Please help define these audiophile words

B

Boogieman

New member
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
127
Please help out a confused bloke and define these; examples would be helpful to make more meaningful:

- scale
- bloom
- sparkle
- sizzle
- dry
- clinical vs. analytical
- clean vs transparent
- pace and rhythm
- microdynamics

Thx
 
- scale --thing found in bathrooms and butcher shops.
- bloom ---Thing found at your local florist
- sparkle ---4th of July playthings for kids.
- sizzle ---- 4th of July BBQ indicator that the foods ready
- dry ---------- How you get after towelling off.
- clinical vs. analytical ----practitioner vs researcher
- clean vs transparent ---- ideally the same, at least for class and clear plastic.
- pace and rhythm ---bowling in cricket, that most english of games
- microdynamics ---------a tautology
 
- scale size of the presentation
- bloom a fullness to the sound
- sparkle well defined highs, that are pleasant
- sizzle well defined highs, that are (typically) unpleasant
- dry lifeless; dull sounding
- clinical vs. analytical presentation where you're focused too much on the sound, than music; same meaning...maybe of varying degrees
- clean vs transparent clean is a neutral presentation; maybe not a lot of "bloom", lol; transparent is detailed...allows you to hear "into" the music (microdetails)
- pace and rhythm presentation feels quick, lively, with decisive drive; hence the toe-tapping reference
- microdynamics revealing of the little things (vs. macrodynamics, which is cohesiveness of the sound as a whole

For the record; just because I defined them...doesn't necessarily mean I subscribe to them ;)
 
My personal take

- scale - relative size of performers to venue in relation to the listener's position within that venue
- bloom - a particular way a system portrays the projection/expansion of sound events into space; presented as unfolding or blossoming in a spherical fashion from a point of origin
- sparkle - realistic sounding highs if the highs are supposed to be sparkly that is :)
- sizzle - mechanical/distorted highs
- dry - lacking in harmonics and overtones
- clinical vs. analytical - tough one - the former has emotions scrubbed out the latter elicits a purely cerebral response?
- clean vs transparent - former pertains to lack of distortion of sound events, latter pertains to the lack of distortion in the spaces between sound event's sources
- pace and rhythm - where the emphasis lays on the sonic envelope. Fast pace leans on attacks, proper pace is balanced between attack, sustain and decay, slow pace lacks attack dynamics. I always hated the term "PRAT" most of all, its origin being a misappropriation.

- microdynamics - low level amplitude changes within the larger whole
 
Great question. This is what I think of when I read these terms in reviews:


  • scale
    The system's ability to portray proportionally the size of the recording venue size and performers. An orchestral symphony should sound larger than a trio in a small nightclub say.

  • bloom
    The envelope of sound created by a voice or instrument within the overall soundstage

  • sparkle
    A lively topend

  • sizzle
    A lively topend with some distortion

  • dry
    A presentation that has very little reverb, either micro or macro.

  • clinical vs. analytical
    Hmm, I tend to read these as one and the same, but I like Jack's response to this one.

  • clean vs transparent
    Clean is the lack of haze/hash/veil to the sound. I also think of clean is nicely layered sound, left to right and front to back.


    Take clean sound and add detail, microdynamics and venue reverb, and you get transparent sound - a window into the recording.

  • pace and rhythm
    Good speed delivery to the sound, both the start and stopping of it.

  • microdynamics
    Low level changes in the sound of a note or chord. Too long a sustain that is unnatural for the sound will ruin microdynamics.



Boogieman said:
Please help out a confused bloke and define these; examples would be helpful to make more meaningful:

- scale
- bloom
- sparkle
- sizzle
- dry
- clinical vs. analytical
- clean vs transparent
- pace and rhythm
- microdynamics

Thx
Click to expand...
 
I look as clinical and analytical as meaning the same. For me it means music that is cut and dry with no emotion or smoothness like early CD players and digital music sounded and like many Sabre based DAC's can sound. Early and poorly designed digital amps can sound this way.

The terms that I have trouble with are differentiating between detail and resolution. Sparkle also bothers me. I always get the feeling that when the term "a lot of sparkle" is used, that it means bright or too much high frequency energy.
 
"Dry" may be called monitor sound (with minimum distortions).

antonym - bright, wet (I meet this term in audio processors).

Dry it is not bad. If dry is really non-distorted sound, after enough listening it, such sound may be preffered.
 
Personally I think of most of it as people with a resemblance of intelligence with too much to say that use superfluous expressions & then try to put their own spin on it because their experience is unique like no other before. .....
 
bzr said:
Personally I think of most of it as people with a resemblance of intelligence with too much to say that use superfluous expressions & then try to put their own spin on it because their experience is unique like no other before. .....
Click to expand...
What he said!
 
My daughter used the word "accurate" when auditioning the system at home last night. Played at low volume but there's nothing missing. Highs mids and bass does not lose any character.

I am having some new interconnects for home demo. She told me later...please don't change anymore...that statement to me seems inaccurate.
 
bzr said:
Personally I think of most of it as people with a resemblance of intelligence with too much to say that use superfluous expressions & then try to put their own spin on it because their experience is unique like no other before. .....
Click to expand...

I think all experiences are both personal and unique in some way. That's always been the challenge of communicating them regardless the subject matter. We always need to express these in ways the receiving parties will hopefully understand. The guessing game begins even before a word has been uttered or typed. In a pinch we just get it out there and hope something sticks! :D
 
I like the Almost! Yes I agree. The problem with measurements isn't the measurements but again how we as people have the tendency to read more into them than what they are meant to represent in so doing bloating the scope and ignoring the limitations in one direction or being outright dismissive of measurements in the other.

Still, I think there is beauty in our collective inadequacies when it comes to communication. Life would be so bland if we could perfectly read each others minds :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top