Interesting difference, which would you prefer?

[Mr Peabody]

If you've read my recent posts hear you know I've been doing some comparing of cd players. The main difference between my Krell 280cd and the T+A 1245r is the Krell gives more of what I'd call textures or lingering effects of the instrument and also more weight but that's not my focus here. Like when a string is plucked the vibration lingers and fades, a piano you will hear resonances of the cabinet and harmonics from other strings. Some may call this noise. The T+A is always very focused, everything is tight and has space between notes. It almost de-emphasizes. I'd call the T+A very analytical because you will hear everything it picks up off the disc. Some may hear analytical and run but the T+A machine is very nice to listen to. It doesn't come off as cold, or aggressive. I think that's what intrigues me about this unit. I also recently heard a Classe CD player through other Classe gear where the music was pretty much dead after the note was hit. On both the Krell and T+A you will hear the same note but on a piece of music with a string of quick notes you will hear the effects I spoke of on the Krell sort of filling the gaps between notes where the T+A will have a space between the notes. The T+A isn't slow and seems to have good pace, I think they just chose to eliminate some of the information to get their preference in sound. I've heard real piano and think the Krell is more true to life yet I wonder if more people would choose the T+A because of the seemingly high detail. I may not have even noticed this without comparing side by side. The information I'm talking about from the Krell isn't a bad thing or else how would they have gotten a criticism of being analytical themselves. Those who say that should familiarize themselves with Arcam or T+A to really under stand "analytical". But T+A is able to be analytical while being more listenable than Arcam in my opinion.

I just wonder which presentation you might pick and if you've heard anything similar to what I'm talking about on other players. Also which presentation would you describe as "detailed", the Krell with more information between notes or the T+A which actually has less information yet this allows you to depict the notes more clearly?

[Wireworm5]

IMO I think the lingering piano sound would be the better of the two, so I would think this is more detailed. I have heard the lingering piano on one of my recordings and you can hear all the harmonics of the piano. I wonder though if I could discern the difference between the two players as you discribe though.

[paul_pci]

I'm not going to come down on one side or the other, but only ask if you are suggesting that the "detail", the lingering notes in the Krell seems fabricated to you, or would the space between the notes (cutting them off perhaps) come off as fabricated?

[PAT.P]

Texture or lingering would it be like silk or cotton?Would it be your speakers giving more the imaging effects ?

[StanleyMuso]

The main difference between my Krell 280cd and the T+A 1245r is the Krell gives more of what I'd call textures or lingering effects of the instrument and also more weight but that's not my focus here. Like when a string is plucked the vibration lingers and fades, a piano you will hear resonances of the cabinet and harmonics from other strings. Some may call this noise. The T+A is always very focused, everything is tight and has space between notes. It almost de-emphasizes. ......... On both the Krell and T+A you will hear the same note but on a piece of music with a string of quick notes you will hear the effects I spoke of on the Krell sort of filling the gaps between notes where the T+A will have a space between the notes. The T+A isn't slow and seems to have good pace, I think they just chose to eliminate some of the information to get their preference in sound.
....... the Krell with more information between notes or the T+A which actually has less information yet this allows you to depict the notes more clearly?
Are you saying these players are changing the recorded information? Shouldn't the ideal we reach for be the absolutely accurate reproduction of what has been recorded, ie, if you hear the recording and real piano side by side they should sound the same? If the players are adding or subtracting information, isn't that undesirable coloration? Surely speakers and amps would have a much larger influence on the reproduced sound than the CD player.

[Mr Peabody]

WW, I think you could hear the difference. The key for me is to listen in my own system at home. Many times I can listen at a store and miss differences like I'm talking about. The stores I went to have individual listening rooms. But still we listen to equipment that's new to us and different from our own and at home we are relaxed and know what our system sounds like so small differences are more apparent this way, at least for me.

I would say the air between the notes presentation would be more fabricated if that is an accurate term to use, because when listening to a live show, especially rock, you don't hear air between the notes, the effects the music have on the venue and the sound the instrument makes is heard and it lingers.

[musicoverall]

Are you saying these players are changing the recorded information? Shouldn't the ideal we reach for be the absolutely accurate reproduction of what has been recorded, ie, if you hear the recording and real piano side by side they should sound the same? If the players are adding or subtracting information, isn't that undesirable coloration? Surely speakers and amps would have a much larger influence on the reproduced sound than the CD player.

1) Yes, players change the recorded information. At least, I suspect they do. Perhaps there are some dead neutral/transparent players out there. Unfortunately, unless you compare them side by side with the master tape, how would you know?

2) Yes, the ideal should be accuracy. A live piano is both accurate and "musical" (sorry to use such a trite term but you get the idea). But comparing a live piano with a CD recording of same isn't a fair comparison, unfortunately. You'd need to compare the master tape of the piano with the CD recording. The few master tapes I've been fortunate enough to compare were miles apart from the CD. The few live sessions I've attended were even further away from the CD.

3) Yes, undesirable coloration may be what is happening. But for many, coloration isn't "undesirable". Your point is that if item 2) is correct, item 3) is also correct. And you're right - in an ideal situation. But if the colorations are subtle in each component throughout a system, offsetting colorations (i.e a "dark" CD player with bright speakers - remember, we're talking subtle colorations here) might be desirable. I once heard a system that used components that all measured as neutral as I think can be measured. It was unlistenable with mediocre recordings and not much better with excellent recordings. So measurements are helpful but don't explain everything, IMHO.

4) I would agree that speakers and amps have a much larger influence. Larger doesn't always mean more important. Once one has his amps and speakers settled, one CD players sonic difference from another becomes critical.