My best description would be "fullness"- the sound is deep and rich and envelopes you in a warm cocoon...
Immersive, yes, that is that/those experiences. The right temperature, warmth, is a necessary part of it. You're welcome my friend and thank you for sharing this esoteric bit of audio lore.I tend to think of & define that/those experience(s) as "immersive", you know, like for example, when a audio systems speakers sonic presence totally disappear.
Thanks for attempting to help clarify/define, spicer, Sir.
"tube bloom"
When realized thoughts were keeping sleep away in bed, I tried to think of nothing. All I came up with was complete blackness...for a while anyway.Random thought: When we think of nothing, are we really thinking about something?
Enigmatic or what?
Q
All I could come with was what's behind the blackness and discovered thinking of nothing without thinking about it.When realized thoughts were keeping sleep away in bed, I tried to think of nothing. All I came up with was complete blackness...for a while anyway.
Yes! It's similar to why I like some females more than others. I'm happy with my decisions — I'm not going to try to convince naysayers.The obsession we all have to convince others that "Our Sound" is best, or right, or better, or more accurate, is really pointless.
Reminds me of a few things:According to the Stereophile dictionary by J. Gordon Holt: "bloom: A quality of expansive richness and warmth, like the live body sound of a cello."
No special category for "tube bloom."
Ref: https://www.stereophile.com/content/sounds-audio-glossary
IMO, words are not sounds. One's sense of sound is bound up in qualia, which really is not shared knowledge. Thus, any words intended to describe sound are based on transmogrification, and aside from serving personal reference points, don't translate well to other brains.
After 50-odd years of hearing people describe sound, I've concluded the value to be roughly nil.
I suppose that when you pay people to say things, those "things" may not be 100% true. Maybe the more you pay them, the further from 100%.Reminds me of a few things:
When some hi-fi manufacturers paid famous musicians to recommend their product, I laughed - those people will hear the music no matter what it's played through.
Some early phonograph makers quoted people recruited from the general public for hidden A/B tests as saying that the record sounded just like the real performer. I believe it wasn't a lie, but people were discounting the surface noise as not part of the music.
I heard of one radio host with a program of old records who would play a blank record in the background of his announcements, thus creating a constant level of surface noise throughout the program that listeners could easily listen "through."

The wife wants a distance of at least 10 ft whenever she suspects I fartedThe air from a fart travels at around 7MPH (Google AI), but the sound of the fart travels at the speed of sound (767 mph at sea level).
I remember a guy in English class having this heated argument with the teacher, that fart sounds were really mini sonic booms.
Anyhow, have a nice Columbus Day!
![]()

10 feet and a fan.The wife wants a distance of at least 10 ft whenever she suspects I farted![]()
Some early phonograph makers quoted people recruited from the general public for hidden A/B tests as saying that the record sounded just like the real performer.
That would be funny. Like Don Knotts on Valium.Bob Newhart on 'ludes?