Jump to content

How do you describe 'WARM SOUND' in your own words?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Most of the examples given would to me indicate a bit of distortion coupled with a rolloff of high frequency.

 

And that kind of falls in line with the sound I generally associate with what people mean with the adjective "warm"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Warm sound a slogan invented by marketing folks to make their product sell. With slogans such adds rich analog warmth to your sound with our __________ product only for $$$$$$$$$

 

I think SRV would sound like SRV on a $100 amp as well as a $1000 amp just the $1000 amp probably uses real tubes and not tube shaped light bulbs passed off as tubes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I see warm as a descriptor of the old analog, lp sound. Things were more "mixed" sounding. Digital often sounds to me like you have a drummer in Oklahoma, a guitarist in Texas, A bass player in Georgia, and keyboardist in New York, and they are playing together by using earphones. They can still be tight, and the music can be excellent, but the analog sound feels more like those same guys in someone's living room playing together, and you are listening on the couch.

 

Digital is a bit too clear and crispy for me.

 

And yes, analog can sometimes be a bit low-end muddy.

 

Carlos Santana did a cd that covered a lot of classic rock songs starting back in the late 60's. His arrangements and guitar, of course, was great, but the first thing I noticed was that uber-clean, crisp sound and feel. I couldn't help but compare it to the original sound that was analog. Sometimes his version, IMHO, was superior to the original, but the sound......well......it just wasn't that warm analogy feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I look at it two ways;

 

1. Smooth mellow tone, devoid of harshness and distortion; and

 

2. Within the context of your original question, (your reference to "tape, vinyl, etc"), the absence of noticeable digital-sampling artifacts and the impact of inadequate filtering. (Nyquist frequency), which can contribute to that sense of "brittleness". I've only ever noticed this effect in cheaper consumer-grade products from the 80's,90's, where it was common to see a single DAC(digital to analogue converter) being used for both channels (stereo left and right) for cost-cutting reasons. Also, cheap "brickwall-filtering", combined with a too-low(IMO) sampling-rate (44/1Khz). I noticed a BIG difference with the DAT standard of 48 Khz sampling and digital filtering, as well as the use of twin DAC's (one per channel/ left and right). Raising the sampling rate to 48KHz from 44.1Khz, "moved" the Nyquist frequency from 22KHz, to 24Khz, which was well out of the range of human hearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I look at it two ways;


1. Smooth mellow tone, devoid of harshness and distortion; and


2. Within the context of your original question, (your reference to "tape, vinyl, etc"), the absence of noticeable digital-sampling artifacts and the impact of inadequate filtering. (Nyquist frequency), which can contribute to that sense of "brittleness". I've only ever noticed this effect in cheaper consumer-grade products from the 80's,90's, where it was common to see a single DAC(digital to analogue converter) being used for both channels (stereo left and right) for cost-cutting reasons. Also, cheap "brickwall-filtering", combined with a too-low(IMO) sampling-rate (44/1Khz). I noticed a BIG difference with the DAT standard of 48 Khz sampling and digital filtering, as well as the use of twin DAC's (one per channel/ left and right). Raising the sampling rate to 48KHz from 44.1Khz, "moved" the Nyquist frequency from 22KHz, to 24Khz, which was well out of the range of human hearing.

 

 

Except that with many folks, the description of warmth includes rich buttery harmonics that are added with distortion.

 

You don't think 22kHz is well out of the range of human hearing also? From my experience in the digital world, there's a lot more to it than this simple description. Some of it's the design choices made, some of it is the PCB layout and unintended interactions, some of it is customer expectations, some of it is sampling frequency and filtering (less than you might imagine), and some of it is the recording/masterig approach because of new found fredoms digital offers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Except that with many folks, the description of warmth includes rich buttery harmonics that are added with distortion.


You don't think 22kHz is well out of the range of human hearing also?
From my experience in the digital world, there's a lot more to it than this simple description. Some of it's the design choices made, some of it is the PCB layout and unintended interactions, some of it is customer expectations, some of it is sampling frequency and filtering (less than you might imagine), and some of it is the recording/masterig approach because of new found fredoms digital offers.

 

You'd think so wouldn't you. That's certainly true for my current "old" ears. (64 years young). That said, and in a younger era, the difference between a consumer-grade 16-bit CD player (44.1kHz), and DAT (48 kHz) was immediately apparent. Theoretically, the 22kHz Nyquist frequency was well beyond the range of human hearing,,, but what about the filters used back then? How narrow were they? How far did they extend below the Nyquist frequency? 20kHz? 18 kHz?

 

There's no doubt that "properly designed" 16-bit/44.1kHz CD players could sound amaaaazing, but back in the day, the only one I ever found, was the Revox B-226 CD player, which used twin DAC's (stereo left and right), and digital filtering.

 

Off-the-shelf CD players, like the NAD's and Sony's that were available at that time, sounded "ok", but in a direct A/B comparison, the Revox was untouchable. That was "digital done right". I even compared it to a boutique tube/hybrid CD player (California AudioLabs Tempest") which cost over $4k, and the Revox (1/2 that price) sounded better. The difference was almost as noticeable as an A/B comparison between consumer-grade CD, and DAT.

 

"Warmer" too. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have no idea how to explain what "WARM' sound is in ENglish. Think Vinyl, Tape, Analog 'warm' sound.


I know my English is at best mediocre compared to you folks...so please teach me.


How do you describe 'WARM SOUND' in your own words?

Tube sound is often described as warm in tone.

 

How bout "Warm and Fuzzy"

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There are other substantial differences between DAT and CD, including ALL of the processing and tracking electronics. It's like comparing apples and oranges.

 

Any differences are likely to be distributed between a number of factors, it's inaccurate to attribute something to a simplistic path without considering the entire system IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

There are other substantial differences between DAT and CD, including ALL of the processing and tracking electronics. It's like comparing apples and oranges.


Any differences are likely to be distributed between a number of factors,
it's inaccurate to attribute something to a simplistic path without considering the entire system IMO.

 

 

I said "A/B'd,,,,,, in other words, in the same system/same room/same level. Only the compared components changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The DAT is a complete system of thousands of parts as is the CD player.


You are confusing the term "components".

 

 

I don't care about the components,,, that's not what I was talking about, at all. I was talking about the "sound" of a 48kHz DAT system,,,, vs the "sound" of a consumer-grade 44.1kHz CD-players with single DAC and brick-wall filtering. The old consumer CD-players sounded "brittle" to some users. The general impression regarding the sound of DAT, was much higher resolution,,,, more "musical",,,, ergo 'warmer" sounding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I don't care about the components,,, that's not what I was talking about, at all. I was talking about the "sound" of a 48kHz DAT system,,,, vs the "sound" of a consumer-grade 44.1kHz CD-players with single DAC and brick-wall filtering. The old consumer CD-players sounded "brittle" to some users. The general impression regarding the sound of DAT, was much higher resolution,,,, more "musical",,,, ergo 'warmer" sounding.

 

 

You HAVE to care about the components. What I am trying to get you to understand is that it's most unlikely to have anything to do with just the sampling frequency or the a-a filtering. If you wanted to assign "blame" on those, then those must be the only changes made in the comparison. There are WAY too many other variables within a CD player or a DAT player to assign cause.

 

You are comparing a CD SYSTEM to a DAT SYSTEM. There are significant differences other than the sampling frequency, the AA filtering, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...