catman Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 G'day all, whilst on a family drive today, I was thinking about whether there is a 'NAD' sound and wondered about 'house' sound generally. At the present time I have two reasonably current NAD audio components, a C515 BEE CD player and my NAD PP2e phono preamplifier. Perhaps it is like comparing apples with oranges, but I love the sound of my C515 BEE CD player, and to be honest this player has made me realise that CD sound quality can be superb! Yet I am less enamoured with the PP2e yet perhaps it does share some aspects of what perceive as the 'NAD' sound of smooth, warmish sound. Various other manufacturers seem to have a particular house sound and I wonder how is a particular 'sound' achieved over a wide product range. I have a feeling that I've raised this question before, sorry if I have, but it's an interesting question. I often read reference to the Naim sound that apparently some love and some don't! I have read that the extensive use of tantalum capacitors in the circuitry of Naim gear is a major contributor to the Naim sound. I don't know if that is true. Any comments? Regards, Felix.
Dean Gale Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 I certainly believe that NAD and of course other brands have a house sound to me it's like saccharin instead of sugar sound. Plenty of detail just a sameness. Sent from my SM-T113 using Tapatalk
Zaphod Beeblebrox Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 NAD, like many manufacturers, builds products that sound different, depending on the technology used. Their D3020 sounds very different to any of their Class A/B amps, for instance. The NAD M3 sounded very different (better) than any NAD at the time. That said, there is a certain similarity between NAD products that are built using similar topologies. Which is to be expected. Rotel is similar. 1
allthumbs Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 I'm not sure how a "house sound" tallies with the goals of Hi-Fidelity, that would seem to me to be a contradiction in terms. I'd be curious as to how software programs are used in design and development of hi-fi products in what I can only imagine is the superiority of the computer's "ear" to that of the human organ, as far as measurement is concerned. Is there an equivalent of the Turing test as to whether hifi gear could be better judged by a computer listening to a piece of equipment or a human? I know RIchard of Quasimodo uses his ear as his guide when developing an amplifier for instance and Hugh Dean said Richard had a "very good ear" for such development. I'd be interested if Zaphod is an ear man or a measurements man? and how much is art and how much is science in design and development of sound gear and is there a touch of voodoo, a secret ingredient that is added by each house to their product maybe in the methodology as opposed to providing a signature sound? Maybe my hearing capability has deteriorated somewhat over the years and my critical faculties have sharpened at the same time which has led to a flattening of the curve between hi-fi, mid-fi and high end, the upshot being an increase in my music listening pleasure, a democratization of both sources and the means of sound reproduction. I can take as much pleasure from my Ipod, my vintage components and my more upto date contemporary gear. I think the House sound Catman refers to might be a making of our own ears, our own preferred bias and tastes. The question then is if that is an imaginary sound, a delusion, an illusion or a measure of marketing success. God how I long to go back to 3AK where no wrinklies fly and a National Panasonic radio in a leather case under the blankets when the terrors of room correction did not exist.
Guest thathifiguy Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 While I can't be 100% certain, I do believe the brunt of NAD's investment dollars lay in the digital end of audio. Their turntable is a re-badged Rega RP1, so I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the manufacturing of the phono stages were outsourced too. Could explain the favoring of the CD player compared to the phono stage too.
catman Posted June 19, 2017 Author Posted June 19, 2017 (edited) G'day all, the question of personal likes and dislikes is hugely relevant here, and is something that I constantly debate essentially between the ear and measurements. I mean, I know what I like in terms of sound quality but I'll admit that I have heard (and built), audio stuff with supposedly superb and truly 'reference' specifications, that simply did not sound right to me! So how does one rationalise that? Is 'euphonic' sound closely allied with house sound then, at least if we happen to like it? Regards, Felix. Edited June 19, 2017 by catman Spelling. 1
Zaphod Beeblebrox Posted June 19, 2017 Posted June 19, 2017 1 hour ago, allthumbs said: I'm not sure how a "house sound" tallies with the goals of Hi-Fidelity, that would seem to me to be a contradiction in terms. I'd be curious as to how software programs are used in design and development of hi-fi products in what I can only imagine is the superiority of the computer's "ear" to that of the human organ, as far as measurement is concerned. That is beyond doubt. Measurement systems are orders of magnitude better than ears. PROVIDED they are used to measure what is required. It ain't always the case. 1 hour ago, allthumbs said: Is there an equivalent of the Turing test as to whether hifi gear could be better judged by a computer listening to a piece of equipment or a human? No need. The argument is done and dusted. The human ear evaluates a huge number of things simultaneously. Measurement systems generally evaluate a smaller number of things, but with far greater precision. It could be argued that there are not, presently, enough measurements available to quantify everything the human ear/brain hears. 1 hour ago, allthumbs said: I know RIchard of Quasimodo uses his ear as his guide when developing an amplifier for instance and Hugh Dean said Richard had a "very good ear" for such development. I'd be interested if Zaphod is an ear man or a measurements man? Measurements first, then listening. If the measurements fail to reach minimum acceptable standards, then there is little point in listening. 1 hour ago, allthumbs said: and how much is art and how much is science in design and development of sound gear and is there a touch of voodoo, a secret ingredient that is added by each house to their product maybe in the methodology as opposed to providing a signature sound? It's ALL science. Every bit. 1 hour ago, allthumbs said: 3
sloper Posted June 19, 2017 Posted June 19, 2017 Goodaye all l always wonder if what the sound engineer produced is the same as what a paticuler amp and speakers are reproducing. l accept setups all sound different but what sound is correct? regards Bruce 1
LogicprObe Posted June 19, 2017 Posted June 19, 2017 1 hour ago, sloper said: Goodaye all l always wonder if what the sound engineer produced is the same as what a paticuler amp and speakers are reproducing. l accept setups all sound different but what sound is correct? regards Bruce Wouldn't the ultimate be to have DSP modelling the control room and speakers of the mix studio? Might be possible within 10 years but a lot of the old studios are gone or remodelled.
Recommended Posts