I have just received my copy of the February 2009 issue of Stereophile and read Robert Deutsch's As We See It "Are You a Sharpener or a Leveler" article ! - which has been generating quite a lively discussion (as Robert points out) :-
>>> "There are some nuances and complexities that I was not able to cover in a 500-word article, but I'm satisfied that the basics are there to stimulate discussion--which at least the article appears to have done." <<<
My problem with Robert's article on Levelers vs Sharpeners is that it is too narrow and because it is narrow it ALLOWS people to stay on a narrow path, allows them to discuss on a narrow path, to argue narrowly whether they, themselves, are a Leveler or a Sharpener, to argue narrowly whether others are a Leveler or a Sharpener.
I agree with KBK :-
>>> "Sharpening leads to and/or exists within it's own form of capacity or state of advancing self awareness.
Which is why the levelers will not engage in it.
The issue is both simple and complex, which is a point that the sharpener will 'get' but the leveler will not.
Robert was kind enough to not get into the real depth of the issue in the one page, which is frankly, not possible, as he was aware of." <<<
And Robert freely admits that he was not able to cover all the nuances and complexities in a 500 word article. One particular point where I disagree with Robert is where he says -
>>> "and, as I said in the article, at different times you may be in a Sharpening or a Leveling *mode*. Tweaking a system requires being in the Sharpening mode, but once the tweaking is done, it's best to let it go and switch over to the Leveling mode." <<<
Why I disagree is because by simply stating "Tweaking a system requires being in the Sharpening mode, but once the tweaking is done, it's best to let it go and switch over to the Leveling mode." ALLOWS people to presume that it is OK NOT to have to THINK further !!!!!!!!!!!! Such a statement allows people to be absolved from having to think any further 'once the tweaking is done'. I understand what Robert was probably trying to convey. Yes, time, energy and inclination may be the 'stopper' for people 'tweaking' any further but by 'stopping' tweaking any further themselves, does not excuse them from THINKING things out further !! I don't think that people should EVER be encouraged to "switch over to the Leveling mode" - i.e using Robert's description of Levelers as "wire-is-wire, bits-are-bits, all-amplifiers-sound-the-same folks".
Buddha says :-
>>> "Audio sharpeners seem to differ from other audiophiles by virtue of needing to feel even more special." <<<
The (so called) audio Sharpeners I know do NOT need to feel 'even more special'. Jan is right when he says :-
>>> "No one claiming to perceive a tweak is doing so because they need "a little narcissistic charge". No one who perceives a subtle improvement in a system's sound quality "will quickly run toward any adjective that might make them seem more special"." <<<
To quote Robert again, this time on audio equipment reviewers :-
>>> "Reviewers vary in how they communicate the differences they perceive. Those who tend towards the Sharpening side may wax rhapsodic about an improvement that to most audiophiles is minor at best, whereas those who lean toward Leveling may seem so blase that you wonder if they're suffering from burnout. " <<<
I think that if a reviewer (to use Robert's description) 'waxes rhapsodic about an improvement', it is USUALLY because of being taken by surprise !!!!!!! In other words, by an improvement where one was not expected or by an improvement greater than expected !!
As evidenced by a recent review by Clement Perry in January 2009 issue of StereoTimes on a Schumann resonator device. To quote Clement :-
>>> "The song features Gary Bias on woodwinds, and though I've listened to this song many
times over the years, Bias sounded as though he was blowing with more intensity - with more air - providing his instrument and this remarkable jazz recording, more life and vibrancy." <<<
And,
>>> "The Sunny Majestic loudspeakers opened up a sound stage so wide and three-dimensional and so utterly natural, I initially didn't want to mention it for fear no one would believe it." <<<
I don't for a moment believe (as Buddha believes) that reviewers (and other audiophiles) are "needing to feel even more special" when reporting their experiences and observations.
By suggesting that it is OK to revert to the Leveling mode, Robert seems to imply that people are to be excused from trying to work out WHY, HOW so many so called 'tweaks' work !!! I say 'trying to work out' meaning trying to THINK out what might be 'going on'. I don't mean TRY, physically, EVERY single tweak mentioned !!!! But, at some time, someone is going to have to figure out 'what must be going on' !!!
Robert is right when he says
>>> "And, again, if I may quote myself, "a problem arises when a Sharpener or a Leveler tries to persuade that one is true and the other is false." Alas, I see too many postings on the Stereophile and the Audio Asylum forums where this is exactly what's going on: people who not only have their opinions
I have just received my copy of the February 2009 issue of Stereophile and read Robert Deutsch's As We See It "Are You a Sharpener or a Leveler" article ! - which has been generating quite a lively discussion (as Robert points out) :-
>>> "There are some nuances and complexities that I was not able to cover in a 500-word article, but I'm satisfied that the basics are there to stimulate discussion--which at least the article appears to have done." <<<
My problem with Robert's article on Levelers vs Sharpeners is that it is too narrow and because it is narrow it ALLOWS people to stay on a narrow path, allows them to discuss on a narrow path, to argue narrowly whether they, themselves, are a Leveler or a Sharpener, to argue narrowly whether others are a Leveler or a Sharpener.
I agree with KBK :-
>>> "Sharpening leads to and/or exists within it's own form of capacity or state of advancing self awareness.
Which is why the levelers will not engage in it.
The issue is both simple and complex, which is a point that the sharpener will 'get' but the leveler will not.
Robert was kind enough to not get into the real depth of the issue in the one page, which is frankly, not possible, as he was aware of." <<<
And Robert freely admits that he was not able to cover all the nuances and complexities in a 500 word article. One particular point where I disagree with Robert is where he says -
>>> "and, as I said in the article, at different times you may be in a Sharpening or a Leveling *mode*. Tweaking a system requires being in the Sharpening mode, but once the tweaking is done, it's best to let it go and switch over to the Leveling mode." <<<
Why I disagree is because by simply stating "Tweaking a system requires being in the Sharpening mode, but once the tweaking is done, it's best to let it go and switch over to the Leveling mode." ALLOWS people to presume that it is OK NOT to have to THINK further !!!!!!!!!!!! Such a statement allows people to be absolved from having to think any further 'once the tweaking is done'. I understand what Robert was probably trying to convey. Yes, time, energy and inclination may be the 'stopper' for people 'tweaking' any further but by 'stopping' tweaking any further themselves, does not excuse them from THINKING things out further !! I don't think that people should EVER be encouraged to "switch over to the Leveling mode" - i.e using Robert's description of Levelers as "wire-is-wire, bits-are-bits, all-amplifiers-sound-the-same folks".
Buddha says :-
>>> "Audio sharpeners seem to differ from other audiophiles by virtue of needing to feel even more special." <<<
The (so called) audio Sharpeners I know do NOT need to feel 'even more special'. Jan is right when he says :-
>>> "No one claiming to perceive a tweak is doing so because they need "a little narcissistic charge". No one who perceives a subtle improvement in a system's sound quality "will quickly run toward any adjective that might make them seem more special"." <<<
To quote Robert again, this time on audio equipment reviewers :-
>>> "Reviewers vary in how they communicate the differences they perceive. Those who tend towards the Sharpening side may wax rhapsodic about an improvement that to most audiophiles is minor at best, whereas those who lean toward Leveling may seem so blase that you wonder if they're suffering from burnout. " <<<
I think that if a reviewer (to use Robert's description) 'waxes rhapsodic about an improvement', it is USUALLY because of being taken by surprise !!!!!!! In other words, by an improvement where one was not expected or by an improvement greater than expected !!
As evidenced by a recent review by Clement Perry in January 2009 issue of StereoTimes on a Schumann resonator device. To quote Clement :-
>>> "The song features Gary Bias on woodwinds, and though I've listened to this song many
times over the years, Bias sounded as though he was blowing with more intensity - with more air - providing his instrument and this remarkable jazz recording, more life and vibrancy." <<<
And,
>>> "The Sunny Majestic loudspeakers opened up a sound stage so wide and three-dimensional and so utterly natural, I initially didn't want to mention it for fear no one would believe it." <<<
I don't for a moment believe (as Buddha believes) that reviewers (and other audiophiles) are "needing to feel even more special" when reporting their experiences and observations.
By suggesting that it is OK to revert to the Leveling mode, Robert seems to imply that people are to be excused from trying to work out WHY, HOW so many so called 'tweaks' work !!! I say 'trying to work out' meaning trying to THINK out what might be 'going on'. I don't mean TRY, physically, EVERY single tweak mentioned !!!! But, at some time, someone is going to have to figure out 'what must be going on' !!!
Robert is right when he says
>>> "And, again, if I may quote myself, "a problem arises when a Sharpener or a Leveler tries to persuade that one is true and the other is false." Alas, I see too many postings on the Stereophile and the Audio Asylum forums where this is exactly what's going on: people who not only have their opinions