Thread: At what point does our music system (or, indeed, any other [and others'] systems) stand in Ken Ishiwata's core belief of 'balance' and "quality" playback ?

Posts: 28
Page: 1 2 3 next

Post by Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui November 6, 2013 (1 of 28)
To expand from these words of Ken :
"When you listen to music with a balanced product you become involved in the music, not just the sound."

What he means by "a balanced product" is :
"I came to appreciate how all the different elements work together to interpret the sound signal not just as an electronic function but in a much rounder, complete and beautiful way."

And if as he says :
"Every single component, passive or active, has a character. In every product you're going to have hundreds of components so, again, balancing the circuit becomes essential. Many people have tried to copy what I do, to use certain capacitors or whatever. But the performance comes not just because I use a specific high quality capacitor ; it's in the overall balancing. I use different kinds of component in different circuits. It's not simple ; you've got to really listen, to understand music and its harmony. To love music is the important thing."

Then, what kind of 'balance' (or imbalance) is our own (or others') music playback system (with its chain of passive and active products) ?


Let's consider the following excerpt, in light of the above question, from http://www.marantz.co.uk/uk/aboutus/pages/keninterview.aspx :
Q : How do you measure quality ?

KI : "Of course we have instruments. But these can only measure ‘sonic parameters’ in a static way. Instruments can only measure instantaneously—it’s like taking a still photograph of a dancer : it is precisely accurate but shows nothing of the dynamism, speed and rhythm of the dancer. Music is also dynamic. Its tone, volume, pitch and intensity continuously change. That’s why every time I work on a product I measure its quality by referencing a piece of music that I absolutely know sonically and perceptually from its original source. Only then can I relate the character of each component as part of a whole.

It is essential to understand what quality in original music really means. I believe this is the only way to reference the design process. You can’t just take a commercial [recording] as a reference point, because you can’t know the authenticity of its origins. At Marantz, we understand this importance as an absolute necessity."

Q : So assessing quality (and improving it) all depends on your understanding of the relationships of the sonic characteristics.

KI : "In principal yes, but in reality the characteristics are never the same. The context changes our perceptions of sound in relation to our environment. Of course we have documented methodologies in approaching and developing our designs but sometimes we have to use completely different components in order to get the results we want. There is no ‘set formula’ for design. For example, if someone referenced my tweaking on one unit as a guideline for the design of another, they will fail. Because the sensitivity of the component combinations produce the unique characteristics that make the product interesting. Take a football team in this instance. You may put together 11 of the best players in the world but that doesn't mean that they are going to win. It is exactly in the elements of these players that a true sense of harmony must be sought and in the same way. A good Hi-Fi engineer must be able to understand this."


Thus, to the short spurious "fact" and sentiment said by /showthread/109801/109934#109934 I quote Ken to Ivor Humphreys, in Gramophone, December 1999 :
"Today's music is very much involved with electronics—very wide frequency bands, huge dynamics. With modern instruments you get a very dry, very fast bass, and you need a good transient response. With classical music, though, duration of power is needed as well—usually an orchestral recording is made in a big concert hall where low frequency energy hangs on in the air. And these two kinds of music require different kinds of behaviour in speakers, amplifiers and CD players."

It's doubtful, in 2013, with cumulative technological breakthroughs and developmental insights that Ken would sanction the 'top of the (Marantz) line' SA-11S3s' release if he wasn't satisfied it serves "classical music" equally as well as any other genre. And we only know that "John Luke" has a higher ranked (though discontinued) SA-7S1 (without knowing his exact system, nor selection of discs from music collection because his User Details reflects, substantially, a void). But, from clues, along with "Ralph A Mazzeo, Jr." theirs' are systems readers won't easily encounter, nor own. Nor, for that matter, would you be able to hear much of what I own.

That's why I'd, stylistically, endorsed /showthread/109290/109463#109463 as :
for its price point, is "the best sounding [reference stereo] music system" (especially, with regard to Ken's idea of "three-dimensional localisation of musical instruments and singers").


And, yes, I still use and enjoy the CD-63mkII KI, PM-66 KI set (even if I happen to own a PM-15, CD-7 combination [although loudspeakers, speaker wires, interconnects and the like makes me question how near, or far, am I from Ken's belief in 'balance' for "quality" playback]).

Post by Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui November 22, 2013 (2 of 28)
"His achievements are considerable. Ken can take credit (though he's too modest to do so) for enabling Marantz to defy convention by being one of very few multinationals with audiophile credibility. Indeed, so in tune is Ken with the brand‘s history, and its high-end roots, that he must be thought of as its saviour in terms of respect. Had he not championed various technologies, or banged on and on about sound quality over sheer commerce, Marantz might have ended up as just another Pacific Rim also-ran."
— Ken Kessler
Hi-Fi News, September 2009 review of Marantz SA/PM-KI Pearl


Focus, yesterday's Post /showthread/39611/110729#110729 prompted me to continue here.


As I'd quoted de Montaigne /showthread/109915/110597#110597 I'll quote more of Kessler :
"Possibly uniquely—unless you can name other audio honchos from large Japanese audio manufacturers—Ken lshiwata has enjoyed celeb status in the UK and Europe for three decades. Aside from the boutique brands, this is in direct contradiction to the way major Japanese manufacturers prefer to show themselves as giant collectives. In recognition of the respect the audio community holds for Ken, Terry O'Connell, Managing Director of Marantz Europe, decided it was high time that the company recognised the way he has acted as the brand's perfect ambassador."


Well, for the reason of the title of this Thread alone, I too wanted Ken's special 30th Anniversary Set (to be exact, I wanted 1x SA-KI Pearl and 2x PM-KI Pearl working in Bi-Amp mode [one dedicated for L Channel, other for Right] through Floating Control Bus) !!!

Yet, the nearest I got was the autographed Book and SA-CD that Mike /showthread/109801/109817#109817 brought back for me from Germany (because I'd subsequently spent my savings settling into Palermo with Claudia).

Misfortune, people pass away, I...

And Hi-Fi, I want to listen to a system that meets Ken's core belief of 'balance' and "quality" playback.


Speaking of Germany :
'[Thirty four] years ago there really was a special German sound,' says Ishiwata. 'Today it's better because they have adapted. Many foreign products came into their market and their designers started to understand the merits of other systems...'

But sound requirements pers se are more universal these days ?
'Yes, and what I'm trying to do today, what I was talking about earlier, is to balance the "speed" of a CD player or amplifier.'
— Ivor Humphreys, Gramophone, December 1999

To understand Ken's previous sentence, listen especially to a minute, starting from 3 min 19 sec of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2QPePifDQI (which to paraphrase) :
one of the strong points Marantz has always had :
from low frequency to high frequency having almost the same 'speed' !
Yes, [even] the low end amplifier or [SA-CD] player, in Marantz' case we try to harmonize the speed...
Usually, what happens is, mid to high frequency become faster and they then can't follow the low frequency. If that happens, I'll bring [the mid to high frequencies] down... So that, in both timbre and time domain, you have this natural balance—in such a way that you can enjoy [all genres of] music in most of the conditions of different listening rooms... 'balance' [so that listeners] can still enjoy the music. That's the way Marantz do things.


The Marantz KI Pearls are an extreme realisation of Ken's personal (preferential [sound : lucid and transparent]) core beliefs (and one day I'd seek to own them) :
"Fed all manner of SA-CDs from Mobile Fidelity, Linn, Telarc and other admirable die-hards, the SA-Kl showed itself to be a thoroughbred player reminiscent of the far costlier Esoteric devices, though the voicing differs. Marantz itself used the adjective 'silky' to described the Pearls' black finish. It also applies to the sound, a glorious sheen possessed by both the amp and the player, and a trait shared with the CD12/DA12 from the upper mid-band through to the highest treble.

Someone, somewhere is thinking, Kessler has just praised a coloration. Perhaps it is, in the same way that a valve amp's warmth must surely be some detour from the truth. But I'm way past giving a toss about suffering for my pleasure, and l have always maintained that I prefer the beautiful lie to the ugly truth. Even when fed aggressive, raucous or cacophonous music for which the edge and rawness are integral parts, like the Pixies' indie classic Bossanova or the heads-down-no-nonsense boogie of Foghat's Fool For the City, the SA-Kl managed to impart this diaphanous texture without either robbing the music or blanketing it.

However hard it is to find words for the phenomenon, it characterises the Pearls' overall behaviour..."
— Kessler
http://www.sarte-audio.com/sites/default/files/hifinews_september_09_ki_pearl.pdf



I was to write more, like what I'd learnt when researching the KI Pearl Lites, but another time.




Incidentally, for anyone in Japan (100V, Champagne Gold) KI Pearls are known as :
http://www.marantz.jp/jp/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=HiFi&SubCatId=SACDCDPlayer&ProductId=SA13S2

http://www.marantz.jp/jp/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=HiFi&SubCatId=Amplifier&ProductId=PM13S2

Post by Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui December 11, 2013 (3 of 28)
To continue from the above Post ; significantly, I've since Posted a link to 'Ken's den' in /showthread/38857/110916#110916 :
[Hi-Fi Choice] takes an exclusive look behind the scenes at Marantz and Ken Ishiwata's incredible £100k listening room.

That article greatly helps to express what I've wanted to address in this tread, namely, to try to reference where our reference sound systems stand—in relation to a referential sound designer's own standards of reference.

A short excerpt for you to recall (or read further into) it :
HFC: What was the main goal for the room ?
KI : I have been working at Marantz for many years on so many products, so I had to have a well-controlled room. But the well-controlled room for the usual audiophile is very damped, very dead. Such a room for me is not enjoyable for music, so I was thinking, 'how can I do it ?'—working on a product you need (to hear) everything from, but at the same time with reverberance in the room controlled. Then you can enjoy music. These two combination were the key with this room. That's the reason I had to spend so much time doing it. In this room I'm very happy. So far when people step into this room, they are all flabbergasted !

HFC : Can you explain what you've done ?
KI : First of all (we did) the back wall, we have to have the midband completely well diffused to have equal soundstage width and depth. This was essential. On the side parts I damped them slightly, so I have some absorbtion. So—back wall diffusing, left and right wall some absortion, but then again right after that, completely diffusing. The depths (on the side walls) are different : each line has different frequency resonance. So, a well-diffused midband, then, of course, deflection from the back wall.


And I, possibly you too, often focus finances on building an ideal playback system than on building an ideal listening room...


I'd read the following Marantz music ideals when researching the KI Pearl Lites in Hi-Fi Choice, November 2010 :
HFC : What distinguishes the Pearl Lites from the original Pearls ?
KI : The Lites subscribe to much the same set of ideas as the Pearls. What has changed, however, is that we felt there was a need for a slightly warmer characteristic in the mid and mid-high frequencies. Most modern recordings carry too much emphasis in this area. This was the direction Saul B Marantz took when he was developing Marantz amplification in the 50s and 60s.
We try very hard to avoid altering other information on the original recording, in particular three-dimensional localisation of musical instruments and singers. I feel that the KI Pearl system has a real strength in its ability to reproduce a recorded sound stage and the same applies with the KI Pearl Lites.

HFC : For you, which parameters are the most important ?
KI : The source must be able to pick up all information from the disc and make sure nothing is lost [I think of /showthread/111632/111725#111725 from yesterday], while adding a touch of mid and high warmth. Here we're dealing with very low voltages and currents, although dynamic range is very high. This means you must make sure the noise floor is extremely low and does not interfere with the analogue audio which is difficult since there are so many digital signals floating around.

HFC : How about customised components ?
KI : It would be easy if just adding better parts meant better sound, but it doesn't work this way. Currently we are still using both HDAM SA2 and SA3 output circuits. Both have distinctive characteristics and they are used in different areas of the circuit. The SA3 has a higher slew rate and is less prone to temperature drift, but it is mainly developed to work in integrated amplifiers, while the SA2 is more appropriate for SA-CD players.
Elna, Cerafine and Silmic are excellent capacitors, but they have completely different characteristics. That's why you'll often find both types in the same product in different circuits areas. Components are like people, each has a different personality.

And as Alvin Gold wrote in the main HFC article :
"Somewhere in the pile of information we've accumulated on the Lites, Marantz makes the suggestion that the Lites are balanced to sound a little warmer than usual through the mid and upper frequency band.

We don't want to make too much of this, because there is no way the sound of this combination could be described as tonally dull or lacking in detail, because neither is true, but there is a subtle loss of the excessive sharpness, the exaggerated sense of detail that is often a part of contemporary amplifier design and the result is almost valve-like, but in a positive sense.

The disc player is simply excellent, and in keeping with the amplifier, creates a combination that is easy on the ear, with expansive, stable imagery, and a very open kind of voicing that makes for easy and consistent longterm listening."
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/audio-visual/hi-fi-and-audio/audio-systems/marantz-ki-pearl-lite-sacd-and-amp-714688/review


And as Ken said in a recent interview /showthread/109561/109703#109703 :
"I try to see people's lifestyle and how they think and feel so I can manipulate sound."

Furthermore, back in a 1990s article KI said :
"What makes Marantz interesting is the special mix of cultures : we are originally an American company, which then became Japanese and now European. I take the base models we receive from Japan and I change the sound components according to the European taste. The Japanese look for speed and sharpness, which is typical for the traditional Japanese music. In Europe, people are more balanced listeners because they are accustomed to the spectrum and distance offered by classical music. On the other hand the Americans tend to like big things, such as Steinway grand pianos. They like everything emphasized."



The graphic above was another that I'd made to amuse Ken (for 2011 [yet a 2013 graphic might not happen, for I've so much to do]).


Wishing everyone a pleasant lead up to Christmas !

Well, personally, of gift giving, I'd like my household to adopt Epiphany, January 6th, as the day—because, as a consumer, there's definite savings to be made (especially post December 25th) when one is aware... :)



















To Carl's reply, his burst of feelings below ; thanks, I've replied in my mind and promise to write it out for you (and readers) when I can.


Briefly, in the first place, it's somewhat disingenuous to quote what you said in a private mail and not quote my reply :
In short, the majority of corporate information (as well as end-user advice) does tend to advocate one product or combinations of products. And I was for a long time mislead, losing both time and money.

Ken became a friend during my privileged position (as I'm friends with the previous local distributor of Marantz) to listen and research his thinking (which led me to want to 'raise' his name in support)...

The following quote of Ken's, the integrity of it, guides me :
"What I always tell people is the following : whatever product you listen to, regardless of cost, if your emotion is moved by your favourite music when you put it on, then this product or system has a value to you. But if that does not happen—even if the product is very expensive—then it has no value to you."

Marantz is (thankfully, for I'm not rich), mass market... I understood and quoted it for the graphic within :
/showthread/39611/110729/y#110729


Nor, secondly, did you quote my reply to Kal, or his reply (actually, he hasn't) :
/showthread/111076/111343/y#111343



Below is what you've posed :
"As I have said to you earlier via PM, I think the Marantz brand represents decent quality in the mid-high end category on down. It was not always that way, where I think it was more of a mixed bag. Some of their slightly older products were underperformers given their price, and behind the competition. That may still be true on a case by case basis.

As I also said, I do not think Ken Ishiwata belongs on a pedestal. But, his products today do deserve consideration and a certain amount of respect. He is something of a Johnny-come-lately to the Mch category, but it is good to see him on board, as Kal has said. I do not see anything particularly revolutionary about his products or his approach. I do not see anything in what you have cited that changes my mind or suggests any major changes to the path I am on for my own system.

If any of that is true, then why, might I ask, are you touting him and his Marantz brand so repetitively in this forum, starting thread after thread to sing his and the brands' praises and to recite marketing copy? It is mostly decent stuff, but it has no monopoly on that. Aren't you going overboard?"


Unless you think to edit it to read and express yourself better (because it [from what I know] doesn't), I will reply thoroughly to it (or whatever it becomes) when I next can.









AmonRa said :
"Somebody is not the sharpest pencil in the box here, and I do not mean Fitz…

Speakers, their placement in the room and the room make 60% of the sound quality. Brand of the capacitors in a SACD player is a fly's fart in Sahara compared to that."

My Reply :
Reading incomprehension ([yet again] to Ken's original comment) ? KI was talking in the context of the player itself. You're still sorely a-jitter—in your speckled deserted mind, misleadingly crayoning an unknown systematic Fata Morgana...










Kal Rubinson said:
Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui said:
Nor, secondly, did you quote my reply to Kal, or his reply (actually, he hasn't) :
/showthread/111076/111343/y#111343

You replied? I find it difficult to follow your extended posts, so, if your reply is buried in a long post, I usually miss it.

However, following your link and doing a search for my name, I found your reply, in part, as "Alright, a quick reply in between the many mounting Posts :
primarily, Marantz' Floating Control Bus System (F.C.B.S.), since 2002 introduction in SC-7S1 stereo pre-amplifier, continues to be a feature for Premium-series amplification towards "high quality mch" setups."

Yes, I know of that system (discussed a review with Marantz way back then) but didn't regard it as a seriously marketed product at the time and still feel that way today. It is almost a way of saying "See, we can do multichannel if we wanted to."

My Reply :
In short, the key-sentence in that link was my :
"Simply, without my listing qualifying Marantz products throughout the past dozen years (including tendencies due to 2008's Global Financial Crisis), let's say it's a matter of publicity, of public relations."

Careful reading of that Post you'd find I'd tried to convey Marantz America Inc. as a distributor who decides what products (and how many) it wants to order from Marantz Japan. And, globally, distributors decide their own advertising and promotions.

Post by Fitzcaraldo215 December 11, 2013 (4 of 28)
As I have said to you earlier via PM, I think the Marantz brand represents decent quality in the mid-high end category on down. It was not always that way, where I think it was more of a mixed bag. Some of their slightly older products were underperformers given their price, and behind the competition. That may still be true on a case by case basis.

As I also said, I do not think Ken Ishiwata belongs on a pedestal. But, his products today do deserve consideration and a certain amount of respect. He is something of a Johnny-come-lately to the Mch category, but it is good to see him on board, as Kal has said. I do not see anything particularly revolutionary about his products or his approach. I do not see anything in what you have cited that changes my mind or suggests any major changes to the path I am on for my own system.

If any of that is true, then why, might I ask, are you touting him and his Marantz brand so repetitively in this forum, starting thread after thread to sing his and the brands' praises and to recite marketing copy? It is mostly decent stuff, but it has no monopoly on that. Aren't you going overboard?

Post by AmonRa December 12, 2013 (5 of 28)
Somebody is not the sharpest pencil in the box here, and I do not mean Fitz…

Speakers, their placement in the room and the room make 60% of the sound quality. Brand of the capacitors in a SACD player is a fly's fart in Sahara compared to that.

Post by Euell Neverno December 12, 2013 (6 of 28)
AmonRa said:

Speakers, their placement in the room and the room make 60% of the sound quality.

Audio feng shui?

Post by stvnharr December 12, 2013 (7 of 28)
AmonRa said:

Speakers, their placement in the room and the room make 60% of the sound quality. Brand of the capacitors in a SACD player is a ................

Well, yes it is important to optimise the speakers in the room. It is also important to optimise the quality of the components in the system as well. It's all a system!

Post by rammiepie December 12, 2013 (8 of 28)
Euell Neverno said:

Audio feng shui?

And throwing Lenny Bernstein SACDs in the trash is Oy Vey!

Post by Euell Neverno December 12, 2013 (9 of 28)
rammiepie said:

And throwing Lenny Bernstein SACDs in the trash is Oy Vey!

Donated them (RBCD's) to the library.

Post by Kal Rubinson December 12, 2013 (10 of 28)
Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui said:

Nor, secondly, did you quote my reply to Kal, or his reply (actually, he hasn't) :
/showthread/111076/111343/y#111343

You replied? I find it difficult to follow your extended posts, so, if your reply is buried in a long post, I usually miss it.

However, following your link and doing a search for my name, I found your reply, in part, as "Alright, a quick reply in between the many mounting Posts :
primarily, Marantz' Floating Control Bus System (F.C.B.S.), since 2002 introduction in SC-7S1 stereo pre-amplifier, continues to be a feature for Premium-series amplification towards "high quality mch" setups."

Yes, I know of that system (discussed a review with Marantz way back then) but didn't regard it as a seriously marketed product at the time and still feel that way today. It is almost a way of saying "See, we can do multichannel if we wanted to."

Page: 1 2 3 next

Closed