Ignoring the top end, what do you think about it going down to 200Hz ? It can't be EQed to that - and it is unlike any of the other Radian plots. It looks like it would be very nice on a 200Hz Le Cleac'h horn crossed over at 320Hz perhaps for a system I am building for a friend. But then maybe it is just a mistake - I checked on the Radian site and it is the same there.
POOH, this is an entirely fair question, and it deserves a serious answer. It may take a while to explain, so bear with me here.
I grew up in Japan and Hong Kong (parents in the US Foreign Service), and didn't come stateside until I went to college in Los Angeles in the late Sixties. Different (Japanese, Chinese, American, etc.) cultures result in different worldviews; by that I mean the actual perception of what is real, what is probably real, and what is unreal is culturally dependent.
Things like reincarnation and the presence of ancestor spirits sound weird and really out-there for the majority of Westerners, but are nothing special or noteworthy for many Japanese, Chinese (at least in Hong Kong), and many cultures in India. It's a serious mistake to think that words in common usage mean the same thing across cultures; at the minimum, there are subtle variations in meaning, and quite commonly, the underlying assumptions about social relations and acceptable behavior are radically different. Going from the great ocean of ancient cultures to the tiny little frog-pond of audio, there are many cultures here, too, even if we don't see them at first glance.
This is why I don't ask what other people hear, what they like, what sounds good, what sounds bad, unless I know them personally, or at least have some idea of their tastes. My own tastes, or perceptions, are so far from the audio mainstream that my opinions don't count for much, unless I'm speaking to fellow weirdos that like direct-heated triodes, Ortofon SPU cartridges, or the sound of M6 steel versus nickel in transformers.
When I say I've never heard a hifi system sound like real, live acoustic music, I'm speaking about my own personal experience, and nobody else. I can only speak about what I hear, what I see, and what I feel. I can only describe the audio systems I've heard, not the ones I haven't heard.
Have I auditioned a really advanced, multi-amped horn system like POOH's or the Boston Cat? Nope. Do I have any interest in flying across the country and hearing such a thing? Nope.
I don't know anything about speakers like POOH's or the Boston Cat. If by chance I did listen to them, I might think they were God's gift to mankind, or not like them at all. But my opinion counts for less than nothing in a system that is so deeply personalized for the owner. The joys of the listening experience are for them, not for me.
Circling back to the original question, no, I've never heard a hifi system that sounded like being there. The closest experience was at the BBC Research Labs in 1975 when they played a discrete quadraphonic master tape made at the Last Night at the Proms (playing Beethoven's 9th at 10th-row-seat levels). That was pretty damned impressive ... nearly in the reach-out-and-touch-it category. I've never heard any commercial recording (LP, CD, or high-res digital) come anywhere close to that first-generation BBC master tape.
Last edited:
Hi Lynn,
Indeed, it is so.
Furthermore, we, humans, don't know and cannot know 'reality-as-it-is' or 'reality-in-itself', all we have and all we know is each individual's perception of reality. Many people confuse between 'perception of reality' and 'reality-as-it-is', they consider their perception to be the actual 'reality-in-itself'.
Now, each individual's perception of reality is deeply affected by culture, society, upbringing and education. In other words, the perception of reality is being affected by each individual's belief system, while the belief system is being affected by culture and so on.
One ramification of the above is that for each individual, 'real' and 'unreal' are what each individual believe it to be so. Reality is being cognized through the eye-glasses of our belief system.
Your words echo my own stand and attitude on the matter.
Indeed, it is so.
Furthermore, we, humans, don't know and cannot know 'reality-as-it-is' or 'reality-in-itself', all we have and all we know is each individual's perception of reality. Many people confuse between 'perception of reality' and 'reality-as-it-is', they consider their perception to be the actual 'reality-in-itself'.
Now, each individual's perception of reality is deeply affected by culture, society, upbringing and education. In other words, the perception of reality is being affected by each individual's belief system, while the belief system is being affected by culture and so on.
One ramification of the above is that for each individual, 'real' and 'unreal' are what each individual believe it to be so. Reality is being cognized through the eye-glasses of our belief system.
Your words echo my own stand and attitude on the matter.
There may be a risk of applying a quasi psychology approach to enjoying a listening experience. Over the years I have formed a view of what gives me the highest sound listening appreciation against previous experience.
I am sure Lynn and most others that like the experience of listening to musical and other sound experiences get a - thats a really good experience - especially where it raises the hairs on your neck, if one has any.
The reality thing is not really the point but it probably gets close. The best reproduction I have enjoyed has exceeded at times, what I would have enjoyed hearing it at the equivalent and identical but live event in the ?best seats.
Say the 95th percentile of us would agree ? but not all. Make your own system on this basis and not only, based on equisite electronic designs, but revisions of these to suit your own perception and enjoyment.
When I first heard in a teachers flat a Quad ELS 57 mono FM BBC VHF FM broadcast of a cello sonata from Maidavale I discovered what my new hobby was going to be.
Probably each one has ones' own view about 'the highest sound listening appreciation', each for oneself.
My point is that different people have different views about it. Thus, when a person raves about certain audio setup, or part of it, like speakers, or amp, it's meaningless to me, unless I'm well familiar with that person's taste and preferences in sound reproduction.
Not view, imagination and perception. I have never heard hi-fi sound " real" for starters we are listening to recordings of live music not live, getting a full symphony into your listening space takes more than great hi-fi, Lynn's response is spot on and its easy to determine where each individual perception takes them and why there are so many camps ...
Which is why I use the word "convincing" - 'real' sound will always be different, every time you listen to it, so which one is the "real" 'real'? The point being, if with a blindfold on you're taken somewhere and you can't determine, decide, whether what you're hearing is a 'live' session or a reproduction, then that's good enough for me ...
Have that too, whats great about that one is recording height , Harry is above the audience and his band , it's very much present in both version1 and V2. Very few systems can recreate the space necessary to hear this ...
If you look on the cover and read the liner notes, Harry is on the same stage with the band and orchestra. I would think that if your system can't reproduce that portion of the soundstage it has a problem. If your system produces height cues that aren't there you may have another problem.
The recording does have very good depth and side to side imaging as well as good dynamics.
OK, so what was the front end, amplifiers and speakers in this system that had the impressive sound? Have you had that gear in your room?
Thanks
I've been listening to a Ketone Polymer HF driver (small format 1.4") for a week or so and found it's really quite outstanding in tonal density and pure sound. If you have inclination to not use BE or aluminum I recommend the Italian driver HF144. Quite refined and delicate sounding but with massive dynamics 
FaitalPRO | HF Drivers | HF144
FaitalPRO | HF Drivers | HF144
I've been listening to a Ketone Polymer HF driver (small format 1.4") for a week or so and found it's really quite outstanding in tonal density and pure sound. If you have inclination to not use BE or aluminum I recommend the Italian driver HF144. Quite refined and delicate sounding but with massive dynamics
FaitalPRO | HF Drivers | HF144
On what horn?
The subjective impressions of the faital hf144 are all positive but the measured performance didn't look as nice to me compared to some of the b&c large format driver/horn combos. Maybe I can find the charts for comparison.
Not sure how much measurements necessarily correspond to what we hear though...
Not sure how much measurements necessarily correspond to what we hear though...
300 Hz flare round wooden tractrix mainly, but also the faital 142 elliptical tractrix as well - briefly EV HR60 and Altec 803. In my system I'm crossing between 1400 and 1800 - the Faital horn gets the most out of them in this range. In the multicells and wood tractrix they could be used almost an octave lower and seem fine used that low. The treble is acceptably extended for me and I haven't used a treble horn with them yet.
I haven't measured these yet, I'm afraid to, they sound too nice to measure
Removing the veil often feels that way, doesn't it? But, in the end, you can find the more beautiful woman. If you like the big lips of the current set up, be it a bump at 1.4kHz or a polar dip at 3k, you can design those into your system targets and come up with the ideal setup that incorporates those aspects you love, "in the light".
But if you don't do the diligence, you can just build and have fun- nothing wrong with that either
How do you know you EQ and crossover are correct if you did not measure them?I haven't measured these yet, I'm afraid to, they sound too nice to measure