What is fake detail?

[sblrog]

Hi. Can someone explain to me what 'fake' detail is (I understand it has to do with accentuated treble) and, more importantly, how it differs from, I guess, 'real' detail?

Thanks.

 

[isostasy]

When an affordable product has an elevated treble response it is described as 'fake' detail, as opposed to 'real' detail, which is what you perceive when you spend above a certain threshold on a product with an elevated treble response. This threshold changes over time, leading once 'detailed' or 'technical' headphones to no longer be described as such once more expensive headphones come out which, naturally, are able to reproduce more 'details' from music. As we all know, there is no limit to the amount of 'detail' which can be extracted from an audio recording, therefore it will always be possible to create more expensive headphones with an ever-increasing ability to 'resolve details'.

 

[sejarzo]

As far as I know, it is just accentuated treble.

While I have never seen an article/paper that confirms my thoughts, I have always assumed that it's a fairly straightforward psychoacoustic phenomenon. The farther one is from a source, the less high frequency content one hears and the "duller"/"less detailed" one perceives it to be.

 

[DVDdoug]

Sometimes distortion gives the impression of detail. I just try to avoid all of that vague terminology. Sometimes I'll say "dull" or "bright" but I try to clarify that I mean cut or boosted high frequencies.

You can find online audiophile dictionaries but it's kind-of useless. The definitions are usually just as vague as the word and if you know what you're talking about you can use clear scientific-engineering terminology.

If you ignore intentional effects like compression, etc., there's ONLY noise, distortion, frequency response, and analog sources and speakers/acoustics you can have time-related errors. See Audiophoolery

 

[majingotan]

I like fake detail though as they bring those treble peaks front and center, just like how I hear a live percussion in real life rather than the subdued presence from standard IEM Harman curve hence I use an IEM with those treble peak in its tuning

 

[Speedskater]

In another forum "DF96" (RIP) responded to a question:

How do you know this "detail" is in the recording? There is reasonable anecdotal evidence that some people confuse noise and interference with 'detail' - for example the popularity of badly-made DIY cables.

DF96
10-May-2014

 

[majingotan]

In another forum "DF96" (RIP) responded to a question:

How do you know this "detail" is in the recording? There is reasonable anecdotal evidence that some people confuse noise and interference with 'detail' - for example the popularity of badly-made DIY cables.

DF96
10-May-2014

Unless the DIY cable has audible distortion and noise measurements, or it has horrible impedance effects it doesn't affect perceived detail at all

 

[Cote Dazur]

Can someone explain to me what 'fake' detail is

If part of the FR is playing louder, it will attract our attention and may lead us to hear something that was always there but had not noticed. While doing that, the elevated part of the signal might hide an other part of the signal, so we are not getting more details, just paying attention to different details.
A smooth, more neutral, FR, will be more truthful to the original signal, not steering our attention to one particular frequency, letting us decide what we want to concentrate on while listening to a piece of music.

 

[Chrispy]

In another forum "DF96" (RIP) responded to a question:

How do you know this "detail" is in the recording? There is reasonable anecdotal evidence that some people confuse noise and interference with 'detail' - for example the popularity of badly-made DIY cables.

DF96
10-May-2014

I thought that was badly made expensive cables marketed to "audiophiles"?

Personally can't say I've ever worried about fake detail or seen it discussed much, but elevated treble sounds about right.

 

[OldHvyMec]

Fake detail? "I'm Brad Pitt's body double." There is a fake detail.

I'm sorry I had too.

 

[Speedskater]

Unless the DIY cable has audible distortion and noise measurements, or it has horrible impedance effects it doesn't affect perceived detail at all

John Atkinson at Stereophile magazine wrote:

I think that what the listener perceives with this cable is that at low levels, the sound is fattened and made more coherent-sounding by the dominant second-harmonic distortion. In addition, the presence of background noise cannot be dismissed, as there is some evidence that introducing small amounts of random noise results in a sound that is preferred by listeners. At higher signal levels, transients are accompanied by bursts of higher harmonics. However, these subside as quickly as they appeared. The overall effect is to render the system sound as being more vivid,
John Atkinson
August 2005

 

[tuga]

Hi. Can someone explain to me what 'fake' detail is (I understand it has to do with accentuated treble) and, more importantly, how it differs from, I guess, 'real' detail?

Thanks.

Distortion artifacts that are perceived as 'enhanced' detail?

 

[raif71]

Fake detail? "I'm Brad Pitt's body double." There is a fake detail.

I'm sorry I had too.

 

[majingotan]

John Atkinson at Stereophile magazine wrote:

I think that what the listener perceives with this cable is that at low levels, the sound is fattened and made more coherent-sounding by the dominant second-harmonic distortion. In addition, the presence of background noise cannot be dismissed, as there is some evidence that introducing small amounts of random noise results in a sound that is preferred by listeners. At higher signal levels, transients are accompanied by bursts of higher harmonics. However, these subside as quickly as they appeared. The overall effect is to render the system sound as being more vivid,
John Atkinson
August 2005

Did JA provide measurements for the said cable at multiple dBVs? If not, it's all mumbo jumbo at this point

 

[dfuller]

Hi. Can someone explain to me what 'fake' detail is (I understand it has to do with accentuated treble) and, more importantly, how it differs from, I guess, 'real' detail?

Thanks.

Fake detail is elevated treble. Makes things sound really clear on a showroom floor or during a demo, but gets annoying after a while.

real detail is harder to pin down, but I tend towards flat frequency response (or the equivalent in headphones) with very low distortion. Planars can do absolutely spooky things.

 

[sblrog]

When an affordable product has an elevated treble response it is described as 'fake' detail, as opposed to 'real' detail, which is what you perceive when you spend above a certain threshold on a product with an elevated treble response. This threshold changes over time, leading once 'detailed' or 'technical' headphones to no longer be described as such once more expensive headphones come out which, naturally, are able to reproduce more 'details' from music. As we all know, there is no limit to the amount of 'detail' which can be extracted from an audio recording, therefore it will always be possible to create more expensive headphones with an ever-increasing ability to 'resolve details'.

This is funny. The question is, is it, per Homer J. Simpson, funny because it's true?

 

[tuga]

In regard to speakers, a peak in the 'presence' region showing up in an impedance plot or a frequency response plot, or a resonance in that same region showing in a CSD plot could also be perceived as increased 'clarity' / 'detail' / 'resolution'.

Sound engineers use these tricks all the time when producing studio mixes:

Try this Interactive Frequency Chart

 

[antcollinet]

John Atkinson at Stereophile magazine wrote:

I think that what the listener perceives with this cable is that at low levels, the sound is fattened and made more coherent-sounding by the dominant second-harmonic distortion. In addition, the presence of background noise cannot be dismissed, as there is some evidence that introducing small amounts of random noise results in a sound that is preferred by listeners. At higher signal levels, transients are accompanied by bursts of higher harmonics. However, these subside as quickly as they appeared. The overall effect is to render the system sound as being more vivid,
John Atkinson
August 2005

Yeah - that is not how cables work.

 

[sblrog]

In regard to speakers, a peak in the 'presence' region showing up in an impedance plot or a frequency response plot, or a resonance in that same region showing in a CSD plot could also be perceived as increased 'clarity' / 'detail' / 'resolution'.

Sound engineers use these tricks all the time when producing studio mixes:

Try this Interactive Frequency Chart

Thanks for the link to the interactive chart.

 

[pagan84]

If you ignore intentional effects like compression, etc., there's ONLY noise, distortion, frequency response, and analog sources and speakers/acoustics you can have time-related errors. See Audiophoolery

I'm gonna run some more tests but I don't really believe that my TCZ can sound the same as my HD6XX (detailwise and soundstage/imaging, the feeling of being dragged into music).
Doesn't a driver size (driver area) or driver speed (probably different inertia for different driver shape/weight/size; attack/decay) affect the sound?

In the TV-world timing affects the moving pictures massively (that's why they measure 'white to black' or 'gray to gray' timing for pixels, something like decay for speakers I think).