Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Horn-Loaded Speakers
In the Thread: Macondo’s lowest channel.
Post Subject: Has Schrödinger's cat moved in unnoticed?Posted by oxric on: 3/2/2011
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 My current bass is very “integrated” and very musical. It low, it is large, it is extended and it is in away grandeur and it has nothing close with faulty Hi-Fi impressiveness. It never take over sound and never indicate the “bass efforts”. It is what it is and listening music with this bass I have no motivations or need to improve anything in lover bass.

However, I do have interests to have my bass to act differently. 

The properly ULF biased room eats bad sounds. The LP clicks, the tape hiss and any other externals noises become not to be noticeable and the room gets that feeling of “space of empty opera theater.” The ULF channel us a mechanism to extend the boundary of the pool into which one dives – the larger pool the less back reflections from the pool boundaries…

I do not have a solution yet and I am keep thinking about it. Right now I am waking around my clients offices, knocking the walls and desks and listening how they response. I am looking for an inspiration, perhaps in a wrong places...

Rgs, Romy the Cat


Romy:

This is indeed a very far-fetched idea and I can fault this approach and the underlying rational in so many different ways that it seems to me pointless to even embark on the argument and enumerate the problems, both practical and on the basis of principle, that beset your search for a solution to a problem that does not exist. This endeavour reminds me of your multi-cell adventure that I seriously doubted at the time, as being anything other than a distraction brought about by frustration with another essential aspect of your playback, the poor electricity you were suffering from and the faulty PurePower unit.

You have on several occasions asserted in strong terms (in fact I believe it is one of the 'Macondo Axioms' ) that one should not attempt to change or improve a system that one has not faulted. It cannot on the face of it make sense to make exceptions when you feel there is something you would like your bass to do, which the present one does not do, whilst it is still described as not faulty. If you want to create an exception to your axiom, fair enough, but what is the ground for doing so? The exception itself must have some ground so the axiom does not loose all value.

What could be the rational for creating such an exception on the basis of a principle that will work only in a narrow range of situations? I can think of at least a few ways of formulating the ground for that exception, but it is evident that none that I can think of can contenance as an exception the notion of 'I need a different kind of bass.' It is far too wide and amounts merely to saying that you just feel like changing the presentaion of your system. You either get rid of the axiom or just admit that the sense of 'requiring something more from your bass' actually is tantamount to admitting there is actually a fault, but it is one which only infinitessimally compromises your playback.

Now assuming that you are nonetheless on safe grounds, and that there is a 'need' as opposed to a hankering for a different kind of bass, one ought to define it and maybe refer to live performances and point out whether this or that element or a combination of elements amount to that required change. There is nothing at all that you have mentioned that even gets close to identifying such an element. You try to describe some vague notion:

 Romy the Cat wrote:

The properly ULF biased room eats bad sounds. The LP clicks, the tape hiss and any other externals noises become not to be noticeable and the room gets that feeling of “space of empty opera theater.” The ULF channel us a mechanism to extend the boundary of the pool into which one dives – the larger pool the less back reflections from the pool boundaries…

 I am looking for an inspiration, perhaps in a wrong places...

Rgs, Romy the Cat


'The properly ULF biased room' idea is an oxymoron if I have ever come across one, begging the question what is its opposite, an 'improperly biased room'? If something is 'biased,' why not bias it whichever way we feel happiest, irrspective of the actual musical performance or recording. If you are talking of the build-up of tension before the beginning of a performance, that sensation of heightened reality, of being there, senses on the alert, awaiting the opening line, the sudden crash of cymbals or the soft touch of a gentle note of the grandpiano, that I think is impossible to recapture, because you cannot record our awareness of sense, time, place and occasion. Anything else, to my untrained mind, is hunting for a chimera.

I regard the LP clicks, tape hiss and other external noises as being an indissociable part of a recording. We cannot be at the performance but we can at least try to stay truthful to what's on the recording, even if we wish these artifacts of the recording engineer's job had been absent. It is one thing to wish for perfection because obviously that's what you seek (which may be a fault in itself inherent to your personality which has nothing to do with your playback) but it is altogether another thing to indulge in wishful thinking and cross the line from science, even science fiction, to the realms of a fantasy world that gets you more and more disconnected from reality and real concerns about real problems in our playback. And I am sure in time you will find real problems that need addressing with your present playback.

Regards
Rakesh





Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site