I would say one pans on a line, ( or a curved line since it always feels the same distance from you)the other feels more like its on an thin oval track in front of you. Left to right is on the front tracks, then it turns and goes back right to left on the back tracks.
My rather simple analogy for the relationship of soundstage and imaging is like looking at a radar screen. The entire radar screen is the soundstage and the imaging is the blip(s) on that screen. That is a 2 dimensional screen representing 3 dimensional terrain…it’s up to the user to interpret if those blips are accurately placed within that terrain.
So i personaly seperate these two and i just stumbled across the perfect song to desmostrate why
On a highly resoving system that doesn’t quite have the right tactility to it the clarinet here sounds tectured, full bodied, propperly detailed, can even have wholisticaly good timbre, but is too pleasent/smooth.
That clarinet shouldn’t be smooth.
The texture on susvara is objectively just truly top tier, but I find that it can be extremely difficult to give susvara propper tactility (wa33 and aic are the only amps ive had scuceed so far). This is the primary reason i prefer the He6 4-screw ive had on loan for a bit on the majority of systems regardless of the slight loss in resolution and image clarity/seperation. Failing at this trait is also a sure way to make me not enjoy gear (arya, GSX-mini, spring 3, etc). I think the best headphone ive heard in regard to doing tactility correctly is d8kp (especialy on masskobo)
1 Like
Would you guys consider the leading edge and transients the same thing?
Example: To me the hd800s has a very sharp, clean, defined leading edge. And to me that is also present in raising the texture and, for lack or better words, define the outline of details
Contrast to the the HD6xx, which isnt as sharp and has a much softer rounded feel in front
I think they are the same thing, a leading edge is just a specific aspect of a transient, leading edge is attack
I’m a visual guy and this helped me out a lot in the way I search for descriptives now.
I think it’s easy to fall in love with attack, it’s one of the most notable aspects of sounds that have power, impact and it’s the first thing we hear after all. Thinking about sound though, I feel decay is what most gives sound that organic tactile sense. Where sustain and more importantly release is what give us room and space information. Attack and decay are more location and placement. I’m sure everyone will have a slightly different take on it but I think as long as one is consistent in how they perceive the sound, the specifics of the works are less important. It’s how we instantly know something is just better, without being able to articulate it as well as some people can.
10 Likes
Honestly I don’t think you can really separate it out that much, it’s all important, if one sounds off so will the others, I’m sure all aspects contribute to all aspects
2 Likes
In terms of musicianship you do separate them out to a degree in that you are seeking to control them in order to give the music the right emotion. Attack tends to add drama, tension, a sense of excitement, decay can add melancholy, peacefulness and so on. They are, with analogue instruments, directly related to physical action in how you produce sound on the instrument. I often have wondered if many audiophiles are using the words the same way as musicians do because it doesn’t always seem to be the case. I wonder then if they once did but have come to describe much more technical aspects of sound reproduction as we have moved into a more digital era of music. It’s not clear to me exactly how they two viewpoints differ and, as I have studied music creation much more than reproduction I do sometimes find the audiophile version really confusing.
2 Likes
It’s just that certain words like slam and fun usually get associated with a leading edge or attack etc. But overall I do agree, when something is off, it’s off. Interesting what you mention @Gothique in that in the end to create a sound using a musical instrument, these words, attack, decay, sustain, release have a physical action associated with them. Yet listening to them and using them to describe what we hear especially in an ensemble does not have to take into consideration the physicality of the creation.
2 Likes
Ye, also in production you want to separate them out to shape them or change them to your desired outcome, and other forms of processing that indirectly affect them
Some of them, others no, most likely because creation vs reproduction are different things with different goals and needs, there are some similarities, but other differences
I would disagree on fun, since that’s commonly just used as a catch all for enjoyable imo, but slam potentially, although as per @Draaly’s separation of slam and punch, I think punch would be more attack, whereas slam is more in the middle, because I typically associate slam with more weight and more drawn out, and weight is probably more in the middle of the transient than the ends
1 Like
I honestly always thought and used decay as how things go back to silence/fade out. Since it is dying and decaying away. Ie: the BHC seems to have a slower decay meaning it lasts a little longer and trails off as it dies. Also in turn this kind of adds a bit more space.
Punch is another word, and it’s very descriptive yet I always find myself using the word impact. If the discussions we’re having here aren’t proof positive that in the end, you just have to listen to things for yourself, I don’t know what is.
3 Likes
I found it interesting listening to the BF2 for the first time and posting that I could hear a difference in the decay of instruments that some replies were encouraging me to wait longer before forming an opinion. I understand why now. I could hear more texture and realism in the quality of vibrato and note decay in violins specifically. I know it well enough from experience to know it was closer to live music and that there was more information there than the Jnog gives, but not precisely how it was apparent. It’s only a few weeks on that I can articulate what I heard with this conversation at just the right moment.
Other things that are less to do with musicianship have taken a lot longer to hear, just as people said they would. Sound-stage, separation the character of the sound sent by the dac to the amp. I’m having the same kind of experience with the Mutex 1.1+ now. I’ll post more on that in a few weeks when the other shoe drops.
4 Likes
I think @Gothique 's point with music is also very valid. In guitar land sustain really focuses more on how long a note can keep going. There is a little crossover with many also considering how long the meat of it can go (before it fades out past use)
1 Like
I’ve always associated ADSR with synths, when I wrote audio software it was a human interpretable way to shape a sound.
Apparently the original idea dates back to Hammon Organs Circa 1940.
It’s not actually a very good model of how instruments sound, it’s at best a gross simplification, but it doesn’t seem a terrible way to discuss what we hear.
4 Likes
When the term “Ethereal” is used. I have some thoughts but I’ll look to others first.
Gotta jump in, whether I’m right or wrong, cause I’d use that term to describe the 880 to an extent.
To me it means an airy and soft sound overall. So not warm, not as much impact, a bit thinner, some treble sparkle (which to me always translates to “magical”). To a lesser degree, I’d also say it means sounds aren’t close or around you since that would make them more tangible.
3 Likes
I’d just personally describe it as the definition of the word, very light and delicate that ends up unnatrual but in a positive way. I’d say if you’ve heard some of the higher end stats they can end up in this range where they are so fast and nuanced they feel more real than real, which is irritating to some but very desirable for others lol
5 Likes
I think every time an audiophile word is used, it needs to be taken in context with the rest of the statement or even the entirety of the review. Words in themselves cannot convey a story they need the context. I think it’s always best to start with the Webster’s definition of the story and then go from there.
6 Likes
So just on a personal level, I use the term almost exclusively to describe a presentation style much more so than I do a signatue. When I think “etherial” I think large stage that places instuments within a light background and not well defined stage limits. I agree estats tend to do this best, but arya v2, ibasso sr-2 and trallii are other good examples of this.
Im my mind, etherial is basioclly the antihisis of audeze staging (with LCD-R beiong the most intense ive heard) with its small, well defined stage and utter nothingness between images
2 Likes