As I reread the posts from Peter I can now understand what he was trying to get at as he described the sound from the Mach III. The words that come to mind when I think about what I heard was holistic, holographic and mesmerizing. From the drums, to string instruments, to brass instruments to voices all sounded authentic. The naturalness of the bass was the best I have heard.
Dave, so nice of you to share Fred's happiness - or how to exactly put it.
Reading your latter words in the quote above, let me return to this one :
https://listen.tidal.com/album/70518588Although that too was planned to be part of the hip-hop evening, this album appears very special and is not really De La Soul as we're used to. It's almost exclusively cool bass riffs with a depth and strength ... well ... you know. No lyrics.
I am confident nobody tried because else I would have heard back something about it. Why ?
well, because there was no basses. Only some low frequency mumbling without definition. And without being interesting at all.
Huh ?
Yes, I played the album again a couple of days later, but I played it on the Stealth II. No electric basses there ! And now I can suddenly see how your words, Dave (and Fred's too) should have way more impact than I would think myself, no matter I have the Stealth III. Am I blind then ? OK, deaf ?
It indeed is so that all is x times more realistic via the III, but the real sense of that is obtained when you go back. Like I did accidentally (I had been listening to Fred's) because a new one had to be build up for me and so I grabbed the II again; Earlier I described that as "ugly" (or "as mud") but this was my perception of the high transient music I listen to (for testing but also because I just like it). And from there, on to the next subject :
Yes, Dave, that would be your interpretation of my words earlier on. But (thus) nothing of the sort of expressions I used, unless it was indirectly about that bass (which I didn't realize it was that "bad" at the time
). Thus no, when I talked about shattering and crackling and "all over" this has few to do with holistic and holographic. I mean, I think these phenomena dedicate to the mere normal music which one has to
play first (haha) and of course judge for that. Say that I hardly do. But now this one :
There is a part where there is whispering, it was like the whispering was 2 feet in front of the instruments.
This could typically be in "my" music, but let's transfer it to needle ticks and a kind of scratching which is often used in the "music" I listen to, and which now comes forward so crazily loud, that we once again can wonder how it all works (hey, especially if now a dumn PC implies it !).
And if we think "crackle" as such and project it onto fireworks, then I could mean literally that but now from "music" which puts it forward (in the "ambient" scene).
And thus what I only realize now is that the novelty of the Stealth III can be put forward from at least two very different angles, if not three. So there's this high transients which so enormously well are represented (mind you, in reference to "not there at all" at first) and which only express in specialty music (no way Ray Brown will incur for it), there's the realistic angle which will be a summarization of all in there and which will give you the "I was there" feeling and which includes the superb (electric) basses and there's the more physical thing of the holistic presentation which btw also is expressed by my crackle because that too is everywhere and which highly contributes to the 3D experience.
There was this uncanny separation of different instruments and voices that let me hear the texture of each.
Dave, Yes. IMO this is very well expressed. I'd say that the further we go with the "absolute good sound", the more the separation is the notable thing. Waves seem to get tighter and tighter (less chance of colliding hence my standing waves concept) which (obviously) implies for the transients to come forward (and no crackle when all is smeared, right ?).
This time as I was driving home I was thinking this was ‘shattering good
You are too kind. And I believe the "shattering" is by accident. But that.
I have a feeling between better technology and the things Peter has learned we will see the sound quality progress further. I’m thinking Peter should work on an amplifier 😉
You say this so right(fully);
So yes, "what I have learned". Let's say that this expresses indirectly that at first I did not know all that much, apart from being an audiophile myself for close to 40 years. I was like most and found new tweaks each day. Ground wires here, ferrites there. Until that one day that I thought that a computer should be able to eliminate nastiness from the CD transport. And from there I lacked the early-quit EE education. But now there was Google.
What is also correct is that the new technology on electronics should be utilized and step by step this happens. Long story short : that amplifier is coming.
Dave, I hope your nice report wasn't underwhelmed by my blathering. I just like those stories too much to not respond to it (all). And of course this is the most helpful for others.
Peter
