Warm sound, cold sound... whats it to you?

[Jimmy C]

...want "reality" in their livingroom night after night.

Ever been to a small venue with blatty horns and crash cymbals 10 ft. from you? Pretty harsh! Sure, in small doses it's fine... but my ears sometimes hurt when the gig is over. I know a few in here are from Long Island... check out "Paula Jean's" in Seautaket - a half-way decent attempt at 'Nawlins food with some great live Jazz and Blues.

Any recording (or stereo) will never approach reality, but sure, I tend to like neutral speakers better than colored ones. I think it's better to "tweak" after you found a speaker for you... which is why I'm going for that Prima Luna... I can't ignore the price/build quality! A bit of "tube warmth" should be a lotta fun for me...

I'll need a phono stage... I heard good thing about Channel Islands.

And, hey... a bit of honey poured over most of today's CDs probably ain't a bad thing!

[JohnMichael]

I like my system neutral and my reality altered.

[hermanv]

There is a certain amount of fun to be had with systems that are excessively analytical. As Stereophile once put it "With this system you can not only hear the conductor fart, you can tell which variety of legumes he had for lunch".

Fun, yes, but for me, tiring. Although the definition of neutral seems easy enough, the ability to decide which systems are truly neutral appears a little tougher.

Many CD are recorded "hot" i.e. over hyped high end. This is done either as a holdover from old AM car radio days or apparently to dazzle you on first listen. For me at least, those CDs get old fast.

So I think it's desirable for a system to err a little on the warm side. It's a matter of personal taste (no not the legumes)

[topspeed]

A speaker measured as "neutral" may not play neutral in different listening environments. Plus, everyone's hearing is different so what may be "aggressive" to one person may be "neutral" to another. I'd also think that music preferences has an effect on what type of speakers are preferred. For example, if someone is really into hard rock, a warmer speaker may have the dual benefits of less fatigue as well as an ability to mask poor recordings a little better.

[kexodusc]

I'm probably in the minority on this board when I say I really don't care for warm sounding gear at all. I don't hate it or anything, I've just experienced zero correlation between gear I like and "warmth". Sometimes it's warm, sometimes it's not. While the soft soothing tones might be desireable when you're busting out all your top moves over a candle-lit dinner with your woman, I much prefer the more realistic lively sound that I hear at live shows, which are almost always anything but warm. I think if the artist wanted it to sound warm it should be captured in the recording, and some music should never sound warm. Same goes for "cold" gear (never heard that one before, I assume it's the opposite of "warm").
At one point in time, warm was just an adjective in the audio-community. Today it's almost synonnymous with "better". Maybe because it's just a cool word? Some warm sounding gear really sounds dull and boring to me. It might not be fatiguing, but I'd much rather get fatigued than just be bored from the start and shut down the system early.
I rarely pay attention to whether it sounds "warm" or "cold", bright or soft etc...If it sounds good to you that's all that matters.

As topspeed says, listening environments will make as big an impact as the gear itself, and an orthologist acquaintance of mine continues to remind me that the shape of one's ears can have a bigger impact still. This would certainly explain the inconsistencies in equipment reviews. What sounds "warm" to some isn't necessarily warm at all.

While I tend to believe I seek "neutrality" in my system, I don't think that's necessarily the correct way to buy audio gear either...that's what works for me. Buy what makes you happy...if others consider it colored or harsh, uninvolving or dull, screw them. They aren't the ones listening to it. There's no rule carved in stone that says we have to listen to music the way the artist intended, or that it somehow sounds better that way. Enjoy yourselves.

Good thread!

[Feanor]

I'm probably in the minority on this board when I say I really don't care for warm sounding gear at all. ... I much prefer the more realistic lively sound that I hear at live shows, which are almost always anything but warm....

At one point in time, warm was just an adjective in the audio-community. Today it's almost synonnymous with "better". ...

While I tend to believe I seek "neutrality" in my system, I don't think that's necessarily the correct way to buy audio gear either...that's what works for me. Buy what makes you happy......

To me "warm" is not better, either, and I'm all for "neutrality". It seems clear to me that people seek warmth mainly to mask the sound of excessively bright, poor records, and/or graining SS and digital components. Warmth might compensated for these things on the one hand, but on the other it masks really great records and other, great components you might own.

I learned that best most recently when I upgraded from an ancient Phase Linear 400 amp to a Bel Canto eVo2i Gen II. Recordings that sound "harsh" or "hashed" with the Phase suddenly sound smooth, detailed, and full of ambience with the Bel. Prior to the Bel, I tried a NAD C270; while it removed the harshness, it came up away short of the Bel for detail and ambience retrieval. Also, the NAD had an excessively "fat" base. The NAD was, for an SS amp, relatively warm but not accurate.