Liquid? as an adjective

[Mr Peabody]

I've heard liquid used as an adjective to describe audio gear but don't understand what it means. In context I assume liquid is a good thing, however, in listening to gear that has been said to be liquid, I sort of hear like a glare or shimmer, I don't really like that quality, I've gravitated to cables not so.

Than I got to wondering if this "glare" or sort of illumination, is what is being called liquid? And, if so, do others like that?

[Mike]

Liquid is a sound that has body and the notes just have a natural flow to them with a slight decay which allows the notes to just flow beautifully.

In my books:

VAC amp = liquid
Pass XA.5 = liquid
McIntosh 2301’s/601’s = liquid
Gryphon Colosseum = liquid
Constellation = liquid
MSB 204 amps = liquid

Spectral = not liquid
Audionet = not liquid
...a few others, but I don’t want to offend anyone.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CPP]

I have this old link showing Gorden Holts audio meanings and he noted Liquid

liquid Textureless sound.

texture, texturing A perceptible pattern or structure in reproduced sound, even if random in nature. Texturing gives the impression that the energy continuum of the sound is composed of discrete particles, like the grain of a photograph.

And you mentioned glare ; glare An unpleasant quality of hardness or brightness, due to excessive low- or mid-treble energy.

grainy A moderate texturing of reproduced sound. The sonic equivalent of grain in a photograph. Coarser than dry but finer than gritty.

gritty A harsh, coarse-grained texturing of reproduced sound. The continuum of energy seems to be composed of discrete, sharp-edged particles.

I say it all depends on a personal definition.

http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/M...-glossary.html

https://www.head-fi.org/articles/describing-sound-a-glossary.12328/

[Alpinist]

Mike,

I think this is a meaningful discussion. Would “organic” be interchangeable for “liquid” or do you feel it has another meaning? For the record, I’ve never taken organic or liquid to mean lacking texture. To me they also mean an ease or natural flow to the music.

Ken

Liquid is a sound that has body and the notes just have a natural flow to them with a slight decay which allows the notes to just flow beautifully.

In my books:

VAC amp = liquid
Pass XA.5 = liquid
McIntosh 2301’s/601’s = liquid
Gryphon Colosseum = liquid
Constellation = liquid
MSB 204 amps = liquid

Spectral = not liquid
Audionet = not liquid
...a few others, but I don’t want to offend anyone.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mep]

After numerous recent online threads about the meaning of words used in the audiophile vocabulary, I have come to the conclusion that audiophiles basically don't agree on the meaning of words that we use to describe what we hear. Everybody has their own definitions for the words they use. This shouldn't be a surprise because audiophiles seldom agree on anything related to audio.

[Mr Peabody]

Sounds like liquid is something I like and I was on the right track to avoid glare.

Texture, surprises me, I thought that was a good thing, assigning the term to those cues that make the sound more believable, like tones from horns or woody on stand up bass. Maybe that's all under macro/micro dynamics.

LOL, maybe we need a standard glossary, like Webster is to dictionary.

[Mr Peabody]

I've always thought of "organic" as "natural", being able to believe it's more real than electronically reproduced.

Mike,

I think this is a meaningful discussion. Would “organic” be interchangeable for “liquid” or do you feel it has another meaning? For the record, I’ve never taken organic or liquid to mean lacking texture. To me they also mean an ease or natural flow to the music.

Ken

[mep]

Sounds like liquid is something I like and I was on the right track to avoid glare.

Texture, surprises me, I thought that was a good thing, assigning the term to those cues that make the sound more believable, like tones from horns or woody on stand up bass. Maybe that's all under macro/micro dynamics.

LOL, maybe we need a standard glossary, like Webster is to dictionary.

Depending on which audiophile you are talking to, texture is a good thing for the reasons you describe. We will never have an accepted standard glossary of audiophile words even though it has been attempted simply because audiophiles would never come to a consensus.

[CPP]

Depending on which audiophile you are talking to, texture is a good thing for the reasons you describe. We will never have an accepted standard glossary of audiophile words even though it has been attempted simply because audiophiles would never come to a consensus.

yep , ya got the Subjective and Objective folks, and most of the time it never works.

[jbtrio]

To me liquid means grain free with a smooth and natural sound.

[Mike]

Mike,

I think this is a meaningful discussion. Would “organic” be interchangeable for “liquid” or do you feel it has another meaning? For the record, I’ve never taken organic or liquid to mean lacking texture. To me they also mean an ease or natural flow to the music.

Ken

To me organic is how a system or a piece of gear gets the TONE right. Like when I compare the S2 to other DAC’s, you are immediately struck by the tonal accuracy of the instruments. I find myself saying “now THAT sounds like a trumpet!” Ditto for say a Martin D-28 guitar. If you have actually heard those instruments in life multiple times, you know what they sound like or should sound like - meaning - getting the TONE spot on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rrwmd]

I've always thought of liquid (as the word implies) as a "wet" sound where everything flows and feels connected, as opposed to a dry sound where there's too much space between and too much emphasis to individual notes giving an analytical sound. Decay contributes to this. I think a somewhat full, fleshed out sound is part of it as well.

[SuperDave]

To me liquid means grain free with a smooth and natural sound.

I would define organic as grain free with a smooth and natural sound and liquid as a the natural effortless flow of music. I wouldn't have understood the last part until I heard it.

Dave

[jdandy]

Here's my take on a the two audio related words used as adjectives.

Liquid: A sound that is as natural and true to the original source as the sound of water flowing over rocks in a stream. There is a three dimensional aspect to the complete combination of sounds that is captivating, mesmerizing, unpredictable, and soothing all at the same time. It touches your soul. Liquid is the essence of a sigh, a release of tension, a submission to the performance that goes beyond simply hearing sound. Liquid is immersion of one's consciousness into the event.

Organic: A sound or combination of sounds that accurately recreate multi-frequency tones of instruments that vibrate their bodies in harmony with their strings, instruments such as double bass, acoustic guitar, violin, piano, and many other instruments offering multi-frequency tone combinations with each note. When reproduced sound approaches the reality of these instrument I sense its texture and depth to be organic, a living thing. Human voices also have these multi-frequency tone combinations that emanate from the vocal chords, breath, chest resonance, and vibrato. Again, when it is delivered by a sound system such that it becomes wholly realistic and believable it strikes me as organic, in other words, true to life timbre, dynamics, resonance, and sustain.

[AJ Soundfield]

Liquid is neither a gaseous nor solid type sound

[Spock]

To me liquid means grain free with a smooth and natural sound.

Simple and good definition !

[Oly]

I think the term ‘liquid’ has as much to do with the music as it does the gear playing it. Using Joe’s synonyms in the prior post, liquid music is grain free, smooth, and natural. There’s a lot of music out there that cannot be liquified not matter what system it’s playing on.

[Mechnutt]

Liquid is neither a gaseous nor solid type sound

I disagree, we all have had a wet fart at one point in our lives or you just have not lived long enough.

Sorry, I could not resist.


Liquid to me is smooth, flowing, easy going sound. Based upon the responses here, I think that we are all on the same page.

[still-one]

To me liquid means unnatural sounding and slow. Not as slow as syrupy.

[UltraFast69]

Lots of definitions of liquid and organic, both words to me are positive traits in describing the music that plays on a system...so what does everyone describe as the opposite?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[audio.bill]

Lots of definitions of liquid and organic, both words to me are positive traits in describing the music that plays on a system...so what does everyone describe as the opposite?

Rough and grainy.

[CPP]

I look at music the same way I look at photography. When someone mentions liquid I see , smooth ( low ISO #'s 32,64 ) low on noise a.k.a grain. When someone wants the opposite I see high ISO #'s ISO 800, 12,800 on up high on noise to where you can see the grain in the picture, some call it harsh. But like in anything sometimes the user just might like a little noise or maybe its actually distortion in the picture or music.

[kiwi_1282001]

To me "liquid" or liquidity usually applies to the mid-range and implies correct reproduction of musical timbre.

The opposite is shrillness, strident or grainy.

[Al M.]

To me liquid means grain free with a smooth and natural sound.

Except that unamplified live music often sounds anything but smooth. Liquid is meaningless to me as audio vocabulary, and even conjures negative associations.

Too many systems sound overly polished, polite and inoffensive -- 'liquid' perhaps?

That sound is offensive to me, it has little resemblance to the real thing.

[Mechnutt]

Except that unamplified live music often sounds anything but smooth. Liquid is meaningless to me as audio vocabulary, and even conjures negative associations.

Too many systems sound overly polished, polite and inoffensive -- 'liquid' perhaps?

That sound is offensive to me, it has little resemblance to the real thing.

I disagree about un-amplified music not sounding smooth. Acoustic guitar, horns, percussion and vocals sound smooth, grain and glare free to me depending upon the venue. Yes, music through a stereo can gloss over music, so does recording and mastering.

[Kingsrule]

To me liquid as a audio term can best be described as HDCD encoded music as in the RR recordings......(played thru a non HDCD decoding dac)

And this is not a compliment.....

[Kingrex]

Do the words really matter. I feel as I play more in this hobby, read more, listen more, i feel descriptions by authors mean less and less.
What I really mean is I have no idea what something in general sounds like till I hear it. And I have no idea more specifically until I have it in my system where I know the rest of the playback and have a way to evaluate what I am hearing and what it means to me. Especially when it comes to front end gear.

[Mechnutt]

Do the words really matter. I feel as I play more in this hobby, read more, listen more, i feel descriptions by authors mean less and less.
What I really mean is I have no idea what something in general sounds like till I hear it. And I have no idea more specifically until I have it in my system where I know the rest of the playback and have a way to evaluate what I am hearing and what it means to me. Especially when it comes to front end gear.

I agree but I do prefer descriptions like warmth, bright, neutral (although one man's neutral may be different than another), bloom, glare, fatiguing, grain, air-transparency over liquid, shimmer, organic, etc.. I can relate and understand the first terms I mentioned and those terms would help me decide if I might be interested in auditioning a piece of gear as I have a preference towards a warmer sound with a bit of bloom. All too often in pro reviews, I find reviews not cutting to the chase and using adjectives that I find are hard to get a handle on as far as the sound is concerned.

[hifinutt]

I have this old link showing Gorden Holts audio meanings and he noted Liquid

liquid Textureless sound.

texture, texturing A perceptible pattern or structure in reproduced sound, even if random in nature. Texturing gives the impression that the energy continuum of the sound is composed of discrete particles, like the grain of a photograph.

And you mentioned glare ; glare An unpleasant quality of hardness or brightness, due to excessive low- or mid-treble energy.

grainy A moderate texturing of reproduced sound. The sonic equivalent of grain in a photograph. Coarser than dry but finer than gritty.

gritty A harsh, coarse-grained texturing of reproduced sound. The continuum of energy seems to be composed of discrete, sharp-edged particles.

I say it all depends on a personal definition.

http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/M...-glossary.html

https://www.head-fi.org/articles/describing-sound-a-glossary.12328/

thanks , some good definitions there

[Priaptor]

After numerous recent online threads about the meaning of words used in the audiophile vocabulary, I have come to the conclusion that audiophiles basically don't agree on the meaning of words that we use to describe what we hear. Everybody has their own definitions for the words they use. This shouldn't be a surprise because audiophiles seldom agree on anything related to audio.

I recommend those of you struggling and often misusing the "audiophile verbiage" to refer to Holt's and Pearson's original meaning of all these terms. I believe Stereophile recently posted something in this regard to clarify all the terminology used in our crazy hobby.

[CPP]

I recommend those of you struggling and often misusing the "audiophile verbiage" to refer to Holt's and Pearson's original meaning of all these terms. I believe Stereophile recently posted something in this regard to clarify all the terminology used in our crazy hobby.

One of my links was J. Gordon Holt, July, 1993 Sounds Like? An Audio Glossary, do you have any other links

[Ritmo]

Liquid is what I consume during a nice music session. Organic liquid is typically the glass (or bottle) of wonderful Cabernet or Bourdeaux style wine I enjoy in a riveting music session...

Enjoy the music!

[Kingrex]

I fully agree some broad defining words are useful such as warm, lean, bright. My point about vernacular is no matter how many pages you fill, I have no idea what an MSB Select, Reference or my Mojo DAC actually sound like compared to one another. Not unless it's in my system and I really hear it. I especially dont know if the delta in price/performance is worth it.
Has anyone noticed review seem to be about 60% to 70% tech details and not about sound. Is this new?

[Mr Peabody]

Not sure if this is what you are referring to, I read reviews for feature and set up tips as much as for performance. I'm in disbelieve that most manufacturer's websites are one of the poorest sources of info regarding that. While I'm on that rant, I love going to a manufacturer website you know nothing about and seeing a list of model numbers like I'm supposed to already know what they are. Is it so hard to just say "preamp" or "amp". Or, have several series and tell you nothing of what's the difference or entry vs don't even think about it, LOL OK, rant over for now.

I fully agree some broad defining words are useful such as warm, lean, bright. My point about vernacular is no matter how many pages you fill, I have no idea what an MSB Select, Reference or my Mojo DAC actually sound like compared to one another. Not unless it's in my system and I really hear it. I especially dont know if the delta in price/performance is worth it.
Has anyone noticed review seem to be about 60% to 70% tech details and not about sound. Is this new?