Opinions are like assholes...Everbodys got one..
Ouch - a little humor is OK.
What is "natural sound"
- Thread starter mashaffer
- Start date
Ouch - a little humor is OK.
Autobot
More than meets the eye
Scorchin34
Active Member
My take on things is that these days it's just hyping the badge with use of what worked back in the days of Yamaha fine gear, my CR1020 is just a stunning performer and it's sound is amazing, my new Yamaha stuff, entry level surround receiver sounds good enough is just that, good enough, goes about it's job without complaint and does it faithfully but when I'm back at the CR1020 it's sound simply candy.
So back in the day there was something to their "Natural Sound" philosophy but today it's just hype.
Peace,
Preston
So back in the day there was something to their "Natural Sound" philosophy but today it's just hype.
Peace,
Preston
Last edited:
fotno
Lunatic Member
"Natural Sound" is certainly a marketing tool for Yamaha; but in the same way that "Brilliant Whites" is a marketing tool for Clorox, or "Look, Ma, no cavities!" is for Crest.
It doesn't necessarily mean that you can't get whiter whites, better teeth, or a more pleasing audio sound using another brand: Just that the aim of the manufacturer is to deliver a a product or service; and they (and their marketing people) feel that this statement best defines what they are attempting to deliver.
Besides, I think that being able to judge whether a recording sounds "natural" is damn near impossible. Natural relative to what? If I'm listening to a pressing of Hound Dog the only way I could know if the recording sounds natural is to have been standing in Sun records the day that Elvis recorded it. When we then account for the coloration of the microphones, the mixers and magnetic media, what I heard in the room as it was being recorded has now been altered to some degree by the signal path and won't sound the same on playback. Not to mention that the recording will be mixed (by human beings to their tastes) to sound good over the studio speakers, and engineer's headphones.
By the time we receive the recordings as consumers, they're already different than the performance material, but we'll never know, cause we weren't there. We either like the recording or we don't, according to our own personal tastes and preferences.
It doesn't necessarily mean that you can't get whiter whites, better teeth, or a more pleasing audio sound using another brand: Just that the aim of the manufacturer is to deliver a a product or service; and they (and their marketing people) feel that this statement best defines what they are attempting to deliver.
Besides, I think that being able to judge whether a recording sounds "natural" is damn near impossible. Natural relative to what? If I'm listening to a pressing of Hound Dog the only way I could know if the recording sounds natural is to have been standing in Sun records the day that Elvis recorded it. When we then account for the coloration of the microphones, the mixers and magnetic media, what I heard in the room as it was being recorded has now been altered to some degree by the signal path and won't sound the same on playback. Not to mention that the recording will be mixed (by human beings to their tastes) to sound good over the studio speakers, and engineer's headphones.
By the time we receive the recordings as consumers, they're already different than the performance material, but we'll never know, cause we weren't there. We either like the recording or we don't, according to our own personal tastes and preferences.
catch 22
"I'm Listening"
"Natural Sound" may be whats at the outputs,but.......the Yamaha sound thur a set of Sansui speakers could make me cringe, on the other hand the Yamaha sound on a set of Dynaco's is almost heaven. The Marantz sound can make damn near ANY speaker sound so good. So now we're back to colored sounds be it from the amp, the source, the speakers, the room or my fauqued up ears, I like 'em all when set up properly, they will all sing a tune that will put a smile on my face, (even my underappreiciated Technics) but I just prefer Marantz... by the way thats why they sell Blue cars AND Red cars.
AlleyKat
Super Member
I just picked up my first Yamaha receiver, a CR-640, as part of a $40 bunch of gear of my local Craigslist. I was really after the Denon CD and the New Advent speakers that were part of the package and considered the Yamaha to be a welcome, but unnecessary addition to the system.
I was terribly wrong. I hooked the Yamaha up to my ADS/Braun L-710A's just to test it as the Advents require a refoaming before use. Now the ADS/Brauns have never been particularly SS friendly as some of the people at the last Fest can attest. They just love tubes:yes:
I was immediately impressed with the clear, uncolored and "natural" sound this produced with a DVD/CD player as a source. (The tuner section does seem a bit weak.) Intrigued, I hauled my TT up to my wife's studio to try it with the Yamaha. I was absolutely amazed by the phono section of this receiver, it comes very close to blowing the phono section of My Adcom GFP 555II away.
Never having owned Yamaha equipment before, my initial thought was that I had almost no money in it and would either flip it, or put it away as a backup for one of my "better" pieces of gear. It's a keeper
Now I just have to figure out which system it will anchor:scratch2:.
I was terribly wrong. I hooked the Yamaha up to my ADS/Braun L-710A's just to test it as the Advents require a refoaming before use. Now the ADS/Brauns have never been particularly SS friendly as some of the people at the last Fest can attest. They just love tubes:yes:
I was immediately impressed with the clear, uncolored and "natural" sound this produced with a DVD/CD player as a source. (The tuner section does seem a bit weak.) Intrigued, I hauled my TT up to my wife's studio to try it with the Yamaha. I was absolutely amazed by the phono section of this receiver, it comes very close to blowing the phono section of My Adcom GFP 555II away.
Never having owned Yamaha equipment before, my initial thought was that I had almost no money in it and would either flip it, or put it away as a backup for one of my "better" pieces of gear. It's a keeper
Now I just have to figure out which system it will anchor:scratch2:.
reggaenaut
Addicted Member
:thmbsp::thmbsp::thmbsp:
Face
BROKEN
CDC-655, no, not a TOTL model from them, but still a "Natural Sound" model.
kretinus
squanto was a fool
Autobot
More than meets the eye
I guess if you have had a bad experiance with a well respected product it is not PC to express it.Is thatwhat I'm getting here.I was useing a Yamaha NS integrated,Yamaha NS single drawer CDP and Yamaha NS A200XT tower speakers all bought at the same time and the speakers where all I kept,the rest went back to Best Buy.That was 10 years ag
ld Kenwood stuff from the 70's sounds better to my ear than the newer natural sound.What I heard was bright and dead boaring.Sorry if my impression is differant from yours.
ld Kenwood stuff from the 70's sounds better to my ear than the newer natural sound.What I heard was bright and dead boaring.Sorry if my impression is differant from yours.
Face
BROKEN
It's more of nobody likes their baby called ugly than PC.I guess if you have had a bad experiance with a well respected product it is not PC to express it.Is thatwhat I'm getting here.I was useing a Yamaha NS integrated,Yamaha NS single drawer CDP and Yamaha NS A200XT tower speakers all bought at the same time and the speakers where all I kept,the rest went back to Best Buy.That was 10 years ag
superdog
AK Member
I guess if you have had a bad experiance with a well respected product it is not PC to express it.Is thatwhat I'm getting here.I was useing a Yamaha NS integrated,Yamaha NS single drawer CDP and Yamaha NS A200XT tower speakers all bought at the same time and the speakers where all I kept,the rest went back to Best Buy.That was 10 years ag
I think what Yamaha gear that they are refering to on this thread is vintage Yamaha.Your experience sounds like a vintage-vs-bpc in which case vintage always sounds better.
yamahammer
mikiesmadness continues
awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww shucks try some stuff from the seventies early eighties you will be pleasantly surprised
I have one of their HT receivers, a CR 1040, and run a C85 pre (in my main system). The HT receiver is kind of low on their current lineup, and wouldn't judge the whole line on it's performance. It's adequate, worth the little I paid for it (open box) and probably more neutral (natural?) than the Denon it replaced.
Now the C85..that's "Natural Sound" to me. HUGE soundstage, DEEP accurate, non-bloated bass, clear non-exaggerated highs and just a very natural timbre to everything. I don't run a Yamaha amp, but the C85 really makes my Robert Grodinsky amp sound the best it ever has. I don't really hear a SS signature to the sound (or a tubey sound, for that matter)...I just hear sound. And it has a fantastic phono stage.
I had a smaller mid-'80s NS integrated, and it wasn't terrible but it also wasn't too great. But it was probably near the BOTL, and I don't think it's fair to judge anything by it.
The 1040 is clean, clear, with plenty of "oomph"..what more could I ask for?
I, for one, love 'natural sound'. I think Yamaha does have a house sound, and them having a label for it makes talking about it easier.
Now the C85..that's "Natural Sound" to me. HUGE soundstage, DEEP accurate, non-bloated bass, clear non-exaggerated highs and just a very natural timbre to everything. I don't run a Yamaha amp, but the C85 really makes my Robert Grodinsky amp sound the best it ever has. I don't really hear a SS signature to the sound (or a tubey sound, for that matter)...I just hear sound. And it has a fantastic phono stage.
I had a smaller mid-'80s NS integrated, and it wasn't terrible but it also wasn't too great. But it was probably near the BOTL, and I don't think it's fair to judge anything by it.
The 1040 is clean, clear, with plenty of "oomph"..what more could I ask for?
I, for one, love 'natural sound'. I think Yamaha does have a house sound, and them having a label for it makes talking about it easier.
The CDC-655 was pretty much Yamaha's BOTL CD player in 1995. The adage "you get what you pay for" is true for Yamaha audio gear the same as it is for anything else.
Unlike audio manufacterers that exclusively manufacture hi-end audio gear for a relatively affluent market, Yamaha is a multi-billion dollar manufacturing company that serves a much wider market. The Natural Sound label on BOTL Yamaha gear is more marketing than fact, while that label on TOTL gear is more fact than marketing.
It doesn't have anything to do with being politically correct. You're criticizing the Yamaha Natural Sound label based on what experience? Having a bad experience with an el-cheapo piece of Yamaha gear? Did you think that was Yamaha's best? That is about as valid as someone saying that Sony SACD players are lousy based on listening to a bottom feeder unit.I guess if you have had a bad experiance with a well respected product it is not PC to express it.Is thatwhat I'm getting here.I was useing a Yamaha NS integrated,Yamaha NS single drawer CDP and Yamaha NS A200XT tower speakers all bought at the same time and the speakers where all I kept,the rest went back to Best Buy.That was 10 years ag
Autobot
More than meets the eye
OH yes the Phono stage is state-of-the-art bar none.
Plus my Pioneer Elite PD-65 CDP sounds like analog.
My C-4 is in front of 6800 watts, Its just amazingly realistic,
mind blowing, clean, clear, deep & wide...I ran out of adjectives.
I guess if you have had a bad experiance with a well respected product it is not PC to express it.Is thatwhat I'm getting here.I was useing a Yamaha NS integrated,Yamaha NS single drawer CDP and Yamaha NS A200XT tower speakers all bought at the same time and the speakers where all I kept,the rest went back to Best Buy.That was 10 years ag
Um, owning a mid to late 90's BPC piece of gear is a fair assessment of the product line? You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I don't think anyone was trying to suppress it, but expressing it based on a small sample, or single piece, is, in my opinion, flawed logic.
"Old Kenwood stuff from the 70's sounds better to my ear than the newer natural sound"
I'd agree 100% and have to say that about any other comparable "newer" product, once again, considering you're talking about comparing it to 90's BPC.
As far as current gear goes, you have to move up the food chain to +$1,000 HT receivers or separates to make a fair comparison of any of them. In that arena, I'd put Yamaha up against anything from the likes of Denon, Onkyo, Marantz, Integra, and the Pioneer "Elite" line.
Cheers!
