Is there such things as too much detail?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by boead, Apr 24, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. boead

    boead New Member Thread Starter

    What other way can one describe ‘detail’ – what is the point of reference? I mean the word detail is subjective to the person’s point of view or opinion, right?

    So how else can you describe detail (the amount of) in terms relative to simplicity? Like; bright = more detail, smooth = less detail, aggressive = more detail, dark = less detail (or does it?), fast = more detail, dynamic = more detail and so on…And is this correct to assume?

    So can you have too much detail? I believe you can have lots of detail and not be too bright; this seems to be the hardest compromise to win. With further balancing of components and cabling, you can likely get whatever combination of sound with little compromise at all – at a price point no doubt.
    So with all this detail available, we start to hear things that the sound engineers may not have heard, don’t you think? Is this a good thing?

    My amp has been blooming like a field of flowers in spring. Some recent modifications I had done are breaking in over and over again for weeks now. Swapping and rolling cables, tubes and such through the system has been fun too. So many different sounds can be had, that’s for certain. But at many points, the level of detail seems to be extreme. I’m hearing instrument detail and room nuances like I have never heard before and I’ve been through this over the years with solid-state equipment. I never expected the shear level of detail that can be obtained.
    I’ve grown to like it in some ways and dislike the brutal realism of studio and live recordings. The edges of passages are sometimes noticeably distorted/clipped, but always in the very same places.
    James Taylor Greatest hits has a live recordings at the end of the album that is horribly distorted at times in the left channel. So obvious was this I thought something was wrong, but everything is fine. The microphone/s were clipping or maybe it was the board, but someone besides me was having a problem, know what I mean? I’ve listened to this album hundreds of times and have never heard this before.
    I have listened through the entire Beatles catalog a couple of times recently and there’re are sounds I’ve never heard or paid attention to before.
    Some live Clapton too, that has such detailed sound stage it’s scary. And this is with a pair of Klipsch bookshelves!! I’ve never been a big Klipsch fan until recently but they’re really amazing if driven with the right amplifier. I’m looking for the another type of 97+ db efficient 2-way bookshelf speaker to audition in my home but haven’t seen much used that would be suitable for near-field listening.

    I remember speaking to Steve Deckart (he builds the ZenSelect SET’s (Decware.com)) some time ago and he said to me that he mostly preferred the non-select version of his Zen amp most often because it wasn’t so brutally revealing. And that too revealing can be undesirable in most cases, depending on what you listen too. I agree to a point but I’m not sure I want to be missing anything that is actually there and available for the taking. I’m just not sure where to draw that line or if the line needs to be drawn at all.

    So I ask, is there such things as too much detail?
     
  2. Stax Fan

    Stax Fan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Midwest
    I think the line will draw itself. If you like it, I say enjoy. If it ever begins to seem like too much, you'll know it and feel the need for less.

    Highly subjective stuff, audio. I guess that's why we have so many descriptive terms floating around. Some folks like a lot of sugar in their tea, some less. What's too much depends on the individual.

    Proper tonality required, level of detail optional. :D
     
  3. vinyl anachronist

    vinyl anachronist Senior Member

    Location:
    Lakeside, Oregon
    I've heard the Reference 3A MM de Capo speakers on a few occasions, and I would say that these are a tad too detailed. By this, I mean that every instrument, and every room reflection, is clearly delineated to the point of being distracting from the musical whole. At times this is a very fun sound, because you do notice a lot of new things in familar recordings and such. But over the long haul, it becomes fatiguing. One thing I've also noticed about hi-fi that is optimized for detail is that tape hiss always sounds more pronounced in recordings.
     
  4. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    B.C.
    Really? It honestly sounds like certain frequencies might be getting a boost in the top end from the coloration of equipment when I hear more pronounced tape hiss.
     
  5. vinyl anachronist

    vinyl anachronist Senior Member

    Location:
    Lakeside, Oregon
    I don't think the sound of tape hiss is actually being emphasized per se, but it's more isolated from the rest of the mix, so it's easier to hear. Of course, this starts to brush up against one of the more thorny paradoxes in the High End, that the best phono cartridges offer more detail, but they relegate surface noise further into the backround, making it less annoying. It seems that a "ruthlessly revealing" component would make these artifacts clearer, not less noticeable. I'm sure there's not a lot of objective reasons why this is.
     
  6. Pinknik

    Pinknik Senior Member

    Maybe it's not so much that they're relegating actual noise to the background as they are making the musical presentation so compelling that the human brain/ear relegates it to the background. Like rejecting room noise to hear a conversation. Most people don't notice air conditioner noise the majority of the time, but wait until you have to make a recording in a room when the air is on.
     
  7. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian

    I think the term "detail" is often confused with "resolution". I would think that we want as much resolution eg: revealing as much as is really in the source material as possible. If what is revealed in the source material sounds unpleasant to you then logically there are at least two main reasons.

    1) The source material is unpleasant in itself.

    or

    2) There is a problem in the reproduction chain which can also include the listening environment such as the room itself.

    I don't think there can ever be too much resolution as that is revealing the truth in the source.

    We can however adjust the "voicing" of the playback chain to sound more pleasant under a wider variety of conditions which many equipment makers (specially speaker manufacturers) do for wider acceptance but, at the expense of accuracy 'cause accuracy ain't always pleasant.
     
  8. boead

    boead New Member Thread Starter

    Yes, but in re-voicing the system chain you are ultimately increasing or decreasing detail or resolution as you call it.
    Detail is mostly heard in the high frequency range but rolling a cable or tube won’t necessarily add detail to a system. It may help reveal what its got (weakest link) but wont reveal more detail from the source that it simply can’t do.

    Most amps I have heard are the limiting factor in detail revealing, second to the source component.

    But if you reach a point where you are hearing detail that the recording artist and engineers didn’t intend you to hear, is it too much?
     
  9. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    Sometimes hearing a detailed (clean, analytical) recording can distract me from the ovarall listening pleasure. It can destroy the "emotional impact" of the song.
     
  10. Stax Fan

    Stax Fan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Midwest
    I'm with Grant. I don't mind resolution, but not at the expense of musicality.
     
  11. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian

    I think we all "voice" our systems to our individual preferences and acoustic environments by choosing playback equipment that we find meets our tastes. I don't think that we can have it entirely both ways but I wouldn't want to sacrifice too much accuracy although some sacrifice might be unavoidable due to individual circumstances.



    I'm convinced this is true not only of both pre and power amplification and yes, specially so of the front end.


    Huh??? I don't quite get the last one.....maybe it's Sunday afternoon and all that :D :D Could you please elaborate?
     
  12. boead

    boead New Member Thread Starter

    Sure, I think that there are sometimes sounds that the recording engineer didn’t intend on anyone hearing. I can hear switching noises like instruments, vocals or subtle background and ambient sounds changing volume or abruptly coming in or out, chairs and stools creaking, what appears to be doors opening and closing into the studio, and just blatant noise – not music.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if much of this the studio engineers didn’t her while mixing.
     
  13. Khorn

    Khorn Dynagrunt Obversarian

    Although gross noises such as subway trains and doors and things shouldn't exist on recorded studio sessions other things like valve tapping & spittle cleaning on brass and foot tapping as well other performance related things are perfectly acceptable. Even more leeway should be given to live concert recordings. What shouldn't be overlooked and should be corrected by omission if possible are things like thermal and floor noise from wide open mics and board pots, as these are engineering mistakes not performance related. These have nothing whatsoever to do with the reproduction system and, if present should be detectable 'cause if your system cuts them out then its gonna cut out one hell of a lot of the recorded material you were intended to hear also.

    Good recordings are a standout from the performance all the way through the recording chain to the final media distribution and deserve to be recognized as such.

    Many home reproduction systems can reproduce a simple uncomplicated recording of voice and a few instruments very well and convincingly. Its with large complicated "multi-layered" [not necessarily multi track] recordings that separate the better reproduction systems. On a good system you are able to hear instrument/performer positioning and separation or space if it was present in the original performance. A lesser system tends to "smear" and cover up or not define elements that are present and integral parts of the recording.

    In many cases people are amazed when they first hear a recording that they are very familiar with on a much better system than they are used to and discover components of that performance they never knew existed. The opposite is also true. I once heard a system that was so bad I stood listening in amazement at a performance of Gordon Lightfoot songs and wondering who in the world was singing these songs with such a poor imitation of Gord. It WAS Gord the system was THAT bad.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine