Which aspects of sound matter most to you?

I’ve started asking myself this question lately. Having a few bits of kit to hand has reminded me of the vastly differing priorities most of them exhibit.

I am going to try and name a few and then rank them in order if importance’s to me in order to understand my own needs better.

Off the top of my head we have:

1. Realistic scale: Two elements to this, Do you need a huge soundstage in terms of width, depth or both? Do you need the sort of volume and impact that real musicians produce. If you do, then it’s likely you will be talking big speakers and a room to accommodate them, as well as a room that isn’t hrough the wall to neighbours. You will also need either powerful amps, efficient speakers or both. Of course there are many levels to both elements, but it’s good to know how much of either you need to be happy.

2. Frequency response. None this can take many paths. Obviously a fast response is often held as the optimum but does it require a few deviations such as upper bass lift to create timing. Does increased treble give an impression of detail? A big can of worms, but perhaps good to work out whether you can live with certain. Variations better than others.

3. Timing and rhythm: This one I’m not so sure about because I don’t really know what produces this quality. I only know it when I hear it. So far, I have often found it is bought at the expense of soundstage depth. I also think it may be bought at the expense of a flat response. Upper bass lift is probably the most likely element.

So for me, I’d say the timing comes first. If it’s not snappy and rhythmic, I don’t usually enjoy it.

Next up is soundstage height and width (let’s call it 2d scale). If it isn’t spacious, I don’t enjoy it, but the 3rd dimension I will happily live without in order to get that “up close and personal” feel to music.

Frequency response is less important. In fact I think I prefer a slightly phat upper bass to give the music a bit of kick. I seem less sensitive to a bit of treble lift and actually seem to find it stimulating. The only thing I seem allergic too is weedy upper bass and midrange hardness.

Finally we have the sort of volume and scale we get with live music. For one thing you’d end up with hearing damage if you indulged in this regularly. Secondly, it would piss off your neighbours within minutes. Finally, I couldn’t listen this way for King sessions, it’s just too much. So I’m very happy with room filling sound and no more.

My priorities are borne out by my favourite products and how I’ve combined them. My favourite Xerxes deck and Exposure amps both have the frequency response and timing that creates the up close and personal feel. My Spicas and planets generate massive soundstages without excess depth sucking the life away.

This is all seen from my own map of reality so many of the terms used may mean different things to others. The point of it was not to find agreement t or even common ground, it was to stumulate others to think about what they like in order to hopefully get them to recognise what facets of sound they are seeking.

To me, recreation of live music is unrealistic because most recordings were never live anyway.They were laid down track by track in an un-natural acoustic with many instruments only producing sound via electronics. Add to that the difficulty in playing at live music levels in terms of db, bass etc and it’s all a set of compromises to me. YMMV.