponsibly (as there may be smoulders from flames in neigbouring threads). Second, I am about to quote myself, never good form:

"Our sternest test was the 'Dick Gaughan Effect'. Not only could we hear what he was singing - that was plain with Ncode, and greatly enhanced with the addition of the BC evo4 - but he had beguiling texture: we could almost feel his Arran sweater!"

This was the net effect of adding a mains conditioner, but could have been a cable, metallic stand or some other add-on.

When sitting in a room with a small jazz combo, its not unknown for talk of texture of the singer's voice, or of the sax' or double bass. This is 'live' music of course. With hifi, we see but through a glass darkly - but for me, I equate good hifi with clarity in that glass. I know that I cannot actually feel that Arran sweater through the glass. However, I do want to sense the texture of voice, be that the singer or the sax.

 

ditton,
I understand the meaning of texture in this context, i think the problem arises when people use other terms to describe the same thing, therefore not understanding what we mean by texture.

 

I think you're confusing texture with realism. In music texture refers to the number of strands being played at any one time. Sensually texture relates is how a substance feels. Music and hi-fi are generally aural sensations and as far as I'm aware doesn't really have a feel. Except of course for trouser flapping bass which you sometimes get from top drawer PA systems, or vibrations through the floor when speakers aren't sufficiently isolated

 

I always used texture to describe the sum effect of micro-detail. The sort of thing that you may not consciously notice in the sounds but when it is there you just know it seems more real. I found my mains conditioner added a bit of this.

 

We could restrict terms strictly, so that bitter/sweet belong to taste, and texture belong only to touch (and maybe also sight), but that sweater is the anchor for the metaphor. And metaphor is metaphor. 'parting is such sweet sorrow', as the man said.

I was trying not to be confused about realism. I was first applying the texture metaphor to live music, which I agree I mostly heard rather than felt or saw (although I did look and was getting good vibrations).

I want realism from hifi not texture, metaphors associated with listening behind glass maybe.

However, I think that you are right about texture and strands, using this to describe music. What is so interesting about Gaughan though, is that his voice has such variations that it has a weave like effect - honest, I'm not just BBC2ing it!

But then we want to describe how recorded music sounds (not just live music - allowing me to hear what Coltrane played in 1954, say), and also to describe how changes in the hifi set-up (from a tweak, say) have affect on our appreciation of the music. I think that allows texture back in.

Mind you, I've never experienced 'trouser flapping bass' but I do like the metaphor.

 

Have heard trouser flapping bass recently in a standmount

maybe get you over sometime to experience it ditton, BTW i understand what you mean about texture, music seems more real, if you haven't heard it then you won't know what it is, I herd texture in the music I heard at your house.

 

http://www.hexibase.com/ttb/vid04.wmv

not trouser flapping but if she was wearing trousers then i'm sure they'd BE flapping along with her hair, kidneys and assorted other internal organs...
cheers


julian.

 

Hi AK, Glad you enjoyed the music through my set-up. I do too. And I was waiting to the opportunity to describe the effect of placing my speakers on top of your diy granite stands! It certainly removed floor-born vibration to my feet; and I reckon it seemed to remove interference, thus enhancing clarity and timing. No added texture though.

I would like to make it over to Paisley sometime. Perhaps we Edinburghers should organise a bus load. Shrink came by last week to visit his ex (the epos es22s); and then I got to demo the Sonic T and cardboard speakers to him and Dunkyboy, before he showed off his ATCs being driven by his new TT hobby. Now the pops and crackles through the ATCs do have texture, but I'm not sold on looking past that which is apparently what one is meant to do.

 

Personally, I'm with James (Bub/The Devil). "Texture" is meaningless magazinespeak.

 

tones the word may be meanigless, but those of us who use it know what we mean, probably has a lot to do with microdynamics, Bub hasn't any texture prolly as a result of his supports, thats why he doesn't understand it

 

Texture is to sound as sweet tasting is to colour!
Texture is a musical term and has been misappropriated to describe something else, detail and realism I think.
Ditton people who hear arron jumpers often have appointments with the men in white coats shortly afterwards!

 

...which is also meaningless magazinespeak, is it not?

 

Texture refers to touch and sight. To hear texture is surely like smelling it or tasting it?

 

not if you have heard it and understand the metaphor, how else would we describe it?

Andi it's a metaphor, but surely if the system makes the sound tangible, then we can apply words like texture to desrcibe it.

 

But surely you associate different sounds with different textures. Try closing your eyes and getting someone to rub a few items in the room, I bet you can hear what the texture of the material is. To me, its this same realism and detail in the sound that good hi-fi can bring through for the instruments.

 

Off to a flying start with that one...

Bub certainly hasn't any 'texture', prolly because we made it all up after reading a hi-fi mag.

You can't even agree what it is!

 

Are you insane?

 

Way Hey

This one is gunna be fun

Anyone got some popcorn?

 

James we can't agree on the words used to describe it, tis not the same thing as not hearing what it is

 

I prefer sugared, not salted.