Results 1 to 18 of 18

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    12

    Correct

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    What I mean by "depth" is getting a sense of the instruments and/or vocals having a position in the sound stage front to back, not, just everything shoulder to shoulder across the sound stage. Take for example a Triangle being struck in an orchestra, the CJ gives me a sense of it being back further in the orchestra where Krell may have it right next to everything else. The positive of the Krell doing that is it seems like you get more detail because placing it up front it is easier to here. But, some one else may think the positioning is more important and actually call that cueing more detail. Both CJ and Krell have plenty of resolution or "air". It's two very different presentations and whose to say which is more accurate. A friend of mine gave one of the best explanations of tube sound, in general of course, it puts the flesh on the bone.
    Pea - I second your comments about sometimes being at the back BUT otehr equipments makes it all comes to the front. This is exactly the feeling n nature of MARANTZ vs NAIM. its like - 2 different recordings altogether..... but there is alos some truth about the depth vs detail argument ...hmm

  2. #2
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    Depth vs. detail

    Quote Originally Posted by art80342
    Pea - I second your comments about sometimes being at the back BUT otehr equipments makes it all comes to the front. This is exactly the feeling n nature of MARANTZ vs NAIM. its like - 2 different recordings altogether..... but there is alos some truth about the depth vs detail argument ...hmm
    I'm not questioning your impressions of the Marantz or Supernait as particular amps, nor Mr Peabody's impression of Krell, but I don't buy that there a necessary a trade-off between depth and detail. On the contrary, genuine depth, (as opposed to euphonic but simulated depth), requires resolution. Thus the sonic difference between MP3 and lossless format playback.

  3. #3
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    I'm not questioning your impressions of the Marantz or Supernait as particular amps, nor Mr Peabody's impression of Krell, but I don't buy that there a necessary a trade-off between depth and detail. On the contrary, genuine depth, (as opposed to euphonic but simulated depth), requires resolution. Thus the sonic difference between MP3 and lossless format playback.
    not necessarity a trade off between depth n detail .... i must listen more b4 able to judge.....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •