This upgrade makes my old system sound broken!

Because a lot of people are silly?

To gain attention.... One can't deny that it seems to work..........

I think I said something along these lines when my Nap 250 was replaced with the new DR version, I just could not believe the improvement it made, but may be it was a little broken as it had never been serviced in the 11 years I had it.

Karl

Since reading this thread, the others now seem broken.

I think the phrase is "click bait".

Half man half biscuit then ?

I'm unable to describe the effect of my hairdo in words. But I know for a fact it's immeasurably superior to the previous hairdo. 

I tried using words, but everyone else disagreed with them.

I conversed with a friendly man a few weeks ago who had a system replete with CD555 and two 555PS's. I enquired about the effect of the second 555PS and he explained that he was unable to describe the effect in words but he knew instinctively that there was an improvement.

There are those that have the capacity for expression and those that prefer the use of contrast to convey their thoughts

" Depth of  soul" ?  ATB Peter ....or simply more of everything.

I might also have used this. And it's not an arrogant statement, it reflects a change which I sometimes have made in the upgrade journey. A change so big that you almost can't understand that you also fully appreciated the system before in it's not upgraded form.

Apparently my system is “fundamentally broken” because I can hear a difference between some Ethernet cables. But I seem to be in increasingly good company so that’s all right.  Past that I am happy to say that my system has never sounded broken – to me.

Expressions get trendy, have a lifespan and tend to die. Inky blackness is on the way out and the hilarious and meaningless "source agonistic" abuse of the English language also seems to be on the wane. Can't wait for this season's meaningless drivel. If nothing else it does you good to larf.

The English language is possibly the richest, most diverse and expressive language in the world and we are fotunate indeed to have it at our disposal to describe our experiences and feelings. Other languages are better at expressing certain other dimensions of our lives, for example German is probably the best 'technical' language. I believe however there is no better language than our own to express (I can't believe it but am now struggling to find the right words......ah yes) the more emotional, ethereal, cerebral experiences in our lives. This rather grandiose claim also applies to describing our reaction to what we hear emanating from a hifi system.

However there is a problem. To me that there there are reasonably meaningful descriptors for visual, tactile and taste stimulea and but we always seem to struggle when we want to descibe our reactions to what we hear. We often resort to unusual descriptors that mean something to us individually but often mean little to others. I think that is why there is often a hesitancy by many of us to describe for example how a NAP250.2 differs from a NAP250DR. There are clear differences but putting them into word is tricky - well I found it difficult when faced with this task. Looking back at my posts on this topic I realise what a poor job I did. There are words like timbre, texture, tone, pitch but these mean different thing to different people and simply aren't enough to describe the emotional effect wonderfully reproduced, and expertly played musical instruments and human singing voices have on us and how it makes us feel.

So I have complete sympathy with those that want to share these emotions with others but find it tricky. That is why I would never criticise those that try and would encourage us all to give it a go. Let's face it, the emotions that great, beautifully produced music, stirs in us is why we spend so much time and money on our HiFi systems. So to describe what we are hearing and how it manages to connect and communicate with us is an important job of the forum. Therefore we should encourage the members here to try and not criticise if once in a while their English doesn't quite translate into ours.

Night night

I wasn't just referring to the phrase 'This upgrade makes my old system sound broken', but was broadening the discussion to the general difficulty in describing what we hear and how it makes us feel.

I guess I have failed to communicate!

I would be interested in your thoughts on this broader point however.

Why the need to describe what we hear, when describing the feeling suffices?

Some of those JVC boom boxes had a fantastic 'sound' - I guess silly is part of us and it is all fun (I hope)!

I think we should have a points-scoring system for identifying hi-fi speak rubbish. If you're first to spot one you get marks awarded, the highest-scoring at the end of a year being given a Statement system. High scorers? "Foo" (a personal hate of mine), inky-blackness, sounds broken, my jaw hit the floor, sounds like I was there, etc. etc. and variations thereof.

Special bonus points awarded fro spotting when someone uses an apostrophe when describing their speakers (SL2's, Ovator's etc.)

Hang on Tony, what about lifted veils?  And surely "My Jaw Hit the floor" is now a phrase of legend around these parts.

I tend to agree with Jan-Erik on this; why tie yourself in knots trying to describe what you hear (never reliable anyway)? Much better and easier instead to describe how it makes you feel, physically and emotionally.  Easier for the reader to relate and understand.  

Unless you're English, of course...

Imagine my jaw hitting the floor due to the vastly improved inky blackness of the loan NAP 300DR I currently have.  It's like a veil being lifted and makes my old ones sound broken!  Sounds great into my Ovator's S600's  (Except it hasn't). 

That work for you, Tony?

I have indeed used the "... sounds broken ..." phrase.  As a tongue in cheek joke.

I have never liked or used the 'broken' word, as it seems to be used to attack other people's systems more than explain a positive gain. I just interpret it as meaning the said item is a lot better and the writer also wishes to offend owners of the described 'broken' item.

Usually the said author has a track-record of wanting to rubbish some particular set of products he dislikes. Also strangely they often never actually purchase the superior items preferring what they already own. 

As to other descriptors - anything goes if it gives the reader a concept of what is being described, so why not. Subjective is essential here, otherwise we degenerate to objective measurements which will only tell us that it is the same as any competent designed bit of HiFi and never describes how it portrays music for the listener.

But we also have different priorities and preferences in musical rendition and portrayal, otherwise more people would agree on system components at any price-point. 

DB.

The Darke Bear has it - although quite often even " a lot better" is hyperbole.  For the most part there normally is an improvement or perhaps just a change but as to the extent of the impact that is most definitely a subjective judgement.  

Nailed it right there Graham!

Agree with you Mr Strat, It's only natural for folks to be enthusiastic about a positive change they've made to their system & the temptation to lapse into hyperbole is quite normal.

Personally, I think most people use the "sounds broken" phrase to describe a positive change to their own systems, as in "Listening to the nuclear-powered DAC makes my old system sound broken". How can anything sound broken? If it's broken then the inky blackness is profound.