Bernard
Well-known member
And this without the influence of port !! Feed the lad some fortified grape juice - in vino veritas !As my sister used to say "Vice is nice. But incest is best!" Of course we never actually... well, nevermind!
Polishing the Turds
- Thread starter David Matz
- Start date
Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:
tonepub
Senior Member
That's why I have a revealing system and a romantic system...
Or if you don't have the space for two systems, a Manley Massive Passive
studio equalizer will set you free.
Can't fix compression, but the tubey warmth helps and it will certainly fix any of those recording anomalies. Vocals pushed back, pull em up front where you like them. Now you CAN be Steve Hoffman.
Or if you don't have the space for two systems, a Manley Massive Passive
studio equalizer will set you free.
Can't fix compression, but the tubey warmth helps and it will certainly fix any of those recording anomalies. Vocals pushed back, pull em up front where you like them. Now you CAN be Steve Hoffman.
When I left having an entry level system to buying hi end electronics mated to my 1st set of ML''s, I realized just how terrible some of the recordings were and they really didn't do it for me on the more revealing system. I didn't enjoy them.I like the emotional attachment to the music that you get out of a good recording. It's fantastic isn't it?
I think what we ( members of this forum ) have aquired in doing so is having a better trained ear that can really pick things like that out. For instance I can go into a cd store and ask to hear a potential cd purchase before hand. I can tell if the songs will be just okay , or great.
I only buy disc with well recorded songs. It could be even for one song such as Stevie Ray Vaughan's - Couldn't stand the Weather - Track #6 Tin Pan Alley. Have a listen to it. I don't play any of the other songs on it because they come no where close to the recording quality of the track I mentioned.
I read the www.audiogon.com music forum quite a bit to get idea's for future purchases, etc. When I first got the high end equipment I took a lot of recordings out only to be listened to on my system for the backyard. I have quite a bit of cd's now for my high end system, not just a handful as the OP mentioned.
Cheers
I think what we ( members of this forum ) have aquired in doing so is having a better trained ear that can really pick things like that out. For instance I can go into a cd store and ask to hear a potential cd purchase before hand. I can tell if the songs will be just okay , or great.
I only buy disc with well recorded songs. It could be even for one song such as Stevie Ray Vaughan's - Couldn't stand the Weather - Track #6 Tin Pan Alley. Have a listen to it. I don't play any of the other songs on it because they come no where close to the recording quality of the track I mentioned.
I read the www.audiogon.com music forum quite a bit to get idea's for future purchases, etc. When I first got the high end equipment I took a lot of recordings out only to be listened to on my system for the backyard. I have quite a bit of cd's now for my high end system, not just a handful as the OP mentioned.
Cheers
Last edited:
Yes, I'd suppose that this is a common phenomenon. Some of my formerly favorite CDs are now relegated to the car or home office stereo because they sound, by comparison, so awful on the Summits. Fortunately, this is still only a minority of my discs. It also has made me much more conscious of the difference, for example, between particular versions of an LP. This is the first time that I've had a system with sufficient resolution to be aware (or, more accurately, to be forced to be aware) of these differences. As they say, "Ignorance is bliss!"
tonepub
Senior Member
As we like to say in the world of cars:
"You can't polish a turd, but you can chrome it!"
"You can't polish a turd, but you can chrome it!"
Mantana
Well-known member
I changed the power cords on my Musical Fidelity
A5 amp, A5 cd, Rotel 1084 hd tuner and
plugged all three into my Monster power center.
This seems to have substantially
tamed the harshness on my Spires, but i still
seem to experience low level stress while listening
over long periods.
Well, after a couple of weeks, i just swapped back to
my Montana EPS2s. I have to say, my ears seemed relieved
to switch to the more relaxing sound. The Spires
remind me of the Sonus Faber Cremonas i auditioned
at home. They were very clear, somewhat forward
but sounded good on well recorded music. On other
recordings they were very poor performers. When i
took back to the dealer, a salesman said "that's
what you want in a speaker!. Poor recordings should
sound really bad". Sorry, i reject that argument.
You can have accurate speakers that don't make sub par
recordings sound unlistenable. There are plenty of
high end speakers that still allow you to enjoy ALL
your music. The Montana EPS2s retail for 10k. They
sound great on good recordings but i can still enjoy
my whole collection. I think the Spires are more
flexible than the Sonus Faber Cremonas and most of
my music is listenable on the Spires. Still, i
think they wear on my ears after a while. I almost
feel a loss of tension when i switch back to the
EPS2s. I don't think it's my electronics. I emailed
Martin Logan and they said they've had good results
with the Musical Fidelity combo...and so have I.
Some music sounds flawless on the Spires. Not sure
if a different amp would help since i see other similar
comments posted on this site.
A5 amp, A5 cd, Rotel 1084 hd tuner and
plugged all three into my Monster power center.
This seems to have substantially
tamed the harshness on my Spires, but i still
seem to experience low level stress while listening
over long periods.
Well, after a couple of weeks, i just swapped back to
my Montana EPS2s. I have to say, my ears seemed relieved
to switch to the more relaxing sound. The Spires
remind me of the Sonus Faber Cremonas i auditioned
at home. They were very clear, somewhat forward
but sounded good on well recorded music. On other
recordings they were very poor performers. When i
took back to the dealer, a salesman said "that's
what you want in a speaker!. Poor recordings should
sound really bad". Sorry, i reject that argument.
You can have accurate speakers that don't make sub par
recordings sound unlistenable. There are plenty of
high end speakers that still allow you to enjoy ALL
your music. The Montana EPS2s retail for 10k. They
sound great on good recordings but i can still enjoy
my whole collection. I think the Spires are more
flexible than the Sonus Faber Cremonas and most of
my music is listenable on the Spires. Still, i
think they wear on my ears after a while. I almost
feel a loss of tension when i switch back to the
EPS2s. I don't think it's my electronics. I emailed
Martin Logan and they said they've had good results
with the Musical Fidelity combo...and so have I.
Some music sounds flawless on the Spires. Not sure
if a different amp would help since i see other similar
comments posted on this site.
![oldboytech 2 Pack AUX Cord, 3.5mm Audio Cable [4ft/1.2M, Hi-Fi Sound] Nylon Braided AUX Auxiliary Cable for Car Compatible with Stereos, Speaker, iPod iPad, Headphones and More(Grey)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41e5qYa0SJL._SL500_.jpg)
DTB300
Well-known member
Some will agree with you, others will not on your issues and reasons. Remember in all of this it is really up to you to decide what you like and what you do not. If you are happy with your other speakers, then listen to those. It is your room and your music - do what you like.
IMO, as the other thread here talks about in regards to good and bad sounding recordings, the Salesman is correct. Speakers and other equipment should reflect what the recording is capable of. Bad = Bad, Great = Great, not glazed over, rolled off, boomy bass, etc. But if you prefer your other setup/speakers and it matches up to what YOU think the music should sound like, then stick with those.
Equipment and ML's is one of the most important things as ML's are rutheless on showing your upstream components and what they are capable of. You have heard great music (as you stated) with the MF/Spires, so you know they are capable of great sound. To me, this proves your setup is very revealing of the source played. But again my my opinion.
Remember it is all about the music and what YOU like. Enjoy the setup you find most pleasing and listen to music.
IMO, as the other thread here talks about in regards to good and bad sounding recordings, the Salesman is correct. Speakers and other equipment should reflect what the recording is capable of. Bad = Bad, Great = Great, not glazed over, rolled off, boomy bass, etc. But if you prefer your other setup/speakers and it matches up to what YOU think the music should sound like, then stick with those.
Equipment and ML's is one of the most important things as ML's are rutheless on showing your upstream components and what they are capable of. You have heard great music (as you stated) with the MF/Spires, so you know they are capable of great sound. To me, this proves your setup is very revealing of the source played. But again my my opinion.
Remember it is all about the music and what YOU like. Enjoy the setup you find most pleasing and listen to music.
I agree that one has to enjoy one's system, and that's the final criterion, but I do want to offer an important clarification to my comments above. I said that some recordings were awful when played on the Summits. True enough, but the fault in each case is clearly located in the recordings themselves (how they were mixed/miked/compressed, etc.). My pet complaint is when a soloist is put too far back in the mix, being overpowered by the accompaniment. In no case were the recordings I referred to too bright/harsh, which seems to be your persistent problem, Mantana. I can't tell you why, but I simply don't have that issue with my Summits. In fact, I would say that the quality of the treble is one of their great strengths. That would tend to make me think that there is a lack of synergy somewhere with the Spires. That doesn't change the outcome--you still need to go with what works--but I wouldn't be surprised if you'd find the Spires sounding more listenable in a different system. That's my two cents, anyway. Good luck and happy listening. :music:
Last edited:
DTB300
Well-known member
I completely agree with you.
Over time I have also found that the ability of one's source player (CD/SACD, Universal, TT, Tape Deck, etc.) can give you improved sound on all your recordings. You can get more of what is there to be read with a better source player.
Does it make Chicken Salad out of Chicken Poop??? Nope.
Satch
Well-known member
Hey Jeff,
I just checked out the Manley Massive Passive... That looks like it would work awesome for bringing out the acoustic bass lines on the old blues recordings I've been studying. Right now I'm just cranking up the Depth i to try and isolate the bass. That works better than anything I've tried so far.
After I can afford to buy a set of Spires I might look for a deal on a used Manley Massive Passive. To help with my studies, of course.
Oh yeah, one thing I've found out lately is that a lot of the songs I thought Willie Dixon was playing bass on is really Ernest "Big" Crawford.
Satch
I just checked out the Manley Massive Passive... That looks like it would work awesome for bringing out the acoustic bass lines on the old blues recordings I've been studying. Right now I'm just cranking up the Depth i to try and isolate the bass. That works better than anything I've tried so far.
After I can afford to buy a set of Spires I might look for a deal on a used Manley Massive Passive. To help with my studies, of course.
Oh yeah, one thing I've found out lately is that a lot of the songs I thought Willie Dixon was playing bass on is really Ernest "Big" Crawford.
Satch
tonepub
Senior Member
You will love the massive passive...
It can fix a lot of sins and once you get used to working with it, you can really make up for a lot of the differences between the "amazing" early mastered versions and the inexpensive versions at the used record store.
I know it's spendy, but worth every penny. My CJ ACT2 has an "external processor loop", so I can switch it in and out at will. A little bit of tubeyness really helps some of those early CD's too!
It can fix a lot of sins and once you get used to working with it, you can really make up for a lot of the differences between the "amazing" early mastered versions and the inexpensive versions at the used record store.
I know it's spendy, but worth every penny. My CJ ACT2 has an "external processor loop", so I can switch it in and out at will. A little bit of tubeyness really helps some of those early CD's too!
Mantana
Well-known member
Well, as stated earlier, i think the Spires work pretty well with
most recordings and you're right, my issue is mostly trying to tame
some harshness. But i still reject the salesman's argument that a
truly accurate speaker should make poor recordings sound really bad.
Yes i expect a degradation in sound quality, but not to the point
where you can't enjoy your collection. The Sonus Faber Cremonas
were worse than the Spires in this respect. Does that mean that
the Cremonas are more accurate? I don't think so. Get yourself
Ian Anderson Plays the Orchestral Jethro Tull. It's a live double
CD but is very well recorded. This CD sounds perfect on the Spires.
The instruments are portrayed so accurately and convincing. No
brightness or harshness here. Speaking of harshness,
I don't think it's my Musical Fidelity
A5 CD player (it's a tube hybrid and pretty impressive i think).
I also don't have a huge amount of hours on the Spires and i don't
play my music at head banging levels. I read a Tone Audio review
of the Summits and they mentioned the Summits need a good
300 hours of break-in at some decent volume levels. Maybe
the now reduced harshness will go away over time. I really don't
have a problem with the Spire's treble. I don't think the Spires
are inherently bright, but will show off a bright recording.
most recordings and you're right, my issue is mostly trying to tame
some harshness. But i still reject the salesman's argument that a
truly accurate speaker should make poor recordings sound really bad.
Yes i expect a degradation in sound quality, but not to the point
where you can't enjoy your collection. The Sonus Faber Cremonas
were worse than the Spires in this respect. Does that mean that
the Cremonas are more accurate? I don't think so. Get yourself
Ian Anderson Plays the Orchestral Jethro Tull. It's a live double
CD but is very well recorded. This CD sounds perfect on the Spires.
The instruments are portrayed so accurately and convincing. No
brightness or harshness here. Speaking of harshness,
I don't think it's my Musical Fidelity
A5 CD player (it's a tube hybrid and pretty impressive i think).
I also don't have a huge amount of hours on the Spires and i don't
play my music at head banging levels. I read a Tone Audio review
of the Summits and they mentioned the Summits need a good
300 hours of break-in at some decent volume levels. Maybe
the now reduced harshness will go away over time. I really don't
have a problem with the Spire's treble. I don't think the Spires
are inherently bright, but will show off a bright recording.
Last edited:
Dougster
Well-known member
The problem is definitely not the Spires! There is no harshness whatever attributable to the speaker, IMO. Fantastic very loud if desired! Treble balance, as opposed to harshness, can of course be tailored by toe in adjustment and precision.
A well balanced system will always get the best out of poorer recordings and they can therefore still be enjoyed for not only their musical quality, but also hearing them the best / most tolerable you've ever heard them. Choice of well matched, open, low distortion components throughout (without treble edginess) is key. Components that make poor recordings less listenable is never the way for me as it reduces the musical repertoire!!!
No point in that - good components such as Spires (Moon) open out your entire music collection - beware any item where you find yourself heading more often for audiophile CD/LP susbset of your recorded music.
DTB300
Well-known member
I guess I was not clear in my typing - imagine that on a forum
A truly accurate speaker will not make a bad recorded source sound "WORSE", it will show the true sound of the source. And as your setup moves up the chain in accurate reproduction, the better sounding source will shine through and the worse sounding source will show its evilness even more.
The differences between great and poor source become more apparent as you move up the chain.
David Matz
Well-known member
Interesting replies so far - thanks to all.
I am also curious whether the designers who create the more transparent sound "design by slide rule" or on paper. I am also curious if those whose equipment "polishes the turds" design by listening.
My take is that everything leaves a sonic signature. Personally, I am leary of the engineer designer. Why not "design by listening" as well as on paper to have the best possible sound? The musical information is still there on transparent vs. less transparent equipment. It's just presented better on certain equipment to make the crappy recordings sound palatable.
I am also curious whether the designers who create the more transparent sound "design by slide rule" or on paper. I am also curious if those whose equipment "polishes the turds" design by listening.
My take is that everything leaves a sonic signature. Personally, I am leary of the engineer designer. Why not "design by listening" as well as on paper to have the best possible sound? The musical information is still there on transparent vs. less transparent equipment. It's just presented better on certain equipment to make the crappy recordings sound palatable.
Mantana
Well-known member
[A truly accurate speaker will not make a bad recorded source sound "WORSE", it will show the true sound of the source. And as your setup moves up the chain in accurate reproduction, the better sounding source will shine through and the worse sounding source will show its evilness even more.]
I expect higher priced components to sound better than lower priced
but at some point we are talking about minor improvements (law of
diminishing returns). But let me again compare the Spires to the
Sonus Faber Cremonas. If both of these speakers are considered
dead on accurate and brutally revealing, then they should sound
similar on a particular recording. With the Cremonas i played a
Frank Sinatra CD from a boxed set. It's actually recorded pretty
well i think. I practically laughed when i heard it on this CD.
How could it sound so bad versus my Montanas. It also sounds
good on the Spires. If the Cremonas and Spires are so accurate,
why don't they sound similar. According to the salesman, the
Cremonas are revealing the true way it was recorded in the studio. He
told me "that's what you want in a speaker". Sorry, i don't
buy his argument. Which speaker is giving the accurate reproduction
of this recording? How would you know unless you were at the
studio?
I agree with David Matz...everything leaves a sonic signature. Your
electronics interact with the electronics in your speakers. Some
speakers have a particular characteristic and sound better on some
types of music than others. So when the salesman blew off
my comment about the poor sound quality coming from his speaker
like i was too stupid to understand, it ticked me off.
I expect higher priced components to sound better than lower priced
but at some point we are talking about minor improvements (law of
diminishing returns). But let me again compare the Spires to the
Sonus Faber Cremonas. If both of these speakers are considered
dead on accurate and brutally revealing, then they should sound
similar on a particular recording. With the Cremonas i played a
Frank Sinatra CD from a boxed set. It's actually recorded pretty
well i think. I practically laughed when i heard it on this CD.
How could it sound so bad versus my Montanas. It also sounds
good on the Spires. If the Cremonas and Spires are so accurate,
why don't they sound similar. According to the salesman, the
Cremonas are revealing the true way it was recorded in the studio. He
told me "that's what you want in a speaker". Sorry, i don't
buy his argument. Which speaker is giving the accurate reproduction
of this recording? How would you know unless you were at the
studio?
I agree with David Matz...everything leaves a sonic signature. Your
electronics interact with the electronics in your speakers. Some
speakers have a particular characteristic and sound better on some
types of music than others. So when the salesman blew off
my comment about the poor sound quality coming from his speaker
like i was too stupid to understand, it ticked me off.
Last edited:
Mantana
Well-known member
I have another question... on break in....with a conventional cone
speaker, heat builds up at higher volumes which can particularly
affect tweeters. That's why they use ferrofluid to keep temperatures
down. Do i have to worry about running the Spires at moderately
high volumes for long stretches? Does high volume build up heat
in the panels? I figure they would on the sub, but how about the panels?
speaker, heat builds up at higher volumes which can particularly
affect tweeters. That's why they use ferrofluid to keep temperatures
down. Do i have to worry about running the Spires at moderately
high volumes for long stretches? Does high volume build up heat
in the panels? I figure they would on the sub, but how about the panels?
Last edited:
DTB300
Well-known member
Not necessarily true, IMO, as each manufacturer has their own sound based on what the designer was looking for. Reviewers and users all have their opinions on revealing and accurate. That is why we have so many different companies and models to choose from.
Last edited:
tonepub
Senior Member
For what it's worth, most people consider the SF stuff to be somewhat romantic and forgiving.
I don't find that a bad thing, but they've always been a little lacking in
ultimate resolution.
Nice speakers though, they always remind me of my Harbeth 40.1s.
I agree with Dan, every designer has a vision of what they would like
a speaker to be. And they are all different. However, there's a lot more variation in rooms, that have to be dealt with....
I don't find that a bad thing, but they've always been a little lacking in
ultimate resolution.
Nice speakers though, they always remind me of my Harbeth 40.1s.
I agree with Dan, every designer has a vision of what they would like
a speaker to be. And they are all different. However, there's a lot more variation in rooms, that have to be dealt with....
Mantana
Well-known member
[Not necessarily true, IMO, as each manufacturer has their own sound based on what the designer was looking for. Reviewers and users all have their opinions on revealing and accurate. That is why we have so many different companies and models to choose from.] (From another
member)
My point exactly....if 2 speakers are supposed to be extremely
accurate and true to the recording, then they should sound similar.
That's why i said each speaker imposes it's own electronic signature.
Manufacturers tune their speakers to meet what they feel is accurate
and musical. Some speakers sound great with classical music, but
not so great with rock recordings. Myself, i like a speaker that is
faithful to all genres. I don't want some patronizing salesman
treating me like i'm ignorant.
So, this whole "polishing the turd" chat is about the speaker.
I really want to like my Spires and i hope they continue to break in
and eliminate the now faint harshness. Don't get me wrong...on
a lot of music they sound great, phenominal even. They are just
up against stiff competition against the Montana EPS2s. Right now,
the Montanas are the more satisfying, but i feel the Spires may
continue to blossom(and maybe i need to experiment with
amplification). Right now i'm happy to have 2 speakers to audition,
but my pocketbook wants a winner to emerge. Keep in mind
i have owned 2 different PBN Montana speakers over 11 years.
I've auditioned numerous speakers (and bought) trying to find
the ultimate speaker, but i always seem to gravitate back to the
Montanas. Again, it's a personal decision but i have high
hopes for the Spires. I'll let you know...right now i like having
both pairs. If you're interested in reviews on the EPS2s, here
are a couple of links.
http://www.montanaloudspeakers.com/files/Montana EPS2.pdf
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/spea...ers/montana-eps2-floor-standing-speakers.html
member)
My point exactly....if 2 speakers are supposed to be extremely
accurate and true to the recording, then they should sound similar.
That's why i said each speaker imposes it's own electronic signature.
Manufacturers tune their speakers to meet what they feel is accurate
and musical. Some speakers sound great with classical music, but
not so great with rock recordings. Myself, i like a speaker that is
faithful to all genres. I don't want some patronizing salesman
treating me like i'm ignorant.
So, this whole "polishing the turd" chat is about the speaker.
I really want to like my Spires and i hope they continue to break in
and eliminate the now faint harshness. Don't get me wrong...on
a lot of music they sound great, phenominal even. They are just
up against stiff competition against the Montana EPS2s. Right now,
the Montanas are the more satisfying, but i feel the Spires may
continue to blossom(and maybe i need to experiment with
amplification). Right now i'm happy to have 2 speakers to audition,
but my pocketbook wants a winner to emerge. Keep in mind
i have owned 2 different PBN Montana speakers over 11 years.
I've auditioned numerous speakers (and bought) trying to find
the ultimate speaker, but i always seem to gravitate back to the
Montanas. Again, it's a personal decision but i have high
hopes for the Spires. I'll let you know...right now i like having
both pairs. If you're interested in reviews on the EPS2s, here
are a couple of links.
http://www.montanaloudspeakers.com/files/Montana EPS2.pdf
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/spea...ers/montana-eps2-floor-standing-speakers.html
Similar threads
