How will we be tailoring sound to our tastes in the future?

[617]

The review of the new Benchmark amplifier has got me thinking about how hifi as a hobby relates the the ever escalating technical standards in our signal chain. Some would argue that amplification has been a 'solved problem' for some time now, but that argument is even more persuasive with amplifiers such as the nCore and Benchmark and a handful of others which offer 150W+ power, have high end DAC-like distortion and noise figures, and are agnostic with respect to the load they drive. Amplifiers have traditionally been chosen due to their sound, which by definition must mean that they deviate from some ideal in some particular way, with some deviations being preferable to some, and some deviations being preferable to others.

This raises an interesting question for me, however. Audiophiles have generally liked being able to make small adjustments to their system to dial in a particular sound they like, but the products we have now, and will be seeing more of in the future, are so hi-fi that they probably won't sound that different. Can we really say different top tier dacs sound dramatically different? Or now, amplifiers?

I've been thinking a lot recently about phono cartridges, which affect sound in many ways. The distortions they introduce are complex, with each cartridge offering different soundstage, detail character, frequency response, and so on. Is it that crazy to think that these devices can have a sound signature which makes music more enjoyable, and easier to listen to, to the individual who chooses them?

Are transducers the final frontier? Or will someone design a box which enables people to dial in the sound they like? A little noise here, a little crosstalk there, a little H2 distortion here, a little dynamic smoothing there?

In other words - when our hifi is perfect, what do we do when we don't like how it sounds?

 

[solderdude]

Are transducers the final frontier?

Yes, always has been, always will be.

 

[617]

Yes, always has been, always will be.

Obviously you're correct, but tweaking transducers is not easy if you buy them in a big well integrated speaker. I'll probably move to a modular set up eventually so I can do just that, but swapping tweeters is lot more involved than buying a new phono cart.

 

[solderdude]

In other words - when our hifi is perfect, what do we do when we don't like how it sounds?

There is room conditioning when done with the equipment and there is always the possibility to EQ and finally.... we could all complain at those recording venues that f* up their job.

I always found that a good recording sounds excellent on equipment that performs well in a proper listening room.

I don't think swapping drivers is a good idea unless one is really knowing what they are doing. Not the thing your average hifi listener could do him/her-self with a desirable effect.

 

[PierreV]

I think it depends if the audiophile finds his pleasure in the result or in the process.

In my case, I enjoy the process more than the result. I am not ashamed to say that I have some very bad systems (from an objective point of view) I really love to listen to. I don't think it is wrong to like poorly measuring stuff or that people should be stigmatized for not liking the Harman curve... I also have systems configured by the book, and I enjoy them as well. But I tend to swap stuff around a lot, just to restart the process.

Also, while I am extremely happy with the result my Hypex kits provide, I was really disappointed that they came under the form of a pre-assembled lego kit, with no room for error and no soldering required...

Living at all times with a "perfect" system is a bit like eating the same perfectly balanced, microbiome and genome tuned diet, over and over...

 

[Purité Audio]

The records are different though, and that is what I want to hear. The ‘more perfect’ the system the more obvious the differences.
Keith

 

[invaderzim]

I'm waiting for the system that tracks my position and which way I'm facing in the room to continually make adjustments so it always sounds the best.

 

[617]

I'm waiting for the system that tracks my position and which way I'm facing in the room to continually make adjustments so it always sounds the best.

You might like headphones

 

[Cosmik]

It's a fantasy that audiophiles tailor their sound. You are presented with a wiggly line - two for stereo. All you can do is smudge it to varying degrees. The wiggly line cannot be deconstructed, something useful done with the elements, and then put back together. Automatically, with every recording of every type of performance. By choosing a transistor or a piece of wire.

What is much closer to reality is that your brain can change your perception of the sound with the assistance of mental crutches of various kinds. This gives the illusion of tailoring the sound. The trick is to learn to do it without having to spend money .

 

[BillG]

In other words - when our hifi is perfect, what do we do when we don't like how it sounds?

Run it through a DSP of some sort, hardware or software, and enjoy the results... I do so on occasion myself with some analog modeling or ambiophonics software.

Then again, I'm probably the wrong person to get involved with regarding this question, since I'm not an audiophile and I've no desire to constantly tweak my equipment in effort to achieve some elusive perfection.

 

[Soniclife]

I'm waiting for the system that tracks my position and which way I'm facing in the room to continually make adjustments so it always sounds the best.

Look at the Bacch thing, there is a thread on this forum about it.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I'm waiting for the system that tracks my position and which way I'm facing in the room to continually make adjustments so it always sounds the best.

Why? Does the band do that when you turn your head at a concert?

 

[PierreV]

The records are different though, and that is what I want to hear. The ‘more perfect’ the system the more obvious the differences.
Keith

Yes, that's a valid point. On the other hand, a lot - and I mean an awful lot - of the records I liked in the 80ies and 90ies are very poorly recorded and a good system makes that painfully apparent.

And now, for the ultimate confession that will forever haunt me , I do also have a system for those. It is very good at making a lot of noise and isn't fussy about details. Plus, somehow, it did not rot.

 

[Juhazi]

There's nothing new with near-perfect dacs and amplifiers. Perfect-by-listening sound with moderate price was achieved already in '80s. Now 40 years later we still have good variety of tube amps, fullranges speakers, vinyl decks and cartidges for the afficionados of musical, analog sound!

So called hi-end hifi has actually never been focused on perfect sound reproduction but "special" sound and extravaganza. Another end of the line is mobile hifi (headgear) and a rising genre is wireless music boxes. Sound bars for TVs sell much better than 5-12.1-5 AV-receivers.

With dsp small table "radios" can give very pleasant sound with modest price. My guess is that mid-price stereo and 5.1 hifi will die during next ten years. I have noticed a really bad degradation of quality of low-mid price Sony, Yamaha etc. gear - a good bad example is this https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-and-measurements-of-sony-uda-1-dac-amp.7586/

 

[invaderzim]

Why? Does the band do that when you turn your head at a concert?

I don't tend to dust the concert venue like my living room. Or chase a rabbit around he concert.

With the exception of concerts in actual special designed halls I don't really aspire for my home system to sound like a live concert. Live concerts are fun for the experience but rarely sound truely excellent.

Plus the room correction systems do their thing to make it sound good in the listening position and then I end up sitting in the floor of to the side working on a project of some sort

 

[RayDunzl]

Living at all times with a "perfect" system is a bit like eating the same perfectly balanced, microbiome and genome tuned diet, over and over...

Noooo....

It's like having the same Michelin Four Star Chef perfectly and resolutely prepare a multitude of dishes made with ingredients of indeterminate quality, origin, age, and quantity.

Sushi/Sashimi Rule: If your dish smells like fish (unless it's mackerel), don't eat it. You'll be sorry later.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Although transducers (and arguably enclosures) are by far the least transparent components at present, I think it is often exaggerated just how bad they are.

DSP can basically negate frequency response irregularities (measurement is actually the weakest link here), while good drivers crossed over at reasonable frequencies can keep nonlinear distortion to around 0.1% at 90dB in the ear’s most critical 1-5kHz range, which is inaudible to barely audible to most, and certainly not unpleasant. Bass requires larger transducers of course, but we are not very sensitive to distortion down there. And although mechanical components take time to to settle after being excited, there is not much evidence of which I’m aware that the modest ringing of well-performing transducers is actually audible (this is due to forward masking).

So perhaps the future is not so much in tweaking a system by swapping drivers, but rather in speakers with their drivers arrayed in such a way that the user has some control over things like polar response, optimisation for specific listening positions/configurations, etc. Speakers like the BeoLab already claim to be part-way there - although ofc this can’t be done with physically small speakers.

And then DSP too ofc for room correction, tone control, the addition of distortion to taste, etc. etc.

I agree @Cosmik that half of this stuff is imaginary, but I think some aspects are not - particularly those that affect frequency response.

 

[Sal1950]

In other words - when our hifi is perfect, what do we do when we don't like how it sounds?

These are the best of times for the audio enthusiast. The chain of components behind the speakers, when chosen for their modern engineered interface , and when compared under blind conditions, has been mostly transparent for well over 3 decades. You can put together a digital system that any hifi nut from the 70s and earlier would have killed for, and do it at a fraction of the cost when the dollar values are equalized.
What can they do? Same things they've always done, They can add eq of all sort from simple tone controls to digital parameteric or modern dsp. They can upsample from pure stereo to a 13+ channel immersive soundfield. Some even use compromised sources like cassette tape, vinyl, even RTR falls quite behind today's SOTA. More
I know few if any here that remain totally committed to a pure SOTA playback that aren't adding in some flavor of their own. (excluding speaker choice discussions).
These are the best of times for the audio enthusiast.

 

[JJB70]

A hi-fi system is a tool, its purpose is to facilitate the enjoyment of music. If your system allows you to enjoy music then it is doing its job. Digital sources, DACs and amplifiers achieved audible transparency years ago, yes measured performance can improve but for DACs it went beyond what is audible years ago. Manufacturers do colour sound to differentiate their products and clearly many people do prefer a coloured sound. I agree with Andreasmaaan that speakers tend to get a bad rap, OK their measured performance may not be in the same class as DACs but there is no shortage of great sounding speakers, especially if well set up and with a little attention to the listening room. I tend to believe that the future of music reproduction is wireless active system speakers and headphones depending on listening preference. Conventional hi-fi and audio gear is already a niche and I think even high end will increasingly shift to active wireless speakers with a small niche of analogue for hobbyists. The issue stopped being about the replay audio equipment years ago in terms of sound quality in my view, the pinch point is the quality of recordings which in many genres fell of a cliff thanks to over use of compression. Peter Aczel was right years ago when he stated that the most important thing is the recording quality, if that sucks then the sound will suck regardless. A terrific recording will shine even on a modest system. If people want to boost sound quality then I think they are looking in completely the wrong direction if looking at DACs, amplifiers etc, it is record labels that hold the key. And unfortunately the reality is that the shift to small BT speakers and the needs of car audio means that the record labels are probably getting it right for the majority of music buyers who want lots of room filling noise from BT speakers.

 

[gikigill]

On the topic of DSP, I have been using Sonarworks for my Headphones and believe we have a long way to go in response to DSP and how we fine tune and apply it.

The best part is it tailors sound to my taste while still keeping the character of the headphone mostly intact. The HD800 is a long time favourite and it fixed the bass and the 6khz treble spike nicely. Its the best compromise that can be achieved in my scenario and makes a technical wonder like the HD800 even better for me.

A lot of aftermarket car audio setups also use DSP to enhance the sound of your stock system if you are upgrading all the drivers and amplifiers in the system. Results in a system that looks bone stock while delivering much better sound than before.

On a lighter note, the final frontier will be when we get bionic earplants that allow us to hear the 90khz frequency response of our favorite Sony can.