The Right Timbre !

Jerome W

Jerome W

Active member
Joined
Apr 5, 2013
Messages
1,289
Location
Near Paris, France
Hello folks,

I wanted to share these thoughts with you.

We all look for different qualities in our audio systems.
Some favor dynamics. Some put PRaT as the first quality. Some will like their system to sound full and rich at low volume while others never listen at low volume. Some like their sound to be the most detailed and clear, while others like it warm and full bodied. Some like a huge stereo image, while others prefer a more centered / focused presentation.
Some want the performers to be transposed in their room. Others want to be transposed in the site of the performance.
We can use dozens of terms to qualify the sound of a system and what we look for. And that's all good to be attracted by different flavors. But :

.......But don't we forget sometimes that the first quality of a system should be the rightness of timbre ?

The right timbre, should be the first quality of a HiFi system. IMHO. All others should come after.
No matter the taste of a hot meal. No matter if you are in a 1 or 3 Michelin stars restaurant or in a little "bistro". The first thing customers ask for a hot meal is to be....hot no ? No one will discuss the taste attributes of a hot meal if it is served cold !

This is something I discovered with McIntosh.
My first McIntosh purchase was the fabulous MC275. Opposite to my mid fi previous gear from Linn, Audiolab, Naim and so on, the McIntosh main quality was PERFECT TIMBRE AND TEXTURE.
The 275 does not have the best bass extension and slam of the world neither the most transparent and cristalline highs. Neither Mc amp has those qualities anyway. But, my experience with McIntosh amps and preamps showed me that, like the 275, they ALL have the right timbre and texture. And no matter the power amp and the speakers you use. With a McIntosh amplifier or preamp or integrated, the voice of Neil Young sounds like the exact voice of Neil Young. Same for Norah, Diana, Eric......
McIntosh is certainly not the only brand with that quality. There are many others. The supreme quality of McIntosh is imho to give the right timbre, NO MATTER THE LOAD. If the speaker connected is neutral enough, with a Mc amp, you will get the right timbre. Guaranteed.
Many other amps are not a good match for ALL speakers. At some point of the spectrum, the speaker does not sound "right". The timbre is off. Sometimes very slightly. But off is off.
When this point of mismatch is in the mids, I can hear it almost right away. Like a hot meal served cold, there is no way I can enjoy the sound presentation after that. It is like having a needle stuck in your body. All my attention is drown by it.

I am still amazed at how many high end systems, that cost huge money and energy from their owners, can sound "off" on voices while having many other stunning qualities. If Eric Bibb's voice sounds like a 18 year old boy, damn there is a problem !!
If Nils Lofgren sounds like a woman voice, damn there is a problem !!! No matter the price of your amps and speakers !!! There is a mismatch between them.
Now if you do not care about the right timbre of a singer, then that's all good. But imho you are missing the main point of hifi.

It seems to me that the whole qualities described everywhere for hifi systems polluted the minds of audiophiles to a point where they forgot the first quality of a system. "Does it sound RIGHT ?" should come before dynamics, frequency extension, stereo image.... No ?

If you are in doubt, just have neutral headphone on hands for reference. I have Senn HD650 and 800 headphones. They both have a right timbre with very various headphone amps. When I have a doubt when trying a new component, I just plug one of them in my Sugden class A headphone amp. And I get instantly the "reference timbre".

A few years ago, I had the privilege to test in my system the fabulous Verdier 845 Triode Spirit SET monoblocks on my PMC EB1i speakers.
It took me about 1 week to hear that the timbres of the voices were very slightly off. Of course the Verdier amps had no defect. They were sounding stunningly good. Much better than the terrific McIntosh 2301's indeed. But there was a mismatch with the PMC speakers in the mids.
While I enjoyed their speed, their "obvious and evident" sound, crystal clear transparency, their bloom and slam, I just could not accept an even slightly off timbre reproduction.

Like we were taught when we were kids, remember ? : you do not have to do everything. "What you do, do it RIGHT" !!!
I ask my Hifi system the same.
Give me the right timbre. First do it RIGHT ! You do not have to "do everything".
Imho that is why so many people can be in Nirvana when listening to a LS3/5a speaker. They are focused on the right timbre.
 
But what many call timbre and midrange "bloom" are really colorations or distortions.

But I agree in principle that midrange quality is paramount! I hear way too many recordings where want to ask what happened to the mids?
 
here are two slightly different definitions of timbre......

********

In music, timbre (/ˈtæmbər/ TAM-bər or /ˈtɪmbər/ TIM-bər) also known as tone color or tone quality from psychoacoustics, is the quality of a musical note, sound, or tone that distinguishes different types of sound production, such as voices and musical instruments, string instruments, wind instruments, and percussion instruments. The physical characteristics of sound that determine the perception of timbre include spectrum and envelope.
In simple terms, timbre is what makes a particular musical sound different from another, even when they have the same pitch and loudness. For instance, it is the difference between a guitar and a piano playing the same note at the same loudness. Experienced musicians are able to distinguish between different instruments of the same type based on their varied timbres, even if those instruments are playing notes at the same pitch and loudness

********

tim·bre

ˈtambər/
noun
noun: timbre; plural noun: timbres

  • the character or quality of a musical sound or voice as distinct from its pitch and intensity.
    "trumpet mutes with different timbres"
    [TABLE="class: vk_tbl vk_gy"]
    [TR]
    [TD="class: lr_dct_nyms_ttl"]synonyms:[/TD]
    [TD]tone, sound, sound quality, voice, voice quality, color, tone color, tonality, resonance "the timbre of the reed"[/TD]
    [/TR]
    [/TABLE]
 
Mike Lavigne said:
here are two slightly different definitions of timbre......

********

In music, timbre (/ˈtæmbər/ TAM-bər or /ˈtɪmbər/ TIM-bər) also known as tone color or tone quality from psychoacoustics, is the quality of a musical note, sound, or tone that distinguishes different types of sound production, such as voices and musical instruments, string instruments, wind instruments, and percussion instruments. The physical characteristics of sound that determine the perception of timbre include spectrum and envelope.
In simple terms, timbre is what makes a particular musical sound different from another, even when they have the same pitch and loudness. For instance, it is the difference between a guitar and a piano playing the same note at the same loudness. Experienced musicians are able to distinguish between different instruments of the same type based on their varied timbres, even if those instruments are playing notes at the same pitch and loudness

********

tim·bre

ˈtambər/
noun
noun: timbre; plural noun: timbres

  • the character or quality of a musical sound or voice as distinct from its pitch and intensity.
    "trumpet mutes with different timbres"
    [TABLE="class: vk_tbl vk_gy"]
    [TR]
    [TD="class: lr_dct_nyms_ttl"]synonyms:[/TD]
    [TD]tone, sound, sound quality, voice, voice quality, color, tone color, tonality, resonance "the timbre of the reed"[/TD]
    [/TR]
    [/TABLE]
Click to expand...

my question is are you referring to the tonality or texture or even something else?

sometimes terms we use get twisted around. the words tonality or tone are less vague words......'timbre' is more challenging to define.
 
I prefer to relate the term timbre to texture and resonance of a loudspeaker which can sometimes affect the tonality of the representation. There is no such thing as a neutral loudspeaker IMO because each representation of a performance is an approximation of a performance that occurred in an earlier space-time, i.e. simulation. A totally neutral loudspeaker could only perfectly represent a single performance for which it was specifically designed to represent. I think the timbre characteristics of a loudspeaker can demonstrate in part a loudspeaker's degree of versatility to approximate a broader range of performances of simulated space-times.

Loudspeakers are uniquely timbre matched to a manufacturer and more specifically to its series. That is why for example in a home theatre environment it is important to have timbre matched loudspeakers, preferably from the same series in order to get a greater convincing sense of realism from the played simulation.
 
I tend to think of timbre as the base sound (pitch) plus the overtones it produces.

When a recording is made both are recorded (although to what degree depends on the equipment and skill of the engineer) and whether they are reproduced with the correct balance (volume) of all the overtones results in whether the instrument sounds real or colored.
 
Mike Lavigne said:
my question is are you referring to the tonality or texture or even something else?

sometimes terms we use get twisted around. the words tonality or tone are less vague words......'timbre' is more challenging to define.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike. I am referring to the tonality and texture.
 
Jerome - interesting read. I'm glad to hear your remain as happy with your Shindo gear as the day you bought it. I've heard Shindo a few times and it's excellent. Timbre wise, I feel my Air Tight with NOS tubes gets me there and beyond.

A dozen NOS Mullard EL34's and these NOS tubes bring me gorgeous timbre:

97945eaf24f499398eb912a906296ccb.jpg
 
Jerome W said:
Hi Mike. I am referring to the tonality and texture.
Click to expand...

Good opening post. The topic is musical related and less technical. Getting the an accurate and true sound is important. How do you meaure Timbre?

I don't quite understand how texture is related. Do you have a definition for that? If so how do you measure it?

Thanks.
 
o0OBillO0o said:
Good opening post. The topic is musical related and less technical. Getting the an accurate and true sound is important. How do you meaure Timbre?

I don't quite understand how texture is related. Do you have a definition for that? If so how do you measure it?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I guess that the timbre of a voice or an instrument can be measured on a spectrum analyser. It is a principal frequency and harmonics.
Not sure about texture. I think that it is more subjective. Texture = Grain.
An analogy would be with a piece of fabric.
Color would be the timbre. Material ( cotton, silk....) would be the texture.
To simplify, when I hear Eric Bibb on my Tivoli Pal, I have the right timbre but texture is off. On my Harbeth P3ESR, I have both the right timbre and texture.
I listened to a high end system last week. Speakers were the SF Ellipsa SE. The texture was fine but the timbre was off.
 
Jerome.......To me, timbre represents the purity of a sound including the harmonic overtones. The accuracy of the primary sound plus the overtones is how we identify what a sound actual is and as an example whether it is a male voice, female voice, animal voice, snapping twig, wind in the trees, the UPS truck delivering our new amp, or a musical instrument. I measure timbre with my ears as we all do. When you listen to a live acoustic guitar you don't need an independent measuring device to determine the sound is live. When you listen to a reproduction of the same acoustic guitar you will not need a test device to know it is a reproduction no matter how well recorded and played back. Reproduced sound always has inherent flaws no matter the minutia of them. Our ears hear these variations in contrast to the actual real event. As audiophiles, we are driven to reduce these differences to the absolute smallest degree. It is our creed.

Texture to me is the degree of deflection inherent in all sounds except pure test tones. Only generated test tones are pure sustained frequencies. All other sounds vary by one degree or another in frequency, amplitude, reflection, vibrato, and diminishing energy. Texture in my mind represents the departure from the absoluteness of a pure tone to a sound that includes variances and imperfections that alter a pure tone. This is what I think of as texture.

The way I perceive it, how well a sound system is able to reproduce the purity of timbre and the spatial imperfections of texture are what defines the true essence of high-end music reproduction. I have heard sound systems that manage timbre very well, think ultra accurate, but somehow fail to completely capture the natural imperfect qualities that strengthen our imagination's ability to fully recreate what we hope to hear. The opposite can also be true when a sound system softens timbre accuracy in favor of what we often term warmth while at the same time delivering an involving presentation of texture. The combinations and variables seem endless. It is this rigorous quest for perfect musical reproduction in our homes that drive us to spend large sums of discretionary income and support an entire industry that feeds our audio addictions. I have moments when I wonder if this is a good thing or a curse.
 
I am going to insult this well thought out and written comment by Dan with a short reply

Current technology lacks the measurement and modeling capability to reproduce a recording with near absolute realism. We can measure with our ears but there are drawbacks that can be freely found by doing a search on the internet.

This lack of measurement and modelling capabilities is much akin to dropping your keys in the complete darkness and searching around on your hands and knees. The measurement device is the street light that your significant other is looking under and your question is "Why are you over there, I dropped the keys somewhere over here." To which your spouse responds, "But I can see here."

We will continue our charge of reducing these differences and finding ways to better measure and model what we seek.
 
But Bill, didn't you get the memo? Measurements are everything! Wait, what? We're measuring the wrong things? We can't measure things like Timbre?

Hmmm....EXACTLY what I've been saying to those who go blindly into the night based solely on measurements. How do we know we are measuring the right things? We don't, because we're not - and can't - for the foreseeable future.

Measurements are nothing more than a footnote. Something to glance at for curiosity. I would certainly not buy a piece of gear based solely on measurements, but I have and will continue to buy based on what I hear, what I like and what I don't like.
 
Mike said:
But Bill, didn't you get the memo? Measurements are everything! Wait, what? We're measuring the wrong things? We can't measure things like Timbre?

Hmmm....EXACTLY what I've been saying to those who go blindly into the night based solely on measurements. How do we know we are measuring the right things? We don't, because we're not - and can't - for the foreseeable future.

Measurements are nothing more than a footnote. Something to glance at for curiosity. I would certainly not buy a piece of gear based solely on measurements, but I have and will continue to buy based on what I hear, what I like and what I don't like.
Click to expand...

Mike - measurements are everything. It's what you asked, "Are we measuring the right thing?" If timbre is important and we are measuring timbre by ear then so be it.

Footnotes and fine print are just as important, if you fail to read that you may be making a mistake.
 
Food for thought: The best sounding gear often measures poorly and sometimes, visa versa.

You wouldn't buy a car based on specs alone either. The visuals, the test drive are all more determining factors than pure specs.
 
Mike said:
Food for thought: The best sounding gear often measures poorly and sometimes, visa versa.

You wouldn't buy a car based on specs alone either. The visuals, the test drive are all more determining factors than pure specs.
Click to expand...

Sure! I have gone out a measured* them all first before buying.

*Measured with my ears, eyes, nose and touch - I felt that taste wasn't going to influence the decision ;)

Back to the topic- I'd like to develop a better sense of "Timbre" and "Texture" as described above for my own "personal" measurements. Any other methods or descriptions here?
 
Double-D said:
Jerome.......To me, timbre represents the purity of a sound including the harmonic overtones. The accuracy of the primary sound plus the overtones is how we identify what a sound actual is and as an example whether it is a male voice, female voice, animal voice, snapping twig, wind in the trees, the UPS truck delivering our new amp, or a musical instrument. I measure timbre with my ears as we all do. When you listen to a live acoustic guitar you don't need an independent measuring device to determine the sound is live. When you listen to a reproduction of the same acoustic guitar you will not need a test device to know it is a reproduction no matter how well recorded and played back. Reproduced sound always has inherent flaws no matter the minutia of them. Our ears hear these variations in contrast to the actual real event. As audiophiles, we are driven to reduce these differences to the absolute smallest degree. It is our creed.

Texture to me is the degree of deflection inherent in all sounds except pure test tones. Only generated test tones are pure sustained frequencies. All other sounds vary by one degree or another in frequency, amplitude, reflection, vibrato, and diminishing energy. Texture in my mind represents the departure from the absoluteness of a pure tone to a sound that includes variances and imperfections that alter a pure tone. This is what I think of as texture.

The way I perceive it, how well a sound system is able to reproduce the purity of timbre and the spatial imperfections of texture are what defines the true essence of high-end music reproduction. I have heard sound systems that manage timbre very well, think ultra accurate, but somehow fail to completely capture the natural imperfect qualities that strengthen our imagination's ability to fully recreate what we hope to hear. The opposite can also be true when a sound system softens timbre accuracy in favor of what we often term warmth while at the same time delivering an involving presentation of texture. The combinations and variables seem endless. It is this rigorous quest for perfect musical reproduction in our homes that drive us to spend large sums of discretionary income and support and entire industry that feeds our audio addictions. I have moments when I wonder if this is a good thing or a curse.
Click to expand...

Great post Dan !
Thanks a lot !
 
o0OBillO0o said:
Back to the topic- I'd like to develop a better sense of "Timbre" and "Texture" as described above for my own "personal" measurements. Any other methods or descriptions here?
Click to expand...

Bill.......Sometimes we simply have to accept the values that our senses deliver to our brains. We do it all the time with other things. I would like to know what air looks like but I can't see it. I know it's real because I breath it and feel it on my skin. There is no test instrument I am aware of to measure air so that it becomes visible but despite this we are comfortable with the presence of air and accept it for what it is. Certain aspects of sound are quite similar. Again, we don't see it but we employ other human senses to determine its presence and influence on us. We can feel sound waves and hear them while at the same time accurately identifying the sound(s) and generally pinpoint the origin. Timbre and texture play into this identification process. That's an astonishing feat when you think about it. Is it important to be able to accurately measure the timbre or texture of a leopard's growl in the brush before we instantly identify it and make a mad sprint for safety? I trust my hearing and my auditory experiences enough to guide me in the right direction without test instruments. The exception would be a sound pressure level meter to help balance speakers in surround sound systems.

I know what your are saying and I am not trying to play devil's advocate. I can appreciate the curiosity that drives the desire to quantify specific sonic qualities but you said it best in an earlier post: "Current technology lacks the measurement and modeling capability to reproduce a recording with near absolute realism." So what's an audio enthusiast supposed to do? The ears know sound like the nose knows smells. I say let your senses be your guide.
 
Fair enough, Dan. Instincts got us this far. I am always looking for ways to quantify something.

An Audio enthusiast needs to "reduce these differences to the absolute smallest degree." ;) in the future by using a measured or systems approach and less "craft"; we want repeatable results for all those who are passionate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top