PDA

View Full Version : What is the art of sound?



Steve Toy
22-01-2008, 17:39
We believe that the actual process of selecting components and their ancilliaries before assembling and setting them up to make a system through which we can enjoy listening to music is more an art than science. Like with any art an element of technical expertise is of course essential. Just as painters need to master the techniques of mixing paint and putting brush to paper before they can create a masterpiece, the components chosen to deliver music into your home will have been well designed and engineered by by experts with considerable technical prowess.

However, whilst favourable measurements taken of THD, dynamic range, power output, current delivery, slew rates, impedance, sensitivity (and whatever else we can actually measure) can be used to support your reasons for choosing a particular piece of kit, these arbitrary measurements will never be able to substitute what your ears and your own judgement can tell you regarding the effectiveness of the components in delivering enjoyable music into your listening environment. If you choose your kit relying solely on such measurements, the end result is unlikely to be particularly inspiring.

Therefore, such a faculty for discernment using yor ears is vital to the success of building the kind of system that, with the right kind of music, will move you to tears, plant a big grin on your face, get your feet tapping and/or keep your attention for any length of time. If you do not place much importance on the process of actually listening for yourself and making your choices based on what you hear then perhaps there are other sites that will meet your needs better than this one.

Because of the very subjective nature of The Art of Sound, it is inevitable that for different people there will be different points of departure for how they would like their hi-fi system ultimately to transport them to their musical nirvana. These starting points outlined below are just that - starting points, for surely all of us would want absolutely everything from a system without compromise if such a thing were ever possible. As such the starting points listed below are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive so you are free to add to or combine them in any way you see fit:

1) Playing the tune or tunes. Components are selected on their ability to make more sense of different melodies, how they fit together in time and generally give the greatest possible insight into the musical performance. The method used to make the selection is often refered to as "the tune dem."

2) Recreating (or getting close to) life-like dynamics, scale and visceral impact. If you are a regular concert-goer you may seek a system that can recreate the drama and thrill of the live band at the arena or the orchestra in the concert hall.

3) Detail retrieval. You want to extract the last tiny little drop of detail embedded in those silver or black discs.

4) You want to listen to your system all day long without experiencing listener fatigue. For you tonal accuracy, low coloration and distortion are very important.

Me, I fall into the first category although I seek elements of the other three in my system. People often think of Linn/Naim when tune or timing are mentioned. Some will even argue that there is no such thing as musicality/tunefulness and that it is just a marketing ploy touted by the aforementioned manufacturers and their brand-loyal followers. For me it is simply a way of evaluating kit, especially as there are a lot of manufacturers out there that excel in this area and it is by no means a foregone conclusion as to which brands or products are likely to be chosen using the tune dem method.

For tune dem read also deriving the greatest insight into the musical performance.

Filterlab
22-01-2008, 17:47
Excellent post Steve, very qualitative.

I fall into the third type of listener, although as you do, I seek an overall quality presentation of music. But first and foremost it is the ability to really hear what the band put on the recording.

The more background kerfuffle I hear the wider my smile. I particularly remember the first time I heard background studio chatter on Supertramp's 'Dreamer' - filled me full of delight. :)

Maybe it's due to being a musician and having to have an ear and a realisation for those elements in recording.

Rick O
22-01-2008, 19:04
I don't really fall into any... I want a system that's not necessarily tonally perfect, not necessarily low-colouration... I want a system that plays the music with feeling.

If I listen to a piece of music on a system I want it to affect me emotionally, I want it to draw me in, and play the music. It's all about enjoyment, I pick my system on whichever system I enjoy listening to the most. Argh! It's hard to explain.

Steve Toy
22-01-2008, 19:17
Hi Rick and welcome.

You clearly fall mainly into the first category then I would think.

SolidState
22-01-2008, 23:49
The art of sound is actually very simplistic truth be told, it really boils down to how you perceive what good sound is. For me personally after years of listening to all topologies of hardware it boiled down to the actual TONE of the sound i.e how realistic is the sound. How real do instruments and the human voice sound through electronics and lack of listening fatigue for long durations?

Steve Toy
23-01-2008, 00:04
Solidstate is our representative offering the basis for starting point #4. Without actually stating the obvious, guys in this particular camp are more than likely valve amp users, possibly with vinyl-only sources.

It's an extremely valid approach and one I personally wish to investigate with the possible risk that I may wish to trash my entire system, fall in a heap and begin again from scratch if it meets some of the other critera, notably mine.

Rick O
23-01-2008, 01:07
Hi Rick and welcome.

You clearly fall mainly into the first category then I would think.

Actually no, out of all the elements of music (melody, harmony, timbre, texture, tonality, rhythm etc...) melody is the least important. Harmony is far more important to me than melody ever will be.

It's more about the music as a whole, the way it's played, the feeling behind the playing, the feeling behind the composition. All these are far more important than melody.

Lokes
23-01-2008, 01:45
Hi guys,
I don't particularly like the idea of categories that I may or may not fit in,
but here goes,
The most important thing for me is that it's able to keep me digging through my collection for another CD/LP. so you would maybe assume I fit into category 4, but categories 2 & 3 are also important as is 1, to me it all comes down to resolution.

The better my system has become 1, 2 & 3 contribute to 4, detail can be a voice in the background becoming 2 voices, where previously the first voice had masked the quieter second voice, or identifying a specific acoustic around a thwack on a tom.
This increased resolution will also better reveal interplay between percussionist and bass player etc.
The system I have at the moment does all this , It's not an expensive system, compared with some of the kit I've owned over the last 26 years, it works well with CD or vinyl , has a staggering 12 watts per channel capability and looks like a dogs breakfast.
Hopefully we'll share ideas without forgetting that we probably all have different ideas as to what constitutes perfect sound reproduction, it would be a sad world if we all liked exactly the same sound, musicians , women, etc.
Some of the systems I've previously owned worked on certain types of music,
but fared less well on others and necessitated explanations to visiting friends as to why it wasn't performing at it's best, ( Lunar cycle etc).
There isn't a single part of the current system that is standard, i.e. it's had a soldering iron waved at it or in the case of the turntable a major rebuild.
I'll end by saying that if you're using a valve amplifier you owe it to yourself to investigate the benefits from upgrading the coupling capacitors, even ludicrously expensive Teflon caps ( £50 a pair of 0.1uf) are a bargain in the context of the benefits wrought.

Steve Toy
23-01-2008, 01:48
Rick, it can be hard work discussing these things, but in actual fact we may actally agree. My understanding of harmony is different melodic threads working in time with each other. True harmonies are in major or minor third, fifth or octave intervals above any given fundamental note. If a system can separate out all of the respective melodies and yet lock the all together in time you get harmony.

Then there are harmonics: a given note on, say a cello, will naturally give an octave + third attenuated interval above the note plus presumably in turn diminishing further such additional harmonics above that to a theoretical infinity. I guess at this point we define such notions of tonal colour etc.

I know the best possible ancilliaries in your system like stands and interconnects/cables are what are required too eek out these extras in terms of decaying detail.

At this very top end in the audible spectrum we also end up with the spatial cues where RFI and other electro-mechanical microphonic distortion has been sufficiently eliminated or significantly reduced.

Then there is the issue of phase coherence governing all of this....

Steve Toy
23-01-2008, 01:52
Lokes,

Good post btw. Thanks. I'll do my best to respond to your points later today.

leo
23-01-2008, 14:47
Main thing I try to aim for is realism and trying to capture the emotion, I don't like fake added colouration

The beauty with diy is that you don't have most of the limitations with just buying a ready built commercial unit, I'll build something, measure and listen to it and simply tweak the circuitry and components until its right.
If a component is expensive but provides better results I can simply buy it without worrying

The only thing I ever have problems with is the cases, one thing us diyers lack compared to commercial is the cosmetics

Filterlab
23-01-2008, 16:29
Well I managed to upset a few after they just spent on a new product and wanted to bring it here to see how it stacks up:p

They can't handle the truth! :cool:

Marco
24-01-2008, 13:08
Whew...I've finally got a chance to reply to Steve's excellent post. Sorry for my late reply. Looking at the four categories Steve listed:


1) Playing the tune or tunes. Components are selected on their ability to make more sense of different melodies, how they fit together in time and generally give the greatest possible insight into the musical performance. The method used to make the selection is often referred to as "the tune dem."

2) Recreating (or getting close to) life-like dynamics, scale and visceral impact. If you are a regular concert-goer you may seek a system that can recreate the drama and thrill of the live band at the arena or the orchestra in the concert hall.

3) Detail retrieval. You want to extract the last tiny little drop of detail embedded in those silver or black discs.

4) You want to listen to your system all day long without experiencing listener fatigue. For you tonal accuracy, low coloration and distortion are very important.


There is merit in all four; I would want them all in the presentation of my system and the way in which it communicates music. If I had to pigeon-hole my priorities into one of the categories above it would probably be 2), but that's only part of the story...

For me, the 'Art of Sound' is about two things: REALISM (one could also say 'accuracy') and MUSICAL COMMUNICATION without artifice. I believe that if the former is achieved then the latter comes automatically, along with all of that listed above in 1-4. Allow me to explain:

If a piano sounds 'real', for example, in the sense that what you're hearing represents as close as possible to how the instrument sounds live (based from experience on what you know a piano to sound like from regularly hearing one played live - in effect you are au fait with the sound of piano), and the system accurately reproduces every element of the musical performance recorded on to the disc or record as tonally accurate as possible in terms of timbre (this is crucial, IMO) then what you have effectively is REALISM.

The 'musical communication' aspect follows automatically because if the system has successfully achieved all of the above, and captured all the emotion of the performance, which will be the case if the system has faithfully reproduced all of the recorded musical information, then, quite simply, the ‘musical message’ will be communicated to the listener. Subjective system characteristics such as 'tune playing' ability, which is so important to Steve in category 1, is simply an automatic by-product of the realism and musical communication achieved as described.

The fact is (to the chagrin of audiophiles with a certain type of belief system) it is completely impossible for electronic components to encode 'emotion' or 'tune' (as defined by certain audiophiles) on to a recording. It just can't happen. If the system is doing it's job properly (and that means all of what I described earlier) then all it can effectively achieve is to reproduce the recorded information, on whatever format, as accurately as possible - that's all, nothing else.

The same applies to cables: they can't add 'emotion' or 'tune' either if it isn't there on the recording in the first place. When an audiophile, or hi-fi enthusiast/music lover, or any other title you care to give him or her, claims that system 'X' or cable 'Y' 'plays the tune' better than some other system or cable, that might well be the case, but all they're effectively saying is that system 'X' and cable 'Y' were more accurate. I'm afraid that any other notion is simply in the listener's imagination.

To claim otherwise or to build a system on the basis of achieving some false notion that inanimate objects can magically alter recorded information on a disc or record and imbue it with more 'tune', or whatever, is I'm afraid nonsense. What you are effectively saying is that you enjoy the euphonic effect of certain types of coloration, which is fine, but it's not hi-fi, and if it's not hi-fi, then by definition it is not accurate, therefore such systems will not convey the "realism" with music I alluded to earlier. The bottom line is if instruments and voices don't sound real then the music isn't real.

What is heard in these instances is merely a style of sonic presentation that's tailored to appeal to your listening preferences, which of course is absolutely fine, but it's definitely not what I'm after, or what my system is about. I want to hear exactly what's on the disc or record as far as my system is able to achieve with as little sonic tailoring as possible. This may mean that on occasions poor recordings are exposed for what they are, but it also means that good recordings are revealed in all their glory, and that for me is what owning a quality hi-fi system is about.

Building a system choosing components, ancillaries, and cables that combine to accentuate an individual's listening preferences will never be a system that is 'accurate' or 'real' in the sense I have described - it's as simple as that. Musically realistic hi-fi systems, such as I have described, are like fine cuisine: they follow a recipe using the best ingredients to ensure the authenticity of the final dish. Artificial additives serve only to sully the dish, and it is exactly the same with music. I want as close to the real thing as possible, not to savour someone else's over zealous use of seasoning! Therefore I build a system with components which in my opinion reproduce recorded music as faithfully as possible. 'Junk food' simply isn't for me! :)

Lastly, and this is significant I feel, what you consider as 'The Art of Sound' largely depends on your available benchmark, which is basically your level of musical experience, if of course it is accepted that owning a hi-fi system is simply a means to an end, and that end is to appreciate and enjoy music.

If you've never been to a concert or heard, for example, a live un-amplified acoustic musical performance or solo instruments being played, then the stark reality is that you don't really know how any of this sounds. Your benchmark, as such, is only how recorded music is heard through a hi-fi system, albeit one that fulfils your presentational priorities, so in the absence of real musical experience how can you judge how 'tuneful' or 'musical' a piece of hi-fi equipment actually is? It's a fact that I feel deserves some reflection for many audiophiles...

Going back to 2) on Steve's list I have to admit that on, say, returning from a rock concert I get a serious buzz from playing the same band's music on my system and experiencing a mini snapshot of what I've just heard live, reproduced with similar visceral intensity, scale, and life-like dynamics, and of course 'realism'. Oh yes... Nothing puts a smile on my face more! :eek: :D

That, my friends, is my 'Art of Sound'.

Marco.

Steve Toy
24-01-2008, 13:43
Good post Marco.


The fact is (to the chagrin of audiophiles with a certain type of belief system) it is completely impossible for electronic components to encode 'emotion' or 'tune' (as defined by certain audiophiles) on to a recording. It just can't happen. If the system is doing it's job properly (and that means all of what I described earlier) then all it can effectively achieve is to reproduce the recorded information, on whatever format, as accurately as possible - that's all, nothing else.



I agree. Tune cannot be added (or encoded) by a given electronic component. However systems that aren't particularly tuneful are missing out an element of the information recorded on the disc that is of importance to many, including me.


The same applies to cables: they can't add 'emotion' or 'tune' either if it isn't there on the recording in the first place. When an audiophile, or hi-fi enthusiast/music lover, or any other title you care to give him or her, claims that system 'X' or cable 'Y' 'plays the tune' better than some other system or cable, that might well be the case, but all they're effectively saying is that system 'X' and cable 'Y' were more accurate. I'm afraid that any other notion is simply in the listener's imagination.

The problem with any notion of accuracy is that it is an all-embracing term for something that is subject to the listener's perception. Measured accuracy according to the criteria of what can actually be measured certainly isn't necessarily going to, or is even likely to translate into something that the listener believes to be 'accurate.' There are a number of aspects to realism that are more important to any given listener than others.

There are aspects of inaccuracy too that are more likely to get in the way of suspending disbelief that this is only a recording being passed through an electro-mechanical means of reproduction than others. Again this varies from listener to listener. For some it will be tonal aberrations; for others it will be a lack of note separation or a poor sense of timing that may be determined by such things like a system's dynamic acuity as well as its phase coherence across the frequency range.

'Tunefulness,' like many aspects of recorded music reproduction, isn't something that can be added by components but it can be taken away. Remember also that the 'tune dem' is only a method of evaluation. It is not a process of attributing magical properties to hi-fi components.

I guess the problem that component designers, those assembling and setting up systems and listeners alike all face, is that anything added to what was recorded on the disc is not a good thing and taking anything away isn't any good either. Unfortunately the latter is inevitable and that's where compromises and choices often have to be made as to what should remain.

Marco
24-01-2008, 20:01
I agree. Tune cannot be added (or encoded) by a given electronic component. However systems that aren't particularly tuneful are missing out an element of the information recorded on the disc


This is absolutely true, but it's just another way of saying that such systems are less accurate/faithful to the recorded musical information on whatever chosen format was used. 'Tune playing' is simply another aspect of a system's presentation that defines how true it is to the source sound. With respect, I think that sometimes you've got 'tune playing' on the brain ;)


The problem with any notion of accuracy is that it is an all-embracing term for something that is subject to the listener's perception.


Again this is absolutely true. Our notion of "accuracy" in terms of hi-fi will always be subjective and based entirely on our individual level of musical experience. For example, a classical pianist who plays the piano daily will intrinsically know how his or her instrument sounds and would therefore easily be able to judge how "accurate" a hi-fi system could reproduce a recorded version of that sound.

Similarly, although arguably not as easily, a person who regularly attends live acoustic musical performances, or in some other way regularly hears the playing of real musical instruments, and as such becomes familiar with how instuments sound, can through effective aural memory judge fairly accurately how good a hi-fi system is at portraying the realistic sound of such instruments - this is my particular benchmark, which I allluded to earlier.


Measured accuracy according to the criteria of what can actually be measured certainly isn't necessarily going to, or is even likely to translate into something that the listener believes to be 'accurate.' There are a number of aspects to realism that are more important to any given listener than others.


I see what you mean, but for me it isn't complicated at all: if it sounds 'real', based on what I've described above, then it is real. It's as simple as that.


There are aspects of inaccuracy too that are more likely to get in the way of suspending disbelief that this is only a recording being passed through an electro-mechanical means of reproduction than others. Again this varies from listener to listener.


I totally agree. My ears are extremely attuned to tonal aberrations, which you have alluded to, therefore regardless of how 'tuneful' a system is if it accentuates any part of the frequency range which cause instruments and voices to sound unnatural then I find it difficult to get past this stage and enjoy the music, or indeed attempt to suspend disbelief as you have described.


'Tunefulness,' like many aspects of recorded music reproduction, isn't something that can be added by components but it can be taken away. Remember also that the 'tune dem' is only a method of evaluation. It is not a process of attributing magical properties to hi-fi components.


Absolutely. However in my opinion it is a flawed method of evaluation if other important aspects of musical reproduction are ignored. Timbre and tonal accuracy are equally important to get right if the end result is successfully to approach accuracy, i.e. what real instruments and voices actually sound like. For example, how can one suspend disbelief when listening to a recorded musical performance if the voice of a female vocalist is sibilant and tonally unnatural? She just won't be 'there' in the room with you, as she should be if the system gets it right in every way, not just in terms of 'tune'.


I guess the problem that component designers, those assembling and setting up systems and listeners alike all face, is that anything added to what was recorded on the disc is not a good thing and taking anything away isn't any good either. Unfortunately the latter is inevitable and that's where compromises and choices often have to be made as to what should remain.

Spot on. But for me the goal will always be the same: my system reproducing the recorded information on the record or disc as faithfully as possible. I will always strive to maintain the integrity of the source 'sound', and in turn allow music to be heard as near as possible to how the performer and recording engineer intended.

Marco.

artist
24-01-2008, 22:12
We are all trying to get as much detail out of the vinyl.trying to capture the sound of the band in the studio or concert hall

I had an interesting time at a studio that a friend had built,i recorded a few songs and we mixed them down into three formats,tape(quarter inch)cd and vinyl(he has an amazing cutting lathe)we all decided to experiment to see what format we would prefer.

we spent the day listening to all formats.the tape and vinyl were very close we did not like the cd at all.

I decided that i would like to see how it sounded in my system,i had a fair idea what to expect.

So with a lot of groaning we madaged to drag the tape machine home.

I had invited a couple of the guys to sit in on the trial we all sat there with a mental score card.

It took five seconds to dismiss the cd

We had a very hard time decideing which of the remaning two formats was best,many hours passed and we were still undecided we called it a day and we would try the next day.

Daybreak we all had a clear head and plenty of tea(we are all teaheads)
we sat down to day two we decided to start with the vinyl then cd and last the tape.
we loved the vinyl but were quite impressed with the cd it sounded quite differant to what we heard the day before,we then put the tape on and it was very clear that the tape was the best.
I enjoy my system very much but was a little shocked to see that i prefered the tape to the vinyl.
we will try the same experiment again at the studio when the new listening room is ready i will report on this later

Filterlab
24-01-2008, 22:32
I have to say that my 'art of sound' started many years ago when I got my first 'proper' component; a pair of Tannoy Mercury S speakers. I had been using a pair of Memorex speakers that I'd inherited from a Memorex midi system from a mate of mine, and at the time I thought they were ok. However, changing to the Tannoys introduced my to factors that I hadn't really been aware of previously.

So once I'd got used to the Tannoys I started to read about hi-fi in magazines (What Hi-Fi) and also I visited hi-fi shops and chatted to the guys to try and gather as much info as I could. It was only then that I realised just how 'artistic' a good hi-fi is.

Over the years I've moved from budget to high end stuff, and I will move higher as the years go on. I guess the aim of hi-fi is really to enjoy the music, and therefore it's not necessarily that all folk will require high end systems, but the enjoyment for me comes down to the fine tweaking and component swapping in order to achieve (or get closer to) my personal audio goal.

Personally I prefer very detailed sound, almost at the expense of natural musicality, and I've gradually got closer and closer to a sound that is very detailed. The best thing about harking for a detailed sound is that when an improvement is made in that area it is immediately apparent. For instance, when I mounted my speaker stands on two sheets of slate (each), midrange and top end clarity and detail was immediately improved, not by a small amount, but quite extensively - so much so that I was hearing things from VERY familiar recordings that I'd just never noticed before.

That's not to say that I'd never heard the specific details, but just that my attention was drawn to them by means of clarity. It's almost alarming to hear new sounds from a recording that one may have been listening to for decades, but that's a real buzz for me and definitely smile inducing.

However, this is not to say that my system lacks in other areas - quite the opposite in fact, it's capable of hugely weighty sound (despite the diminutive speaker dimensions), it's capable of swinging along to the music and keeping up with ease, it's just that I've pointed it at detail and that takes priority. If I could gain improvements in detail by marginally compromising the other factors, then I would - however not to the point where the system becomes unbearably stripped away, but the essence of decent components is that they should always have all the elements of decent quality sound albeit in varying degrees.

So, the art of sound for me is not related to expense, it's not related to the number of components, it's not related to the physical imposition of components, it's simply hearing what the band REALLY put on the tape. :)


The best advice I could give is experiment experiment experiment, supports that have worked for some players haven't worked for others, cables that have been superb with some components have been poor with others, even little things like positioning on the stand (in terms of height from the ground) have made large differences. Don't take anything for granted as working well just because it has in the past - it could be the weakest link that is destroying the life in your system.

Most of all, don't despair if something's disappointing - not every component is for everyone which is why there's such a vast choice out there!

:)

Steve Toy
25-01-2008, 03:06
Rob,

You've pretty well nailed your colours to the mast regarding your Art of Sound. Folks who know exactly what they want are less likely to waste money on upgrades only to be dissatisfied with them very soon after.

Marco,

I'm still not comfortable with these undefined notions of realism and accuracy. We still need to pin down exactly what aspects of a given recording and how it is reproduced can make it sound real in an absolute sense to absolutely everybody. My suspicions are that this is impossible. Hi-fi technology and its implementation have a long way to go before playback of recorded music is ever indistinguishable to the live event.

Yes we can step closer to subjective notions of realism and accuracy in certain aspects but in an absolute sense they are unattainable goals.

Defining your own notion of realism/accuracy that you can happily live with and enjoy is basically defining your own Art of Sound. For you then to define your Art of Sound as being realism or accuracy would thus be tautological.

jimdgoulding
25-01-2008, 05:11
If the event is recorded right and reproduced right, it is possible to be in the same time and space of the event and in the presence of the performers. Or, so it can seem. A good room helps. To me, that is very satisfying and a worthwhile goal. Very good comments above. I know you cats are down. Cheers.

abc1337
25-01-2008, 08:41
Greets to all.

My one dollars-worth.

i've been listening to a pair of Fostex monitors into a Yamaha mixer whilst learning to play my Roland 'piano' - and when I go back to the naim rig I have, I enjoy it for differing reasons, now.

I mainly enjoy it as it sounds more 'cultured' and refined (yup, for a Naim rig!), and also i actually more so now don't listen to the hifi - more what is being played.

Also, i've mentioned it countless times before, but if your room ain't right...

Marco
25-01-2008, 08:43
Marco,

I'm still not comfortable with these undefined notions of realism and accuracy.

LOL. Undefined and not comfortable? Well go and wrap yourself in a duvet, darling; I don't think I could have defined them any more clearly!

Anyway, I think we've both had our say so perhaps we should step back now and allow our members to define their 'Art of Sound'? :)

Del (Artist) raised some interesting points which I will address later. However, as you know, I have a very busy day ahead with bits of paper ;)

Jim,


I know you cats are down.


Man, don't ya just love Americans! :p

Rob,

Excellent post!

Laters,

Marco.

Filterlab
25-01-2008, 09:44
If the event is recorded right and reproduced right...

That my friend is the real crux of hi-fi. If the guy sitting at the mixing desk has his head screwed on and his mind in the right place, the resulting sound will be excellent on any system and frankly outstanding on anything approaching hi-fi.

On the other hand, if he has fists of ham and ears of cloth then no hi-fi will ever be able to 'make' it sound good - quite the opposite in fact, I've found the better the hi-fi the worse a poor recording will sound.

Steve Toy
25-01-2008, 10:33
You know your Art of Sound is working for you when you find yourself spinning lots of discs and spend many hours listening to them.

Steve Toy
25-01-2008, 14:30
I mainly enjoy it as it sounds more 'cultured' and refined (yup, for a Naim rig!), and also i actually more so now don't listen to the hifi - more what is being played.

Naim gear has traditionally excelled in areas of musical reproduction that I hold dear. More recent Naim does sound more cultured and refined.

Vinyl Grinder
30-01-2008, 12:14
3) Detail retrieval. You want to extract the last tiny little drop of detail embedded in those silver or black discs.

4) You want to listen to your system all day long without experiencing listener fatigue. For you tonal accuracy, low coloration and distortion are very important.



Um. Of absolute importance to me is silky smooth listening without any fatigue at all. CD are totally out, i hate everything about them .I do need detail retrieval but not in your face. All needs to be laid back (Like listening to music in a dream). Large speakers that give deep gut wrenching bass response are important, as i listen to a lot of organ based material which does reach down to the bowels of the earth at times (Speakers permitting)...Vintage Amplification/speaker of choice give me everything i want (Lot of vintage TT's are suspect tho, prefer a modern turntable & cartridge & tube phonostage)...Don't get me wrong i don't just fit in off the shelf vintage gear, a lot of extensive re-building & modification is at play before hand without loosing too much of the original products sound signature. I'm not one for the more modern pin point accuracy etc sound.Sorry if i kinda included 'System Synergy' topic in with this (Just realised).

Marco
30-01-2008, 13:54
Nice one, mate. A lot of qualities that you value are also important to me :band:

Marco.

Steve Toy
30-01-2008, 13:59
Sorry if i kinda included 'System Synergy' topic in with this (Just realised).

No probs. The two are kinda connected anyway.

Vinyl Grinder
30-01-2008, 16:31
My last post Should have said (Like listening to music in a dream). Sorry too late to edit..

**Edited for you by Filterlab.** :)

Vinyl Grinder
31-01-2008, 01:33
My last post Should have said (Like listening to music in a dream). Sorry too late to edit..

**Edited for you by Filterlab.** :)

Cheers Rob..;)

Dogruff
29-02-2008, 12:21
Perhaps the Art of Sound is the ability to transform previously unlistenable music into beautiful toe-tapping stuff.
The problem is you will probably have to bin all your previous favourites.

Filterlab
29-02-2008, 12:28
Perhaps the Art of Sound is the ability to transform previously unlistenable music into beautiful toe-tapping stuff.
The problem is you will probably have to bin all your previous favourites.

Now that's a good post.

Going from CD to lossless AIFF has made the best recordings sound even more open, and also made recordings I thought to be bad (wrongly, my CD player was the problem) completely enjoyable. :)

Steve Toy
29-02-2008, 13:02
Dogruff. Very good point. I'll add that it is also creating a system that broadens your musical tastes in that you begin properly to understand and appreciate more and different genres and artists and basically spend more time listening to more music.

Filterlab
29-02-2008, 13:09
...creating a system that broadens your musical tastes in that you begin properly to understand and appreciate more and different genres and artists and basically spend more time listening to more music.

Another excellent point, the stuff I've got into since buying hi-fi.

jcbrum
30-04-2008, 21:17
In correspondence with Steve Toy and Marco, Steve asked me to post on what my hifi kit was and is, and what I used it for.

I started off with lots of 1950's s/h valve stuff which I used to buy in jumble sales, and take it home and repair it. Components were cheap and new KT66's cost about £2 with ECC 81/2/3 at about 12p. All these were new original boxed Mullard and GEC.

Eventually I acquired a really nice pair of Quad II amplifiers and used them with some HUGE Wharfedale speakers that looked a bit like Quad Electrostatics but veneered walnut instead of expanded aluminium gauze.

Originally I also had one of those little early Japanese battery operated tape recorders, but it was only suitable for speech, as it had too much wow for music. That was eventually replaced by a Revox 'A77' tape recorder with 10" reels.

Through the seventies I tried other stuff such as Sony and Rotel but my favorite kit was Quad. I sold the II's in 1991 for £80 the pair (not many wanted valve stuff) and replaced it with a Quad 34/FM4/306/CD combination which I still have but never use.

I also bought a Revox B77 10" reel to reel, a B215 cassette recorder, and a B285 Receiver together with Revox CD player. I have now sold all the Revox stuff except the cassette machine and the receiver which does as a standby FM/AM/LW Radio, although I haven't turned it on in the last five years. Similarly I haven't used the Quad set in the last 15 years.

For the last seven or eight years I've used AVI kit, initially with Spendor speakers. I've had all sorts of loudspeakers over the years including big TDL's and ATC's including the active ones.

I've always put the music before the kit although I have a keen interest in the electronic and construction side of things. These days ready built kit of excellent quality is so cheap it isn't worth building up yourself, unless it's unobtainable any other way, or you just enjoy wire knitting.

I settled on Spendor LS until they became so ridiculously overpriced that it was more cost effective to build them oneself. Then I started a long search for a really accurate and uncoloured LS, that added nothing at all to the signal but was completely faithful to the original recording. I spent about two years evaluating about twenty or thirty different makes of all the usual suspects and ended up purchasing two sets of Fostex and AVI and running them in comparison for another two years. The AVI's won, principally for their control and uncoloured accuracy.

This brings me to my present system, which is MacBook Pro, AVI speakers, and Airport express. That's it. and it's better than all the other stuff I've heard.

In addition to the above I have four record decks, including a Garrard 301 which I bought NOS, a Thorens TD124 currently unplinthed, a TD160, and a Swiss Lenco grey, before they fitted the cheaper arm with v-blocks. Also an AVI two-wire sub used for base extension when necessary.

I have a digital field recorder and very posh Calrec microphones which I use in conjunction with an RME fireface for making original location recordings. There is not much point in making your own recordings if you can't replay them accurately. For me this is a much more important thing than "PRaT" or "musicality" or "involvement", what's that all about ? altering the re-production so that it happens to suit you on that day ? - weird or what ?

I have always been fascinated with the music of 1925 to 1935 with considerable extension either side to roughly 1895 - 1965, that's the "special" stuff. 70's, 80's, and 90's stuff is "ordinary popular" for me.

So, I digitize everything because I want to be able to assemble a playlist from any part of my library within a short time and just press a button to hear it.

My project for this month is to make a really good recording of "The Dawn Chorus" in my garden which is a mile and a half from Broad Street, the centre of Clubland in the city centre of Birmingham. I've re-furbished an old Goodmans parabolic dish, and am selecting one of my mics to fit to it.

The remaining task is to try to wake up at 4am and go into the garden to make an hours recording.

Regards JC.

Marco
30-04-2008, 22:04
Hi John,

Great post, and just the sort of thing we were looking for :)

I'm a bit knackered now so I'll comment more tomorrow.

Cheers!

Marco.

Mike
30-04-2008, 23:29
Brilliant!!!


:clap: :clap: :clap:



:goodluck:

Steve Toy
01-05-2008, 00:56
Great post John. Now we know what you are looking for it is easy to see why you have chosen your particular path in audio. I guess the same applies to all of us.

The question we should ask ourselves throughout all the heated discussions is does your chosen kit meet your key objectives as opposed to those of someone else with a different set of priorities?

Absolutists need not apply.

jcbrum
01-05-2008, 09:05
Hi-Fidelity is by definition about RE-production of sound, - not production.

Some one once said that the ideal hifi set is a cable with gain.

I can well understand that many wish to alter the sound of their replay kit till it pleases them but that can be different for say, modern commercial recordings, and 40yr old vinyl.

This amounts to "added effects". In the ideal situation you would have a black box with many knobs, so that with all knobs at centre zero, the set simply had gain and didn't alter or colour the sound at all, then either because of deficiency in the recording, or because of personal preferences, one could tweak the knobs and achieve a modification of the output sound. That is adding "effects".

I say if your hifi won't do "gain with no effects" then it can be of only limited use.

Digital systems are almost perfect in this respect since "effects" are very easy to control and the kit can be set up to give "straight gain". Once that has been achieved then the desired effects can be applied to each recording individually and saved with it for later perfect satisfaction in replay. You can even undo some of the effects of compression in the original recording.

This could amount to everyones library of music being tailored to his idea of perfect re-production with no two "songs" necessarily the same anywhere in the world. This would make listening to someone else's hifi and music collection of some interest.

In order to achieve all this it's necessary to have loudspeakers which are uncoloured in the first place. and of the highest tonal accuracy. Undoubtedly this is the hardest thing to achieve presently, but without it good HiFi, and all that I have suggested is not possible.

anthonyTD
01-05-2008, 09:09
In correspondence with Steve Toy and Marco, Steve asked me to post on what my hifi kit was and is, and what I used it for.









The remaining task is to try to wake up at 4am and go into the garden to make an hours recording.

Regards JC.

nice one jc,
i think we all thought there must be more to you than all the ranting and leg pulling!;)
good to read about it...:)
anthony...

Iain Sinclair
03-05-2008, 12:48
Because of the very subjective nature of The Art of Sound, it is inevitable that for different people there will be different points of departure for how they would like their hi-fi system ultimately to transport them to their musical nirvana. These starting points outlined below are just that - starting points, for surely all of us would want absolutely everything from a system without compromise if such a thing were ever possible. As such the starting points listed below are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive so you are free to add to or combine them in any way you see fit:

1) Playing the tune or tunes. Components are selected on their ability to make more sense of different melodies, how they fit together in time and generally give the greatest possible insight into the musical performance. The method used to make the selection is often refered to as "the tune dem."

2) Recreating (or getting close to) life-like dynamics, scale and visceral impact. If you are a regular concert-goer you may seek a system that can recreate the drama and thrill of the live band at the arena or the orchestra in the concert hall.

3) Detail retrieval. You want to extract the last tiny little drop of detail embedded in those silver or black discs.

4) You want to listen to your system all day long without experiencing listener fatigue. For you tonal accuracy, low coloration and distortion are very important.

Yes, all of the above, plus it must have lots of blue LEDs.

Filterlab
03-05-2008, 12:58
LOL! Oh yeah, for me now it's all about replacing red LEDs with blue ones, particularly those really intense ones. :)

zenith2134
09-06-2008, 01:28
Hey Filterlab! Those blue LEDs are nice indeed. My Little Dot MKII has one and it is very intense. It lights my late-night listening sessions perfectly.

Filterlab
09-06-2008, 08:57
There's something so 'right' about blue LEDs. :)

Marco
09-06-2008, 09:21
There will be a couple of them winking at you chez-moi soon enough ;)

Marco.

Filterlab
09-06-2008, 09:28
Oooh, I love the blue!

Steve Toy
09-06-2008, 10:07
I had the blue LED replaced with a green one in the AOS classic amp. I don't like blue LEDs at all. They are the visual equivalent of a bright and fast sounding system.

Marco
09-06-2008, 10:46
I disagree. Blue is cool, especially the 'pin sharp' ones on the EA1s, but for best sound no lights are the way to go as LEDs chuck noise into the circuit.

One of the (many) mods I had done to my preamp recently was to disable the existing LEDs.

In summary: LEDs are for gayboys :lolsign:

Marco.

lurcher
09-06-2008, 10:59
I disagree. Blue is cool, especially the 'pin sharp' ones on the EA1s, but for best sound no lights are the way to go as LEDs chuck noise into the circuit.

Err, have you any links to describe how LED's do that?

I know of at least one commercial, and several DIY phono stages that uses LEDS in the cathode of the first stage to provide bias, they are very low noise in that situation.

Mike
09-06-2008, 11:11
In summary: LEDs are for gayboys :lolsign:

Marco.

Ooh!... suites you sir! :lol:

Marco
09-06-2008, 11:25
Err, have you any links to describe how LED's do that?

I know of at least one commercial, and several DIY phono stages that uses LEDS in the cathode of the first stage to provide bias, they are very low noise in that situation.


Hi Nick,

Nope, but I suppose I could find some if I looked. I thought it was an accepted fact that LEDs are 'noisy'. It was certainly agreed by Glenn Croft.

"Very low noise" also suggests that some noise exists ;)

I'm not saying the detrimental sonic effect is huge - it's simple a case of covering all bases for complete piece of mind. I am somewhat of a perfectionist :)

Marco.

lurcher
09-06-2008, 12:00
Hi Nick,

Nope, but I suppose I could find some if I looked. I thought it was an accepted fact that LEDs are 'noisy'. It was certainly agreed by Glenn Croft.

"Very low noise" also suggests that some noise exists ;)

I'm not saying the detrimental sonic effect is huge - it's simple a case of covering all bases for complete piece of mind. I am somewhat of a perfectionist :)

Marco.

Noise always exists, no component available will not generate noise. I suspect a forward biased LED will be no noiser, and given the correct choice less noisy that the two diodes in series that Glenn seems to like using in his preamp cathodes.

Filterlab
09-06-2008, 12:09
I know that displays are particularly noisy which is why a lot of CD players and AV amps have a 'display off' facility, but I'm sure I'd be hard pressed to hear a connected LED effecting the sound. Given the level of mains borne interference, is one tiny little LED really going to upset the whole thing?

Oh, white pinpoint high intensity LEDs - they're the new blue LEDs. :)

Marco
09-06-2008, 12:10
Nick, I take your point. Glenn recommended it so I went with the programme. He's certainly not the type to do these things if they don't offer some benefit :)

Also, many CDPs offer a display on and off facility. I can usually hear a slight degradation in sound quality when the display LED is left on...

Anyway, LED or no LED the preamp sounds stunning. I will be doing a full write-up shortly :smoking:

Marco.

lurcher
09-06-2008, 12:21
Nick, I take your point. Glenn recommended it so I went with the programme. He's certainly not the type to do these things if they don't offer some benefit :)

Also, many CDPs offer a display on and off facility. I can usually hear a slight degradation in sound quality when the display LED is left on...

Anyway, LED or no LED the preamp sounds stunning. I will be doing a full write-up shortly :smoking:

Marco.

Ah, yes, the backlight of a LCD is a different matter, they are often powered by a switching DC to DC converter so much more likely to do damage.

I know Ian certainly seems happy with his modified pre.

Ian Walker
09-06-2008, 14:09
Glenn recommended it so I went with the programme.

Thats funny he told me it sounds better WITH the blue ledsh:)

Marco
09-06-2008, 14:19
Aye, that's only 'cos you complimented him on his 'pish catchers' and asked where you could get a pair :lol:

Marco.

Ian Walker
10-06-2008, 06:21
Dunno about that mate but it seems the whole Italian team played in their PISH CATCHERS last night:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Marco
10-06-2008, 08:35
Too right, mate. The Dutch could have played in clogs and still won!

That was a very impressive display of football.

Marco.

John
01-08-2008, 07:02
I grew up listening to live music so I want the same kind of impact when listening to it at home. Its kind of impossible task but I am a lot closer I also want to listen to the music and not the sound of my system I guess for me as long as I am enjoying the music thats the main point I try not to think in terms of bass resolution etc they all matter but basically I want kick drums to kick harmonics to cut through tablas and cymbals to sound real and natural and music that can make the hair stand on my back

MartinT
17-08-2008, 11:18
I also want to listen to the music and not the sound of my system

That's exactly it, John. I would also add that I don't want to hear the sound of my room. I want the recording's acoustic to take me to the venue, not a facsimile that doesn't sound like the original. That has been my goal for many years and I believe I am closer to it now than I have ever been.

Yiangos
12-01-2009, 10:51
Personally,i fall into cat.1 and 4. A combination of all categories would be great only is the software was good and let me elaborate on this.Yesterday and the day before,i decided to re-arrange my system to see which component to use and which to get rid.
What i found is,when i listen to a good recording(any kind of music.Classical,rock etc),with my system at least,i feel as if i am in heaven.When the recording is bad,i feels like sh.... lol I am not a die hard vinyl-o-phile but at least,when an lp is badly recorded is listenable but with a cd.....well,that is a different story.

Steve Toy
13-01-2009, 13:43
Hi Yiangos, (do you have a first name btw?)

Your post has made me look back on this thread started a year ago and I've realised just how much my own system has changed over that time. I've changed every component in it and gone all-valves on my amplification. What I've got now is a system that seems to deliver on all four fronts at the same time as not being so brutally revealing as to trash less-than-perfect recordings.

It's amazing what a good linear power supply can do for a CD player too. Thse kind of upgrades give you more detail and better dynamics at the same time as making poorer recordings more listenable not less. How can this be so?

I've come to realise that a good musical system simply does not trash bad recordings for it doesn't exaggerate sibilance or top-end harshness. One combination of kit I tried at home just over a year ago included two big-hitting (expensive) transistor pre/power amps from two different manufacturers. A decent recording was breathtaking but poorer recordings were unlistenable. The reason for this is the fact that this was one grainy mutha of a combination. I guess at this point the valve seed began to germinate in my head. Why go for "valve-like" solid state when reallly, only valves will do?

Yiangos
14-01-2009, 07:04
Hi Steve

Yiangos is my first name btw and before i forget,i want you and everyone else to excuse my English unless you want me to post Greek ! lol yeah,i thought so rotfl. Steve,i know what you mean but here in Cyprus,only the last 10 years you could find a serious hi-fi shop and believe me when i say the owner and stuff don't know anything about hi-fi !
I bought my first hi-fi (well,sort of hi-fi) at the age of 13.Akai receiver/cassette deck Akai loudspeakers and a Goldring/Lenco turntable/arm/cartridge combination.A GL something,don't remember.Ever since (i am 50 now)i am in my fifth system.I only upgrade when it is needed and usually the whole system.I bought my previous system in 1985 and kept it for almost 13 years.I had to purchase a new one only when i blew the drivers on one loudspeaker and couldn't find replacements (TDL RS). I concider myself a music lover with a taste for good equipment not a die hard audiophile who instead of listening to music,tries to find fault in his system and is on a constandly "upgrade mode" :)
I read a lot of hi-fi mags although i don't believe anything reviewers say.For my,hi-fi mags os like sci-fi.You read for entertainment and because is my hobby and i would like to make an adition here.Although i am into what you'd call "high end" regarding audio and i am a subscriber to "The Absolute sound","Stereophile","hi-fi news","hi-fi plus" and 4-5 others magazines,the only one i really enjoy reading is "Hi-Fi World" and if i ever decide to quit reading hi-fi mags but keep only one,that would be.
Regarding valves now.Remember,i am from Cyprus.If i ever want to get involved into valves,i would have to travel to UK,spend a considerable time visiting shops,listening to equipment etc and if something goes wrong (not rare with valve equipment)i would have to ship them back to UK for repair. Mind you,i am not against valves.I haven;t had the chance to valve equipment but i think you guys are crazy.You must know something we, solid-staters,don't,the same way,we,vinyl addicts,know a few things cd users don't !

Steve Toy
14-01-2009, 15:06
Sorry about that Yiangos. :o I didn't pick up on the fact that English was your second language (it's that good) and therefore didn't pick up on the origin of your name.

As for valve amp reliability they are pretty good when screwed together correctly. The valves themselves just turn up in the post, hopefully unbroken, in little brown boxes as and when required.

As for Hi-fi World David Price posts here on the odd occasion and if you look at page 8 of the December 08 edition, we are in there!

Yiangos
20-01-2009, 11:46
No problem Steve.As for valve gear,one day Steve,one day....

Tony G
26-01-2009, 01:58
A lot of interesting thoughts here.
The proposed categorisations, which I see as aspects of emphasis in system selection, can certainly be illustrated from my own experience.
Most notably, when upgrading my speakers nearly 2 years ago.
I was fortunate to be able to audition 1 of the potential contenders in my own system for some time with a view to purchase.
The other contender was an unheard, import only proposition, roughly price equivalent.
Not perhaps a complete unknown as I owned a lower model in the range at the time and a higher model using the same driver was exceptionally well reviewed by a tntaudio writer with whom I share an affinity of tastes in reproduction.
The speakers in question had received very good press and for more than a week I was very taken with them, they mated well with my amplifier, made everything sound great, tremendous sense of scale, not quite as dominating of my living space as the ones I eventually bought.
They definitely covered the first two aspects and were not remiss in the fourth.
Until I stopped being in the first flush of love and heard what they were missing, then followed a week of tinkering to see if the problem was elsewhere, I set up a switchbox to switch between them and my then current speakers to check what I was hearing and finally decided that what I was noticing was the compromises that had been made in the design to achieve their design goals.
I still find it a mystery why a speaker with a nominal sensitivity very similar to what I am using now should not reproduce the micro detail I hear now.
Be that as it may, I reluctantly returned them to the dealer with recompense for his trouble in delivering and picking them up again, feeling that it was only proper to do so and also that it was a cheap letoff.
Those speakers have now gone to a home where they are loved, but they were not for me, much as the effortless sense of scale was intoxicating.
I then went through the import thing and after nearly 2 years am constantly delighted with what I hear, yes they are ruthlessly revealing, yes they do not do the bottom octave and I may add bass augmentation at some time but at present, for most of what I listen to and the comfort of my neighbours, they are more than adequate.
Quality of bass, for me, exceeds quantity for most music. They have also proved an excellent system tuning tool.
Enough illustrative digression.
I would propose, and it is covered in various ways earlier in this thread, rather two categories, the first resolution and the second re-presentation.
The first being the ability of the system to retrieve the recorded information and the second its ability to faithfully re present (as in present again) that information.
I expect this is similar to what Marco is referring to as accuracy and feel it most closely resembles category the third, though it embraces the other 3.
I do not set out to find problems with the re-presentation of my system, but should some particular distortion intrude upon the music, then I will embark on tinkering and tweaking to ascertain its source and if possible resolution.
Whilst improved fidelity has often revealed recordings to be less than might be desired, the balance of improved sounding recordings is very favourable and the improvement made by some changes been much greater than expected.
An example here would be the improvement to the performance of the DL-103 after changing from a cheap SUT to an active headamp, another, a particular distortion in vocals on a couple of recordings eliminated after using Mr Yips protractor and painstakingly realigning my cartridge.
The results of the above 2 examples, improved information retrieval for the latter and harm minimisation in the former, resulting in more accurate re presentation, instead of a screech of massed violins there are individual violins, instead of one singer there is a backing singer and some studio reverb.
If the information is retrieved with accuracy in the time domain and re presented with phase coherence then I think tunefulness and all else will/can be re presented given a minimum damage amplification chain and suitable output transducers.
I think that is enough of an essay.

Steve Toy
26-01-2009, 04:02
I would propose, and it is covered in various ways earlier in this thread, rather two categories, the first resolution and the second re-presentation.

I think with this we essentially end up with a Flat/Round Earth dichotomy. This is no bad thing but for the fact that many associate Flat Earth with certain brands of hi-fi rather than with a state of listening.

Flat Earth is about coherent retrieval of detail - communication. Round Earth is about presentation - speaker/room interraction, bass slam, scale, shimmering highs, air and space, big soundstaging etc.

A decent system does the lot but "shimmering highs," for example, need to reproduce the rhythm of the high hat rather than just a softened tizz with the sibilance stripped out.

Where there are obvious compromises to be made, communication comes before presentation for me.

Tony G
26-01-2009, 06:28
Thanks for your thoughts Steve.
As a latecomer to hifi discussion and not UK resident, I am only peripherally aware of all the to & fro associated with the nomenclature of "flat earth" and "round earth".
I had gathered that there was some association with adherents of certain manufacturers products.
In some respects it would seem that my preferences mirror your own, given that I am happy to do without bass response "flat to 20Hz" in favour of being able to "hear the walls" in the concert hall or studio.
To me though it is all yin and yang, the breathing in and breathing out of the universe, the one becoming the other, opposite but not opposed, holistic and complementary.

Addendum some time later,
it is certainly not my intention to aggravate old wounds and schisms or restart wars of which I have no knowledge. Please forgive me, if, in my ignorance of such historical matters, I may have seemed to be doing so. It is only my desire to deepen my own understanding of the issues involved and partake in some sort of discussion thereon, that prompts me to post. I have seen enough already of interminable and pointless argument in other places where the primary issue is lost in the clamour to "prove" who is right and obversely who is therefore "wrong".
I find it all acrimonious and unwelcoming and I get the impression that those here feel similarly.

MartinT
26-01-2009, 10:45
I fall firmly into believing that a well-rounded system is capable of both the communication (foot-tapping, rhythm, dynamics, slam etc.) and presentation (width, height, depth, focus, detail, transparency) capabilities. One or the other of the extremes (e.g. Naim electronics or SET valves) just don't do it for me. I also believe in wide bandwidth, which usually translates into large speakers. I can't be listening to full orchestral music on stand-mounters.

Just all my personal preferences.

aquapiranha
26-01-2009, 10:58
I just like whatever does the job to the level I require. for the moment that is valves and full range drivers. This may change if I can better things within my budget.

Steve Toy
26-01-2009, 14:36
Steve, could you be more specific?

What is your art of sound? You've stated the kind of equipment you want to use but not the kind of presentation of recorded music you seek from it.

aquapiranha
26-01-2009, 17:55
Steve, could you be more specific?

What is your art of sound? You've stated the kind of equipment you want to use but not the kind of presentation of recorded music you seek from it.

Sorry Steve. I suppose what I strive for is basically to have a sound that recalls as much realism as is possible. I want to be able to sit down whenever I get the spare time and be transported elsewhere by the music. To that end I have certain requirements:

I like a big, expansive "sound stage" but most importantly, all of the instruments and / or vocalists must be palpable and well defined within this sound stage. All of the instruments must display as far as possible the traits they show in a live performance, with each in its own space and time line within the music, separate, yet working together to produce a sound that enables me to imagine they are in the room with me.

I suppose I do not go for "hifi" things, preferring instead to take the music as a whole, an experience to enjoy, and not an exercise in "critical listening"

Music is meant to be enjoyed. What good is listening to it if all you are going to do is dissect everything instead of relaxing and letting it take you over?

Yiangos
27-01-2009, 06:24
:smoking:I believe Martin T and Steve (aquapiranha)said it well but let me add something.From what i remember a few years ago and ever since i began reading magazines and listening to music,all reviewers used to say that there was absolutely no way to approach live sound in our rooms.Unless something redical happened during the last years,that comment still stands.Therefore,my view on the subject is hi-fi is full of compromises.
Unless one has the perfect room and the perfect system (money money money) there's absolutely no way to recreate live sound.What really matters is to setup a system that plays the way you like it.I am not sure i am making myself clear on this but what matters to me is when i sit to listen to music,i want my system to be balanced.If i notice that something attracts my attention (i.e. certain frequencies,especially in the upper mid and treble sticking out)then the whole concept is wrong.The system should be "invicible" and well balanced.What i am trying to say here is apart from personal prefferences,a system should be synergistic.

Steve Toy
27-01-2009, 06:29
The bar to live sound from hi-fi isn't room acoustics - you could have a live band in your room and it would sound, er, live. The problem is dynamic range. No hi-fi can do it to reproduce any live instrument, especially not that of a drum kit.

aquapiranha
27-01-2009, 07:25
The bar to live sound from hi-fi isn't room acoustics - you could have a live band in your room and it would sound, er, live. The problem is dynamic range. No hi-fi can do it to reproduce any live instrument, especially not that of a drum kit.

Indeed Steve. That is why I say "strive" for that kind of sound. Lot's of fun in the chase though!

:lol:

alb
27-01-2009, 09:49
I suppose I do not go for "hifi" things, preferring instead to take the music as a whole, an experience to enjoy, and not an exercise in "critical listening"

Music is meant to be enjoyed. What good is listening to it if all you are going to do is dissect everything instead of relaxing and letting it take you over?

Interesting that many of us who dabble in the DIY side, would relate the above to their own preferences. Even though we have the ability to create a clinically detailed and accurate system should we wish to. I wonder if this only applies to tube heads.
Solid state DIYers often seem to go for surgical precision. I suspect - having done both - that it's easier to arrive at this with SS devices.

Whilst it's true that systems can't reproduce the dynamics of some types of instruments, i've heard one or two lately that have a good go at it.:)
I wonder if the average recording even has any dynamics to start with.
Maybe in another thirty years....

Marco
27-01-2009, 10:26
Whilst it's true that systems can't reproduce the dynamics of some types of instruments, i've heard one or two lately that have a good go at it.


:eyebrows: ;)

Marco.

StanleyB
27-01-2009, 10:43
The old Cerwin Vega AT80 speakers were the first production speakers I knew of that could produce a dynamic range to scare the neighbours.

Stan

Ali Tait
27-01-2009, 13:57
Most modern recording are so compressed that the full dynamic range of the music isn't present anyhow.If it ain't in the recording,you can't reproduce it!

Steve Toy
27-01-2009, 14:37
Ali, this is unfortunately the case where recordings are designed to match the more dynamically compressed kit they are most likely to be played on.

TKK
26-07-2009, 04:17
Therefore, such a faculty for discernment using yor ears is vital to the success of building the kind of system that, with the right kind of music, will move you to tears, plant a big grin on your face, get your feet tapping and/or keep your attention for any length of time. If you do not place much importance on the process of actually listening for yourself and making your choices based on what you hear then perhaps there are other sites that will meet your needs better than this one.

Steve, on that there can be no disagreement.

Personally, I can do without neutrality; I don't know what it is since it seems it's different with each of us, at different times, even at different venues, and one would think something like “neutrality' would be incontrovertible. The kind that is being bandied around in audio journals and all manner of audiospeak seems to point to the kind of peppermint cool, driven from a wide but distant perspective and threadbare tonal dynamics. Think early Spectral electronics and their sponsored recordings.

I can also do without the lowest distortion figures, total harmonic or in any of its other disguises, and many solid state electronics from the early 70s' namely, DB and Electrocompaniet, to current kings of that heap, Halcros, come to mind. They feel like like we just came off some skin bleaching treatment and there's no hair to raise.

I certainly can do without a total lack of colouration, if it means icy, glazed, white versus visceral, pompous and burnished glow. The early Sugano's Koetsus from the 80s were coloured so beautifully than real, yet only they could erupt the surrealism in our precious vinyl and make us limp and weep.

So I go in search of not the highest and not the truest of fidelity but that which sets a flutter of excitement as I advance the volume from a whisper.

I need to feel jovial – the system has to have a rhythmic pulse and a desire to rip open from compression. I'll take brashness over coyness, speed over lethargy and light over darkness.

I need to emote – the system has to to be able to express, and to that it has to be supple and subtle, from the lowest to moderately high volume, and not strangely so, that appears to be the province of high efficiency transducers and simple (low power) electronics.

But most of all, I find especial delight with stereo systems built on small meaningful budgets, assembled and fitted with passion, not obsession. With lots of music to go around.

Steve Toy
26-07-2009, 13:45
A superb post. I used to agree on the neutrality front but have recently found that neutrality in terms of frequency spectrum that is also correct in phase makes for very believable and convincing reproduction of passionate music performances; I see no trade-off in expression.

I agree with measured distortion figures though for they only tell a small part of the story.

Marco
03-01-2010, 20:23
Hi Kee,

A superb summary of your 'art of sound'. You display an excellent ability to distinguish that which separates real music from a processed cardboard cut-out of such, and a genuine understanding of what it takes to produce a system that evokes emotion and stirs one's passions. This recipe defines the true 'art of sound'.

Well done!

Marco.

DevillEars
16-02-2010, 06:53
Greetings one and all,

I guess my 'philosophy' around "The Art of Sound" is based on the assumption that the only "Art" aspect lies in the music itself and how it appeals to my (baser?) instincts.

All else is simply a means to an end - be it the physical media or be it the reproduction chain.

From an 'enjoyability' perspective, one needs to take into account other personal factors such as mood, level of exhaustion, etc. This can tend to influence the choice of media at any given tiime.

Also from an 'enjoyability' perspective is the final sound produced - does it satisfy all of one's requirements for enjoyment. And it is this aspect that - for me anyway - that governs any changes to the reproduction chain.

Right now, I am happy with the sound of a system that has been described as "something old, something new, nothing borrowed and something blue".

So, in the words of someone from the transatlantic colonies: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

Finally, the reproduction chain and its composition and placement within a listening environment provide the only area other than music for any aspect of "Art" (and this is more of an arcane art than any really artistic sense).

Achieving some sort of synergy in a system is not a scientific process - its an empirical one with a high degree of 'hit & miss' - as is placement.

:cool:

Dave

Steve Toy
16-02-2010, 08:24
Achieving some sort of synergy in a system is not a scientific process - its an empirical one with a high degree of 'hit & miss' - as is placement.




Indeed. Hence the art of sound. It is indeed an empirical process as the final sonic characteristics of the system cannot be predicted by looking only at what can be measured.

The music itself is the art as is the reproduction of it in recorded form.

Dave Cawley
16-02-2010, 08:39
But not always, if your amplifier is incapable of driving your speakers you have a scientific explanation on why it doesn't sound right. Amplifiers with poor current drive and early SOA protection will struggle to drive some of the new complex, reactive and low load loudspeakers.

Dave

DevillEars
16-02-2010, 08:48
But not always, if your amplifier is incapable of driving your speakers you have a scientific explanation on why it doesn't sound right. Amplifiers with poor current drive and early SOA protection will struggle to drive some of the new complex, reactive and low load loudspeakers.

Dave

Hi Dave,

Specifications will tell if the components are 'compatible' (i.e. whether or not they will work together), so I don't have an issue with what you've written in that context.

Where we differ lies in the achievement of some form of synergy (where the 'whole' is unexplainably better than the sum of the component parts).

It is this aspect - where everything just 'clicks' - that cannot be predicted or explained by any scientific approach and is achieved via serendipity...

What a scientific approach CAN provide is early identification of combinations that have little or no chance of achieving synergy due to electronic incompatibilities.

Isn't nature wonderful?

:cool:

Dave

anthonyTD
16-02-2010, 09:50
But not always, if your amplifier is incapable of driving your speakers you have a scientific explanation on why it doesn't sound right. Amplifiers with poor current drive and early SOA protection will struggle to drive some of the new complex, reactive and low load loudspeakers.

Dave
the answer to that one [IMHO] is to look at the available specifications of said speakers and amplifiers and this should give you a good indication of how well or not the two will perform as a unit, it wont tell the whole story but is a good starting point.
A...

Dave Cawley
16-02-2010, 10:54
Exactly chaps! And that is why I said "not always" glad we agree on this one!

Dave

Welder
13-08-2010, 22:20
Oh great, found a post where I also can talk a load of meaningless bollocks
(What do you mean I always do that)

A few thoughts on the Art of Sound.
There are two sorts of HiFi, the type that when you’ve finished admiring all the shiny boxes and saying “wow I bet that cost an arm and a leg” you leave saying “Yep, nice kit mate”.
Then there is the sort that makes you want to cry or dance. I like this sort best.

Two sorts of HiFi enthusiast; those who buy music to listen to the HiFi and those that buy HiFi to listen to the music.

Time for some of you to stock up on bricks me thinks ;)
I have never heard a HiFi system I can bear to listen to the majority of classical I like on. I don’t care if you’ve got enough valves to heat a housing estate and a turntable made from titanium floating in nitrogen. Not surprisingly, I don’t have a lot of classical music files preferring to go and listen to it live.
By the time the recording studio has wiped out the high frequencies with recording mics that don’t go much past 16KHz, the recording engineer has wiped out everything below 20KHz, the recording equipment has sampled the wave given by some pure chance it wasn’t a digital recording in the first place, etc, etc, it makes all this Art of Sound getting close to the live performance a bit of a nonsense really. You can’t reproduce anything like the sound/experience of a live “classical/acoustic” performance using today’s, or even yesterday’s electronic music reproduction equipment. No ifs, no buts.
HiFi is only really suitable for electronic music.

(Stands back up shaking the brick dust off, stumbles on a couple of breeze blocks that didn’t quite make the distance and carries on)

Right, that’s that sorted then. Glad you all agree.
So what does the art of sound mean to me; emotional involvement.
Don’t listen to what my ex Italian girlfiend (nope, it’s spelt right) tells you about me being typically British and not knowing a bloody thing about emotion; I got emotion, lots.
When that latest CD arrives through the post and EAC has done its stuff I sit in my special chair with an expectant grin on my face and get ready to be entertained. If it’s good, I’ll shut my eyes and get lost in the performance. Sometimes a particular piece of music won’t grab me immediately and it goes to my “listen in another mood pile”. Other times I just slip away to somewhere where there are no bills to pay, problems to be sorted, no noisy traffic or annoying hum from the fridge freezer; just me involved in someone else’s performance.

Stratmangler
13-08-2010, 22:37
Don’t listen to what my ex Italian girlfiend (nope, it’s spelt right) tells you about me being typically British and not knowing a bloody thing about emotion; I got emotion, lots.

I'm intrigued by this girlfiend being an ex Italian.
What nationality is she now ?:scratch:

Welder
13-08-2010, 22:52
British apparently :)
Something to do with marrying an Englishman and changing passports ;)

You get one point for the droll humour and -5 for not considering nationality changes through marriage :ner:

The Grand Wazoo
13-08-2010, 23:49
Interesting...........just one question though.
What exactly did your 'girlfiend' do to become an ex-Italian?

.........was she jumped or did she push?






EDIT: doh.......just seen the last two posts!!

Welder
14-08-2010, 00:14
-10 points for you Wazoo.
You’re not even paying attention.
If you’ve all finished………..

Very disappointing all round I must say chaps. British forum as well. May as well be chatting to the Yanks. At least they can follow the plot even if they don’t get the humour

The Grand Wazoo
14-08-2010, 00:20
So, you prefer the bricks you referred to, to a little bit of friendly (if badly timed) humour then do you?
Fine.

Welder
14-08-2010, 00:34
No need to get all pissy just because you woke up with your foot in your mouth.
Hurl away, I bet you cant hit a barn door with a brick at ten paces anyway :rolleyes:

Clive
14-08-2010, 06:03
British apparently :)
Something to do with marrying an Englishman and changing passports ;)

You get one point for the droll humour and -5 for not considering nationality changes through marriage :ner:
You don't renounce Italian citizenship when marrying a Brit, that situation changed just after my mother (Italian) married my father (British) around 60 years ago.

The Grand Wazoo
14-08-2010, 08:09
No need to get all pissy just because you woke up with your foot in your mouth.
Hurl away, I bet you cant hit a barn door with a brick at ten paces anyway :rolleyes:

I'm not getting 'pissy' and I don't chuck bricks - if you expect to have bricks chucked at you on a forum, you're on the wrong one.

Stratmangler
14-08-2010, 09:24
British apparently :)
Something to do with marrying an Englishman and changing passports ;)

You get one point for the droll humour and -5 for not considering nationality changes through marriage :ner:

Ooooooohhh!!
Only -4 points - that means I win (QI rules) :lolsign:

Welder
14-08-2010, 09:47
Stratmangler
Rats, nobody told me we were playing under QI rules. Guess I’m a few points adrift now :(
:lol:

Wazoo
Oh, no brick hurling here? :eek: Might as well put this pile back outside then.
Relax, it’s just a bit of fun :lolsign:
I believe the correct description is naturalization or something similar. In fact the girlfiend was one of the Queens subjects (can’t say British citizen because I don’t believe we have such a status here) when I met her.

Joe
14-08-2010, 12:53
Oh great, found a post where I also can talk a load of meaningless bollocks
(What do you mean I always do that)

A few thoughts on the Art of Sound.
There are two sorts of HiFi, the type that when you’ve finished admiring all the shiny boxes and saying “wow I bet that cost an arm and a leg” you leave saying “Yep, nice kit mate”.
Then there is the sort that makes you want to cry or dance. I like this sort best.

Two sorts of HiFi enthusiast; those who buy music to listen to the HiFi and those that buy HiFi to listen to the music.

This division into 'music lovers' and 'hifi lovers' is artificial IMO.

Firstly there are way more than two types of hifi enthusiast. There are the 'fit and forget' types who buy one system and stick with it; there are the 'upgraders' who start out with a basic set up and then move up the ladder to Nirvana/bankruptcy; there are 'box-swappers' who try loads of stuff and move it on quickly if it doesn't suit; there are the DIYers who want to get the best result at the lowest cost, and to tailor what they've got more exactly to their needs.

Secondly, almost all of every type of enthusiast simply wants to hear the music they love 'better' through a better system, even if some of us get distracted at times by the shiny boxes, blue LEDs and faffing around with peripheral stuff.

Clearly the desired end result in all cases is a system that entertains you, moves you emotionally and basically enables the suspension of disbelief that allows you to connect with whatever sort of music you choose to listen to, be that simple voice & guitar or large-scale orchestral symphonies.

Dr. Flicker
14-08-2010, 14:16
Two sorts of HiFi enthusiast; those who buy music to listen to the HiFi and those that buy HiFi to listen to the music.

One of those two will be the starting point. But one hopefully begets the other.

But that still doesn't stop me from listening to bad music that's superbly recorded, or superb music that's badly recorded. The trick is to not be a narrow-minded snob about it 100% of the time.

Steve Toy
14-08-2010, 15:23
Joe, good post. :)

Welder
14-08-2010, 15:44
Joe
All fair points ;)
I did cover my arse.
“Oh great, found a post where I also can talk a load of meaningless bollocks”

However, I think you get my point non the less :)

Dr Flicker
Bad music! My dear chap “bad” music isn’t a concept I subscribe to :scratch:
I’ve had more arguments on this topic than I care to think about.
An example of my current playlist:
AudioSlave
Ace of Base
Air
Portishead
Ray Charles
The Cardigans
Little Feat
Miles Davis
Metallica
Dave Van Ronk
Sugarbabes
Traffic

What I was trying to point out was when confronted with the HiFi/Music snob who insists that he can only bear to listen to Classical music on his multi thousand pound system it might be worth pointing out at some point that he probably listens to the same over produced, over-sampled redbook quality recordings as everyone else.

Of course, the Vinyl junkies will probably tell you that Vinyl replay allows them to hear all those little nuances and harmonics only the very best equipment and a classically trained ear can detect.
Sounds vaguely plausible until you discover the precious recording they are driveling on about was knocked up in a modern recording studio within the last decade.
No worries though, we are all entitled to a bit of self deception :)

Marco
14-08-2010, 15:58
Hi John,


Sounds vaguely plausible until you discover the precious recording they are driveling on about was knocked up in a modern recording studio within the last decade. No worries though, we are all entitled to a bit of self deception.


Not if you're listening to original recordings on vinyl from the 1950s, which were made using valve microphones and mixing desks in the days when quality prevailed over cost and convenience, and which were produced by some of the most talented recording engineers ever born ;)

I have many records from that era, where the recording quality is utterly stunning (the nearest thing you'll hear to live music) - eons better than anything produced today on vinyl, CD or anything else....

I agree with your above statement, but the fact is, when you hear some of the amazing early stereo (and even mono) recordings on vinyl, played on a top-notch turntable, through a suitably capable system, it leaves digital for dead!

Having the pleasure of hearing that quality of music at home in all its glory is the reason why I own the type of system I do.

Marco.

Welder
14-08-2010, 16:23
Marco.
Now why did I have a feeling you might chuck your two pence worth in here ;)

Okay, I’ll admit as an ex vinyl junkie who also had some pressings from the era you mention, SOME of them were stunning recordings given the equipment.
Of course, if you want to talk about quality recordings then perhaps we ought to change medium to ½ tape; get rid of all that horrible deck rumble and all those annoying clicks and pops :eek:

But,” - eons better than anything produced today on vinyl, CD or anything else....”
Well, frankly no.
You might get away with “better than many of today’s recordings” but “better than anything produced today”, not a chance, digital or otherwise.
May I suggest you check out some of the classical offerings from a few of the HD downloads in 24/96.
Oh, damn you can’t can you, you don’t do digital sound :lol:

Steve Toy
14-08-2010, 17:41
Marco does 16/44 via those shiny silver discs though and rather well too, as do I.

I've yet to hear more than one really impressive computer audio setup and that was at Coherent Systems courtesy of Tony Sallis although Hamish and Ian Walker's offerings deserve a mention.

Personally, I've only really been taken with vinyl with certain recordings, notably the ones that Marco mentions. Female vocal sibilance is one bugbear of mine with vinyl, never mind pops, clicks and rumble.

A top-notch solver disc spinner is still where it's at although I suspect not for much longer. I'm not sure why, I think it has something to do with transfer rates.

Welder
14-08-2010, 19:14
I’m only teasing ;)
I do actually have a lot of empathy with Marco’s approach to enjoying the music he listens to.
I have relatively recently transferred to computer based audio from a vinyl set up which I was extremely fond of.
I think looking back the best sound I can remember (if recalling sound is indeed possible) was from recording live some bands entering the Melody Maker local band competition that newspaper held many years ago. This was recorded directly to a Revox reel to reel using two good quality mics and replayed through an Exposure RC21 and a pair of 18 mono power amps into my current speakers but with different mid and hi drivers Yep, I really have had them that long :eek:
Unfortunately some thieving little tossers nicked the reel to reel and amps (I think the speakers were too heavy for them to carry) many years ago otherwise I might still be listening to the above.
I’ve had a few deck, arm and cartridge combinations including my favorite, a Decca London Gold over the years. However, trying to keep Vinyl and associated equipment and enjoy life with a family is problematical.
Fine if you have the space to shut it all away and yourself with it to listen to music. But, I’ve been there, and for me at least, gaining the reputation as that grumpy old f****r and his precious HiFI took a bit of the shine off the whole experience. I appreciate others may have different domestic circumstances and deeper pockets.
I did try the CD player route for a short period hoping to get a more child and family friendly balance; I owned two, an Exposure and Moon CD3.
I will take your word that a top class CDP system does it for you and many others; it didn’t do it for me at this level.
I was a very reluctant convert to computer based audio. It took listening to a few mates rather more up market systems and some family members threatening to lock me in permanently to drag me screaming into the digital age.
The horrible truth was, even the basic HRT Streamer I bought to try the whole concept out with tore my CD player to shreds, once I had finished struggling with getting the bloody computers to output bit perfect sound; that’s ignoring all the added convenience computer audio brings.

The truth is these days I don’t take the HiFi press, forums, forum contributors or any of the “audiophile” nonsense too seriously. It has only been the matter of a few broken bones and intense boredom that brought me to this and other forums out of curiosity to see if there has been any meeting of minds and reduced bullshite over the years. 30 years ago people were swearing they could tell the difference between one plug on the end of a bit of wire to another so it seems not much has changed.
Basically, I like music and bit of electronics (something from my R&D days in avionics) and speaker building which I tend to do more for my mates these days rather than myself and of course a bit of light hearted forum banter.
If you want intense, committed and serious audiophile chat out of me, I can manage it for a while so long as nobody says anything too ridiculous or too offensive, after that I’m prepared to play and pass on what little knowledge I may have gained over the years if it helps.
Meanwhile I’ll be listening to music :)

Ooops, almost forgot.
For those who dont like my attitude ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U76Nde6rMTw
Relax, it's the pure truth. (bet you dont listen to the entire track)

Marco
14-08-2010, 20:11
Hi John,

You make some very valid points here:


I’ve had a few deck, arm and cartridge combinations including my favourite, a Decca London Gold over the years. However, trying to keep Vinyl and associated equipment and enjoy life with a family is problematical.
Fine if you have the space to shut it all away and yourself with it to listen to music. But, I’ve been there, and for me at least, gaining the reputation as that grumpy old f****r and his precious HiFI took a bit of the shine off the whole experience. I appreciate others may have different domestic circumstances and deeper pockets.


We don't have any kids, and thus I'm able to dedicate a (comfortable, nicely furnished) room at home which is simply for my hi-fi system and music collection. Therefore I can set my system up optimally with specialist equipment supports, and connect it to a dedicated earth and mains supply and have cables placed where I want them, with no concessions whatsoever to 'WAF' nonsense. All that matters is what sounds best, not what it looks like. We have a separate lounge for all the non-hi-fi stuff where the TV and all the 'normal' stuff lives.

I realise that I'm lucky in that respect. However, and this is the key, I'm far from being the 'lonely boy' who's locked away in his room from the real world with only his hi-fi for a friend, which can all too easily become the case with this hobby of ours.........

Quite often my wife will join me when listening to music and we'll share a nice bottle of wine and just relax and have a chat. The secret is to create an environment at home which is conducive to this.

I'm also lucky that my wife loves music, and crucially, is pretty interested in hi-fi. She even goes to shows with me and is an active member here!

We do this because we're genuinely interested in each other's hobbies and like to share our mutual interests, which is something that I find is sadly lacking in some people's relationships, where many married couples are like disparate souls leading separate (and often quite unhappy) lives. We're nothing like that, and indeed very close and do pretty much everything together.

Having that sort of relationship with your partner makes listening to music and owning a quality hi-fi system a joy, not a lonely existence. And not only does my wife often join me when listening to music, but we have many friends who share the same interests, so there is nearly always someone visiting who's into hi-fi and music, and we make it really enjoyable by sharing some lovely food and wine with them, so that the focus is not just on hi-fi and music, but a social occasion where there is plenty of fun and good banter! :cool:

As for the analogue vs. digital debate, I know where you're coming from. All I can say is that I have a fairly substantial music collection and own a very (VERY) good CDP, and also turntable. Whilst I enjoy superb sounds from CD and have heard some very good computer streaming set-ups, nothing I've heard digital-wise, and I mean NOTHING, gets close to the sound produced by my T/T when playing mint superbly recorded vinyl of the type I mentioned earlier.

Clicks and pops? There's (almost) no such thing if you have plenty of brand new vinyl, only buy the best condition second-hand records, own a professional record cleaner, and above all, take care of your records and store them properly! ;)

Owning a top-notch vinyl replay system, and both maintaining it and looking after records, is definitely a labour of love. But I enjoy every bit of it, as I much prefer this more tactile 'human' way of accessing my music collection than some 'soulless' files stored on a computer, which are worth bugger all in monetary terms, and which could be lost in the blink of an eye with a software failure!

No, give me a physical music collection and the ritual of pulling a record out of its sleeve, popping it on the turntable, and placing the stylus in the lead-in groove, and then sitting back and admiring the cover artwork and gatefold as I listen to the music, any day over some utilitarian computer set-up. It's such a dispassionate way of accessing one's music collection and yet another example of how modern technology, in some instances, has dehumanised us......

Don't get me started on that one though! :eyebrows:

Marco.

TONEPUB
14-08-2010, 20:39
Sorry, I beg to differ. I've got halfway decent analog and digital setups and it always comes down to the mastering. I've heard great and poor examples of each. And while I've always been thumbs down on computer playback, the recent Amarra player that now plays the track directly from memory is not only fantastic, but has really changed my thinking of what computer audio is capable of. And it's not terribly expensive either.

I don't have a "ritual" for listening to music. I just enjoy it and I enjoy it just as much when played from a disc, a computer or a vinyl LP. I like them all. Nothing wrong with being romantic, however it's not the only way to go.

And I love having 7500 CD's on the Sooloos. Not only am I listening to more of my music collection than I used to, my whole family is as well. Nothing dehumanizing about that. The Sooloos has two full backups, so it won't be lost "in the blink of an eye with a software failure."

Even if we did have a catastrophic meltdown, I still own all of my discs, so it would just be some time to rip it all again.

colinB
14-08-2010, 20:59
Sorry, I beg to differ. I've got halfway decent analog and digital setups and it always comes down to the mastering. I've heard great and poor examples of each. And while I've always been thumbs down on computer playback, the recent Amarra player that now plays the track directly from memory is not only fantastic, but has really changed my thinking of what computer audio is capable of. And it's not terribly expensive either.

I don't have a "ritual" for listening to music. I just enjoy it and I enjoy it just as much when played from a disc, a computer or a vinyl LP. I like them all. Nothing wrong with being romantic, however it's not the only way to go.

And I love having 7500 CD's on the Sooloos. Not only am I listening to more of my music collection than I used to, my whole family is as well. Nothing dehumanizing about that. The Sooloos has two full backups, so it won't be lost "in the blink of an eye with a software failure."

Even if we did have a catastrophic meltdown, I still own all of my discs, so it would just be some time to rip it all again.

I agree the mastering and care in production a great recording maketh.

Give me a giant mixing desk and quality engineering over Pro Tools any day.
That could be a future problem though if all other mediums were to disappear and all music was streamed. If the reverence and time in the finished product is no longer there or needed the produced music will surely suffer.
Disposable culture surely means lower quality.

Welder
14-08-2010, 21:07
No problem with any of that Marco me old china.
I must admit I do miss the record sleeves; a pixel light image on a screen just doesn’t cut it.
Shame you’re mainly into classical and I wasn’t about when I unloaded my vinyl; even the 78’s went (sob sob)
What I wrote about listening to classical music though, I just can’t do it through a HiFi not mine or anyone else’s I’ve heard.
Maybe your kit would do the trick but you ain’t going to give it to me are you?
I’ve always believed you would need a huge listening room and kit capable of at least 10Hz to 40 kHz to cover what can be heard, felt and, if you believe that perception of sound goes beyond aural capacity, perceived. Even then, there is something about dressing up, an attractive lady on your arm and the entire ambiance of the concert experience.
Fortunately a lot of the more modern music often sounds better once the recording engineer has straightened out the final mix. I cant think of many live rock/whatever concerts I’ve been to where live matched recorded in quality and I’m a modern music fan.
Maybe Tower of Power were one of the exceptions to this.
However, despite all of our different perspectives and different means of replaying the music we like, I have a feeling that if it hasn’t already happened it wont be long before a handful of bits shunted through a USB or Firewire cable will produce audio indistinguishable from the master mix.
Let’s hope so or we may all be listening to mp3 on a white fruit company pod thingy.

TONEPUB
14-08-2010, 21:26
I agree the mastering and care in production a great recording maketh.

Give me a giant mixing desk and quality engineering over Pro Tools any day.
That could be a future problem though if all other mediums were to disappear and all music was streamed. If the reverence and time in the finished product is no longer there or needed the produced music will surely suffer.
Disposable culture surely means lower quality.

I certainly agree with the Pro Tools thing...

What's unfortunate, is that a fair share of the vinyl being cut today is from digital masters via pro tools with no care. In almost every case, the dig file sounds better.

But every now and then something really great appears and that's what makes this still fun!

Marco
14-08-2010, 23:51
Hi Jeff,


Sorry, I beg to differ.


That's fine - it would be a boring world if we all agreed on everything! :)


I've got halfway decent analog and digital setups and it always comes down to the mastering. I've heard great and poor examples of each. And while I've always been thumbs down on computer playback, the recent Amarra player that now plays the track directly from memory is not only fantastic, but has really changed my thinking of what computer audio is capable of. And it's not terribly expensive either.


Again, no problem. I've heard some very good computer audio set-ups too, but none can hold a candle, sonically and musically, to really well recorded vinyl played on my T/T, or others I've heard of similar or better quality. All I can do is relate the results of my experience so far.

The fact is, in my circumstances with my system, I have recordings on vinyl which sound WAY better than anything on CD (very good though some of those are), even though I have a superb CD player and love listening to music through it on a daily basis. We're talking veritable 'night & day' differences between the best of the respective recordings, Jeff - it's not subtle!

However, YMMV :smoking:


I don't have a "ritual" for listening to music.


Well, when you listen to vinyl, you take it out its sleeve, pop it onto your T/T and place the stylus on the record grooves: that, my friend, is somewhat of a 'ritual'! ;)

And it's what I was referring to earlier when I used the word. It's also that type of physical interaction that's missing when one listens to music via a computer, and which I thus dislike with streaming music, because I enjoy that process.


I just enjoy it and I enjoy it just as much when played from a disc, a computer or a vinyl LP. I like them all. Nothing wrong with being romantic, however it's not the only way to go.


Yes I enjoy playing CDs, too, but for me it's nowhere near as much fun as playing records. I don't see this as being "romantic", but rather simply being more 'human', i.e. doing things yourself, by adopting a manual process, rather than a machine doing it for you.

As I said, I dislike the way some forms of technology have, to an extent, dehumanised us. It also encourages laziness in many forms. Quite simply, I enjoy doing things, rather than machines doing them for me. I also like to think for myself, rather than a machine doing my thinking for me! It's what makes us function as human beings, not robots.

I feel largely the same way about mobile phones, for example, which in many ways have killed the art of conversation, as people would rather send each other texts than actually lift the phone and talk. Jeez, I know people who would still rather text each other than speak, even when they live in the same house or are in the same room!! How bloody lazy and utterly crazy, not to mention inhuman, is that??? :mental:

And let's not even mention how badly mobile phones have affected the ability of people to write properly with the correct grammar and punctuation, with the proliferation now of god awful 'text speak'! :rolleyes:

Like I said before, don't get me started on this type of thing, as it's a major bugbear of mine ;)


And I love having 7500 CD's on the Sooloos. Not only am I listening to more of my music collection than I used to, my whole family is as well. Nothing dehumanizing about that. The Sooloos has two full backups, so it won't be lost "in the blink of an eye with a software failure."


Nice one - I'm pleased you enjoy it, but it's not really for me. Each to his or her own, I guess.


Even if we did have a catastrophic meltdown, I still own all of my discs, so it would just be some time to rip it all again.

Yes, but in that instance how long would it take to rip your whole music collection on disc? I'm afraid I'd lose the will to live if I had to do that - it would likely take years!!

Nah, I'll stick to having a physical music collection I can put my hands on at any time and continue playing my LPs and CDs for the foreseeable future, thank you very much :cool:

Marco.

Dr. Flicker
15-08-2010, 02:42
Dr Flicker
Bad music! My dear chap “bad” music isn’t a concept I subscribe to
I’ve had more arguments on this topic than I care to think about.

I'm not sure what "topic" it is you are referring to.


An example of my current playlist:
AudioSlave
Ace of Base
Air
Portishead
Ray Charles
The Cardigans
Little Feat
Miles Davis
Metallica
Dave Van Ronk
Sugarbabes
Traffic

What relevance does your taste in music have to do with anything?


What I was trying to point out was when confronted with the HiFi/Music snob who insists that he can only bear to listen to Classical music on his multi thousand pound system it might be worth pointing out at some point that he probably listens to the same over produced, over-sampled redbook quality recordings as everyone else.

That may or may not be true, but I still don't understand your argument...are you saying playback equipment makes no difference if the source material is the same?


Of course, the Vinyl junkies will probably tell you that Vinyl replay allows them to hear all those little nuances and harmonics only the very best equipment and a classically trained ear can detect.
Sounds vaguely plausible until you discover the precious recording they are driveling on about was knocked up in a modern recording studio within the last decade.
No worries though, we are all entitled to a bit of self deception

This is a pure straw man argument.



The truth is these days I don’t take the HiFi press, forums, forum contributors or any of the “audiophile” nonsense too seriously.

You sound like you are excluding yourself from any of that, when in fact, you are doing exactly what you are accusing those hypothetical people of doing.

Hey...you switched to a particular format for reasons that make sense to you, and you're rationalizing...like people tend to do.

If the lossless file route makes your life easier and you miraculously believe it kills every other format at the same time...big double win for you!!!! But to relegate everyone else who hasn't made this epiphany to deluded fools status is, well...deluded. You're trying way to hard, so I'm inclined to believe there's a little resentment lurking there.






As I said, I dislike the way some forms of technology have, to an extent, dehumanised us. It also encourages laziness in many forms. Quite simply, I enjoy doing things, rather than machines doing them for me. I also like to think for myself, rather than a machine doing my thinking for me! It's what makes us function as human beings, not robots.

I feel largely the same way about mobile phones, for example, which in many ways have killed the art of conversation, as people would rather send each other texts than actually lift the phone and talk. Jeez, I know people who would still rather text each other than speak, even when they live in the same house or are in the same room!! How bloody lazy and utterly crazy, not to mention inhuman, is that???

And let's not even mention how badly mobile phones have affected the ability of people to write properly with the correct grammar and punctuation, with the proliferation now of god awful 'text speak'!

Like I said before, don't get me started on this type of thing, as it's a major bugbear of mine

I couldn't agree more.

It fosters more than just laziness and poor communication skills. How many people do you see making transactions (store, bank, etc) with their ipods still playing in their ears. That is disrespectful and downright rude. This is now the norm.

We are in the age of convenience and instant gratification. Listening to your ipod while doing everything else is not multitasking...it's doing everything half-assed.


I like eating good food...I also enjoy preparing it. I also prefer using good quality ingredients and equipment to do it. This has both a practical advantage as well as an intrinsic value. It doesn't necessarily guarantee the food is going to be better, but it stands a much better chance because of it. And in the end, it doesn't matter, as I enjoyed the process on its own.

With audio playback equipment, there's always the chance of better sounding music. Besides that, the "hobby" of it brings it's own rewards, not least of which, is pride of ownership.

"Things" give me comfort.

Joe
15-08-2010, 09:24
I'm not sure which is funnier; people debating on an Internet forum about how technology's killing the art of this, that and the other (hem hem), or people complaining about poor grammar, then using an apostrophe for the possessive form of 'its'.

Still, at least no-one's mentioned 'flat earth' yet.

Marco
15-08-2010, 09:55
Hi Joe,

Who made the error with 'its'? More than likely it was a typo :)

Regarding your other comment, it's not about rejecting ALL forms of new technology - heaven forbid! New technology is wonderful and definitely has its place; like you say, we wouldn't be having this discussion without it!

No, my bugbear is people who let new technology and its associated gadgetry almost rule their lives, where seemingly they cannot function without it.

Like Kevin says, some people need to have bloody iPod earphones plugged into their lugs all the time as they go about their daily business, and it is extremely rude. I love music the same as the next man, but I can do without it for 5 mins while I'm at the checkout of a supermarket or at the bank! :rolleyes:

Some people can't even go on holiday without taking their bloody laptop with them, and all sorts of other pish, and I just find this very bizarre.....

We went to France by car recently and not only did we not have our laptops with us, or any desire whatsoever to log onto the Internet for the duration of our stay, but our mobile phones were switched off (and only checked periodically for any messages) - we'd probably not even have taken watches with us if we could've gotten away with it! ;)

Holidays are about switching off from 'normality' and completely chilling out - and that means leaving any superfluous paraphernalia at home!

Kevin,


It fosters more than just laziness and poor communication skills. How many people do you see making transactions (store, bank, etc) with their ipods still playing in their ears. That is disrespectful and downright rude. This is now the norm.

We are in the age of convenience and instant gratification. Listening to your ipod while doing everything else is not multitasking...it's doing everything half-assed.


I like eating good food...I also enjoy preparing it. I also prefer using good quality ingredients and equipment to do it. This has both a practical advantage as well as an intrinsic value. It doesn't necessarily guarantee the food is going to be better, but it stands a much better chance because of it. And in the end, it doesn't matter, as I enjoyed the process on its own.

With audio playback equipment, there's always the chance of better sounding music. Besides that, the "hobby" of it brings it's own rewards, not least of which, is pride of ownership.

"Things" give me comfort.


Hear, hear! I agree 100% with your sentiments :clap:

Marco.

Welder
15-08-2010, 11:57
Kevin.
I was referring to this.
“But that still doesn't stop me from listening to bad music that's superbly recorded, or superb music that's badly recorded.”

I may have misunderstood your meaning here but given you’ve covered recording quality I assumed that music genre was what you meant by “bad music”.
If this assumption is incorrect then perhaps you would care to explain exactly what you mean by “bad music”.

“What relevance does your taste in music have to do with anything?”

Well, not very much. However, given the original context of the quote you responded to, and the above, and considering in other debates I’ve had concerning “bad music” which usually revolve around genre, I was trying to point out that while some may consider particular genres of music less worthy of being heard on hi fidelity equipment, I don’t.
This should have been made obvious by the next piece of the post you’ve picked out.

“What I was trying to point out was when confronted with the HiFi/Music snob who insists that he can only bear to listen to Classical music on his multi thousand pound system it might be worth pointing out at some point that he probably listens to the same over produced, over-sampled redbook quality recordings as everyone else.”

I don’t think the general meaning of my post was overly obscure because Marco seems to have understood it without problem.

Anyway, once you have clarified what you meant by “bad music” then we will be in a better position to assess the relevance of my response.

“That may or may not be true, but I still don't understand your argument...are you saying playback equipment makes no difference if the source material is the same?”

No.
I am saying that a great deal of classical music (the assumed to be not “bad” music and therefore more worthy of hi fidelity reproduction in some peoples views; a view which you may or may not hold given it is yet to be established but I have assumed, rightfully or wrongfully; phew, hard work this) is often recorded at the same standard as the “bad” music and in theory, provided the replay equipment can cope adequately with redbook, wouldn’t have any less quality of sound at replay than the good music.

I did go on to make a separate case for non digital recording and playback.

“This is a pure straw man argument.”

I don’t know what this means. What is a straw man argument?

“You sound like you are excluding yourself from any of that, when in fact, you are doing exactly what you are accusing those hypothetical people of doing.”

Do I?
I did at least manage to make myself clear on this point then. The only fact here is I posted.
Am I?
Try as I might I cannot find any accusations in my statement.


”Hey...you switched to a particular format for reasons that make sense to you, and you're rationalizing...like people tend to do.”

True.

”If the lossless file route makes your life easier and you miraculously believe it kills every other format at the same time...big double win for you!!!! But to relegate everyone else who hasn't made this epiphany to deluded fools status is, well...deluded. You're trying way to hard, so I'm inclined to believe there's a little resentment lurking there.”

Please point out where I have written that I “believe it kills every other format.”
I don’t believe in miracles and I certainly don’t believe in miraculous belief.
Please show me where I have even hinted that anyone who doesn’t follow my “epiphany” is a deluded fool.
I’m glad you at least notice and appreciate that I do put some effort into my posts.
You are of course free to believe what you like. However, the only lurking resentment I can detect is in the tone of your post; about what exactly, and why, I have no idea.

Pride of ownership.
Sure it’s nice while it lasts.
“Things give me comfort.” Hmm, personally I think that’s a bit sad. Things give me pleasure, sometimes, but more often than not because of something that thing can do rather than it just being another thing to own. Still, each to his own.

Right, my turn now.

“It fosters more than just laziness and poor communication skills. How many people do you see making transactions (store, bank, etc) with their ipods still playing in their ears. That is disrespectful and downright rude. This is now the norm.”

What absolute rubbish.
I see very few people behaving in this manner.
To be the norm, more people than not would have to be making commercial transactions with ipods still playing in their ears. The people who behave in this manner are a minority and I would suggest a very small minority at that.
While you may find it irritating, as I do at times, unless they are communicating directly with you, in which case you politely request they remove the device when speaking to you, I really can’t see why what other people choose to stick in their ears should bother you.

“We are in the age of convenience and instant gratification.”

Might not all ages have been like this? Couldn’t it just be that convenience and gratification are more easily obtained in this age, or is this some deep moral outrage surfacing?

Listening to your ipod while doing everything else is not multitasking...it's doing everything half-assed.”

This depends on whether you believe listening to music is a task. If it isn’t a task, then it shouldn’t interfere with the conscious effort required to carry out other tasks.
Would you for example forbid the listening to music on a car stereo on the grounds that it interferes with the driver’s concentration?
I carry out a great many tasks that require fairly intense concentration while listening to music and I haven’t noticed any deterioration in outcome because I was listening to music at the time.
Isn’t this complaint about those who have music playing through ear buds more about the person who perceives the behavior viewing the others partial isolation from the environment as anti social?

One might be forgiven for believing one has stumbled on the reactionary old bastards thread from reading some of the above.

I use a mobile phone to text and yes, I have on occasions used “text speak” I don’t consider myself as illiterate or unable to communicate effectively through other mediums. There is a very good reason why people use text rather than speak directly; it’s a lot cheaper!
Text speak, or word abbreviation is a lot quicker to type. If for example they were using Morse code would the practice be received with the same disparaging comments?
Is there any evidence that the use of text speak is having a long term effect on the relevant generations grasp of the English language and would it really matter if such an effect was evident?
Anything that encourages the young in particular to communicate should be encouraged in my view. Just because another generation looks down upon the practice because they don’t consider it to be “proper” English doesn’t lessen its value as a means of communication. Provided the recipient can understand the message I really don’t see what the outrage is about.

I have used a music player with ear buds on a number of occasions and yes it was in public (instant credibility loss). Perhaps if those who so readily condemn the practice had to endure the constant drone and hum of machinery day in day out they might also prefer to listen to something else.

It may come as a shock but we don’t all live and work in ideal circumstances. The young in particular would seem to be at a disadvantage in today’s society and the comments concerning dehumanization and lack of discernment with regard to quality and manners would seem to be directed primarily at a younger generation.
If there is any truth in these opinions then perhaps it may be well to bear in mind that as the “elders” and supposedly more responsible we have allowed society to get like this. In fact, it’s been my generation that has constantly promoted technology and convenience above other values.

It’s great that some of us believe we have reached a comfortable, relatively affluent and happy stage in our lives. I would suggest before you sit back in comfort with a glass of good wine in your hand or your meal consisting of “good quality” ingredients and place the needle in the groove of your well recorded vinyl music (no this isn’t directed at any one person, it’s a general comment relevant to many of us I suspect) directing a stream of phlegm at the dehumanized, text speak, ipod generation, you try to remember you were also young once and maybe even less well off and equally antisocial.

Finally, phew, another wall of text; I must be bored.

Marco
15-08-2010, 15:44
Hi John,

Wow... Chillax! There's a rather quaint modern expression you'll enjoy ;)

This thread is getting rather off-topic, so I'll simply address this issue, which I feel is important, and leave it there:


Anything that encourages the young in particular to communicate should be encouraged in my view. Just because another generation looks down upon the practice because they don’t consider it to be “proper” English doesn’t lessen its value as a means of communication. Provided the recipient can understand the message I really don’t see what the outrage is about.


The problem is, 'text speak' teaches kids bad habits and makes them lazy in terms of their use of language; it most certainly does not improve their written communication skills.

My wife is a lecturer at one of the largest colleges in our area, and I'm always horrified to see how kids manage to progress into further education at the age of 16, 17 and 18, while barely able to string a coherent sentence together with correct grammar and punctuation. I help her mark their homework, so I see the evidence with my own eyes!

There are of course many reasons for that sorry state of affairs, not least of which a catalogue of failures in our current education system (together in some instances with bad parenting), but communicating on mobile phones using 'text speak' has most certainly not helped the situation.

I too (sometimes) use 'text speak' when contacting friends on my mobile phone because, as you say, it's quicker and cheaper to do so than using proper words and punctuation, but then I can switch off from that mode when the need demands and write formally to a reasonable standard.

It's the inability of many of today's kids to do that, and know when various forms of language are acceptable, or not, which is the problem. New technology is a great thing, but only when it benefits our learning process more than it hinders it.

Marco.

Steve Toy
15-08-2010, 16:46
I use my phone a lot, mainly for speaking to people and so have lots of minutes. I also use it for the internet including right now and I send an average of 40 text messages a month, most of which are grouped together in twos and threes because I use proper words and punctuation.

In terms of music format, I'd always choose on the basis of sound quality over all other considderations. I'm really not fussed about the touch-feely aspect to choosing music to play.

If I'm to rail against modern technology, my bugbear is satnavs. You become a slave to a machine giving you orders and sometimes the wrong instructions. All being well you arrive safely at your destination but don't have a clue how you actually got there; you certainly don't learn routes using satnav.

Me, I prefer the old fashioned navigation method called a "map."

I do like google maps though because they enable you to plan and learn your route in advance and using Streetview enable you to see what your destination looks like.

Marco
15-08-2010, 16:53
Agreed... Sat navs suck - maps rool. Oops, I meant rule! :eyebrows:

Anyway, yes, it's another valid example of a bloody machine controlling you and doing your thinking for you - feck that.

Marco.

Joe
15-08-2010, 17:34
I've never sent a text in my life.

I had an odd experience with my mobile the other day though. We've been having a shower fitted, and I was waiting for the plumber to ring me about a suitable date for the work to begin. My mobile rang, and a bloke said 'It's the plumber here, I'm wondering if Monday would be a good day to start?' After we'd chatted for a couple of minutes, we realised that he was the 'wrong' plumber, who had dialled my mobile number by mistake.

Back on topic; I'm format neutral with regard to music. The absolute best-sounding music I have is on Blue Note 45rpm LPs. It's a faff having to leap up every 15 minutes or so to changes sides, but the sound is glorious, making the effort worthwhile. However the records were ridiculously expensive, so I'll never be able to afford to own more than a few of them.

I don't mind about ritual, or the lack of it, when listening to music, and if ripping CDs wasn't such a pain I'd probably have moved over my CDs to some sort of computer-based system by now. As it is I've only transferred a handful of titles out of the thousand or so I own.

Welder
15-08-2010, 18:24
Was that all a bit strong then guv? ;)
Chillax and straw men, well I never….:doh:
Oh well, back to the Hi Fi related matters then; shame, I was just beginning to enjoy myself.

It took me about a week to rip my CD’s to file, two copies, one flac and one Wav, using EAC.
I believe dbPoweramp is quicker and more user friendly.
I have another 600 gigs or so of music on ½ tapes that I have yet to find a satisfactory method of transferring to file.

Given I can’t do much in the way of physical activity atm (waiting for bones to re-knit) I’ve had the ideal opportunity to make this transfer.

Ooops almost forgot.....kthxbai :)

Dr. Flicker
16-08-2010, 04:31
If this assumption is incorrect then perhaps you would care to explain exactly what you mean by “bad music”.

Perhaps you should have asked that question before going off on your long triad? ha ha But then again, we wouldn't be able to add a little spice to what is..let's face it...a pretty docile forum. :near:


Since taste in music is subjective, it doesn't matter to me what other people are listening to, which is why I mentioned what I was listening to, and considered it "bad".

That comment meant that I am sometime guilty of listening to my hi-fi, rather than my music (just as you talked about). In my case, it referred to the fact that I have purchased certain "reference" recordings based on their reputation for superb recording qualities. While the recording is first rate and shows what the playback equipment is capable of reproducing , the music itself just didn't do it for me. I have a couple of Shefield Labs discs that fall into this category.

At the same time, I have plenty of piss-poor, "loudness wars" recordings that contain basically no dynamic range (you know the ones...usually late 80's, early 90's hard rock "re-masters"). But I still like the tunes, so I play them anyway.

What I was trying to point out, was that I don't think people fall into your hypothetical "categories" so easily...I think it's far more fluid than that. I think being a music fan, as well as an "audiophile" (in all its genres..."vinyl junkie", etc) can actually expand your musical "taste", rather than narrow it.

I know I have learned to appreciate the "music" of many artists while listening to my "hi-fi". As I said...one begets the other. There's a synergy between music and the hi-fi hobby. And yes...there also be dragons here (and I'm not referring to the Nakamichi type).



“That may or may not be true, but I still don't understand your argument...are you saying playback equipment makes no difference if the source material is the same?”

No.
I am saying that a great deal of classical music (the assumed to be not “bad” music and therefore more worthy of hi fidelity reproduction in some peoples views; a view which you may or may not hold given it is yet to be established but I have assumed, rightfully or wrongfully; phew, hard work this) is often recorded at the same standard as the “bad” music and in theory, provided the replay equipment can cope adequately with redbook, wouldn’t have any less quality of sound at replay than the good music.

First off, no, I don't put "classical" music on any kind of pedestal...while I can appreciate the fact that this stuff is still very popular after centuries (as opposed to only decades of modern music we consider "classic" tunes)...it represents about 1% of my music library. Like you, I really don't think there are any bad "genres".

Secondly, are these hypothetical classical music lovers also audiophiles? There's little point in commenting about their preference for classical recordings...if that's all they like...who cares what they think of what they don't like. Although your assertion that classical music is as badly recorded as anything else is one I find debatable (a large symphony recording with poor dynamic range would be unlistenable on any equipment), I would still say that better playback equipment is still capable of squeezing out the maximum fidelity of even a less-than-perfect recording than poor playback equipment can.



Please point out where I have written that I “believe it kills every other format.”
I don’t believe in miracles and I certainly don’t believe in miraculous belief.
Please show me where I have even hinted that anyone who doesn’t follow my “epiphany” is a deluded fool.

I'm just upping the drama a tad.

I wish I could convince myself that I could just rip everything onto my hard drive and live happily ever after, reassuring myself that this format is every bit as good as all this esoteric hi-fi equipment because theoretically, I'm not "losing" anything in the process, while making it all so much more "convenient". But I can't. And for several, complicated reasons. I've heard very good Flac playback, and it sounded very nice to me, so it's not all about sonics. But at least there are still speakers left to obsess about when going that route. Perhaps soon there will simply be bluetooth or wi-fi implants directly into your brain and we can illuminate those too?



“Things give me comfort.”
Hmm, personally I think that’s a bit sad.

Well, probably because you are making knee-jerk assumptions again. Save your pity.



Things give me pleasure, sometimes, but more often than not because of something that thing can do rather than it just being another thing to own. Still, each to his own.

Taking that to its logical conclusion, I guess you have no use for "art"?

If you are consuming things and they don't bring you pleasure, or you just "own" things to impress people, then that would be sad...but that isn't what I was referring to.

Here is a quote from an excellent book called The Comfort of Things by Daniel Miller, a UK anthropologist.


“We live today in a world of ever more stuff – what sometimes seems a deluge of goods and shopping. We tend to assume that this has two results: that we are more superficial, and that we are more materialistic, our relationships to things coming at the expense of our relationships to people.

We make such assumptions, we speak in cliches, but we have rarely tried to put these assumptions to the test. By the time you finish this book you will discover that, in many ways, the opposite is true; that possessions often remain profound and usually the closer our relationships are with objects, the closer our relationships with people.”




“It fosters more than just laziness and poor communication skills. How many people do you see making transactions (store, bank, etc) with their ipods still playing in their ears. That is disrespectful and downright rude. This is now the norm.”

What absolute rubbish.
I see very few people behaving in this manner.

Hmmm...you aren't noticing this? Perhaps it is because I live in NA, where the race to the bottom is probably farther along than in your neck of the woods.

I mean, here, it's come to the point where there is actually starting to be some backlash...signs at point of sale actually saying they aren't going to serve you if you are talking on your cell phone.



Isn’t this complaint about those who have music playing through ear buds more about the person who perceives the behavior viewing the others partial isolation from the environment as anti social?

Absolutely...that's part of it. But this "isolationism" causes more problems than just anti-social behaviour (which is bad in itself). Normally, what you do that doesn't effect me...I don't care. But there's the safety issue, which does affect me. There's also the fact that since most music is now downloaded in MP3 files and played back on crappy equipment, it has had a very noticeable affect on the recording industry as a whole. There is little incentive to master/engineer recordings of high quality, because most people don't know...and don't care. This makes life difficult for me, as all the great equipment in the world isn't going to help me if the source material sucks...the old "garbage in...garbage out" ethos.

You know, I have an iphone, and eventually I did rip a few cds to its player feature for the instances I'd find myself in, where I wouldn't mind having some tunes to listen to (and I do think there is a time and place for this).

I tried listening to it while just walking down the street...but you know what...I didn't like it. I'm a definite "flaneur" and the isolation and distraction it gave me from the simple pleasure of just walking down the street, paying attention to the little sights, sounds and smells of the experience was disturbing. It's a habit I would not want to get used to, for fear of turning into one of the "zombies".


Might not all ages have been like this? Couldn’t it just be that convenience and gratification are more easily obtained in this age, or is this some deep moral outrage surfacing?

Absolutely. Not all progress is good, and our exponentially increasing ability to do this is starting to bare some of the bad fruit. And it seems to be doing it so quickly that it is impairing our ability to weed it out fast enough. And this part is not isolated to youth.



One might be forgiven for believing one has stumbled on the reactionary old bastards thread from reading some of the above.

That's probably far more true than I'm willing to admit, but I can't help knowing it can't all be explained away by the fact that one generation always thinks the next is doing it wrong. Remember, the whole concept of "youth culture" is a relatively recent one...dating to around the middle of the 20th century. It has certainly been an interesting evolution, but I have this feeling that it has hit a tipping point, and is slipping into some kind of implosion on its current path.

I don't think its all bad...youth seems to be more interested in the environment, and more accepting of diverse culture and lifestyles. But the bad stuff just seems to be getting worse and worse. Some of them are fairly benign fads...like walking around with your pants falling down as a fashion statement...we can laugh at that one later the same way we laugh at what we were wearing in the 70's disco era. But you really think we will be putting Lady Gaga in the same category as Charlie Parker, Elvis, Beatles/Stones, Led Zep and every other "degenerate" of their era (as seen by the older generation)? I don't think so. I really do think it's become a throw-away culture to a much larger extent.

By the 90's, it seems youth culture had started running out of ideas, which is why "retro" became the whole thing (I have to admit, I did fall for the whole *Wallpaper movement of the late 90's). The problem with that is, you can copy the "look", but not the "feel". Seriously...as you look back, you can clearly see the various zeitgeists at work. It's not so easy any more. Perhaps that's because we need some time to pass to see it clearly. Weird things are happening...take tattoos. They were once the way you stood out from the mainstream...now it's the way you fit in (40 years from now, "granny" is still going to be sporting her full arm tattoos ha ha).




It took me about a week to rip my CD’s to file, two copies, one flac and one Wav, using EAC.

Ok...back on track ha ha

Here's my take on it....why would I do that, if I already have the equipment (that I also like having) to just play the cds? (leaving the whole sonic quality argument aside) Why put that extra process in there...It seems like a waste of time, plus it involves giving up a hobby I like. I don't have the wife factor/kid factor/peer pressure factor or desire for the "convenience, so there's no net gain for me. It isn't even a lateral move...it's a downward move.

Marco
16-08-2010, 06:57
Hi Kevin,


I tried listening to it while just walking down the street...but you know what...I didn't like it. I'm a definite "flaneur" and the isolation and distraction it gave me from the simple pleasure of just walking down the street, paying attention to the little sights, sounds and smells of the experience was disturbing. It's a habit I would not want to get used to, for fear of turning into one of the "zombies".


Hehehe.... You're a man after my own heart. It's the 'zombie factor' in all this I really dislike.

I don't get the need for folk to always have some bloody 'gadgetry' strapped to them wherever they go, instead of just taking in the sights and sounds and enjoying the natural beauty of their surrounding environment.

But then I guess that's easy to say when your surrounding environment is beautiful. I live in rural North Wales in the UK, well away from the 'rat race' (thank God!) where that most certainly is the case, but I might feel differently if I lived in, say, the squalor of some parts of London, where I may instead choose to block it out ;)

I'm definitely NOT a city person! I love the wide-open space, fields and hills, and fresh air of the countryside.

This is an interesting discussion, but it's way off-topic, so I'll split the off-topic stuff into a separate thread later :)

Marco.

Steve Toy
16-08-2010, 11:45
I guess it boils down to whether you actually listen to music which requires at least an element of concentration or simply have it on as a silence-filler. Personally I'm not scared of silence, I don't need constantly to fill the void. My own thoughts can sometimes be great company.

I rarely listen to music in the car because driving itself is a task I enjoy and like to devote my attention to. I guess having something "on" in the background is good if I'm stuck in traffic or forced to drive like a passenger behind the wheel, effectively forced to do the same as the twat in front of me who is shaving 30% off the posted speed limit in good driving conditions for no good reason other than that he either wants to combine some other activity with his driving, i.e. multi-task by looking at the scenery on either side, use a hand-held device, fight to stay awake, allow for the fact that he's had a drink or he hates driving and so prefers to daydream. I guess under such circumstances I begin to daydream too and a spot of Radio Two provides some light relief.

As for iPodding it as you either walk down the road nearly getting run over in the process, order a Big Mac Meal, sit in the front of a taxi, or attempt to engage with another human being, somehow I don't really get it. On a train or a bus I do - that makes sense unless it's the Eurostar...

Welder
16-08-2010, 12:32
I will be back, especially now the boss is also way off topic and going to move the thread ;)
Nice post Dr Flicker; deserves the appropriate response effort so don’t go away.
Over run with kids and dogs atm

Welder
16-08-2010, 15:48
Awww, please leave it. It's relevant to stuff I would like to comment on.

(John checked on who was/is who before he started posting)

Welder
16-08-2010, 21:36
Well, some of this won’t make much sense since the relevant posts have been deleted despite assurances otherwise. However, those of you who read the posts will follow the humour of the following. Hopefully those concerned in the deleted posts will as well.


Ian Walker.
;)


Marco and Steve Toy.
I don’t like having to do this, but if you two are going to continue bickering about who is boss I’m going to have to send my mate Sunny over to keep the peace.
Say “hello” to Sunny

http://www.mediafire.com/i/?momimtzlz3m

If you both sit there quietly and behave yourselves it will all be fine :eyebrows:

Kevin.

”Perhaps you should have asked that question before going off on your long triad? ha ha But then again, we wouldn't be able to add a little spice to what is..let's face it...a pretty docile forum.”

What, and miss the opportunity of going at it like a bull in a china shop with half the necessary information and making a fool of myself in the process! Why reverse the habit of a lifetime? :lol:

Most forums to do with luxury goods tend to be fairly docile in my experience; something to do with the age and social/economic position of the contributors perhaps.
I enjoy participating in a couple of the on line video game forums I visit and moderate.
These forums are largely populated by very young males (maybe 5% female) and if you don’t offend easily can be a lot of fun and quite instructive with regard to the views of those younger members of our society who post comments.
However, they are far from docile and it’s easy to find ones tolerance of post content and construction stretched to breaking point.
(I’m in the process of writing an article on on-line gaming; sort of “a guide” for the elder generation who seem to believe these often violent and very aggressive games are somehow corrupting the youth of today. I’m the top UK player in the main league of the particular game I concentrate on, a fact I’m enormously proud of with given my age) There is just some immensely childish pleasure to be had when after an online clan match one of you opponents types on the HUD (Heads up display) “gg, how old are you guys?” and you reply “gg thx, I’m 55, ***** is a 38 year old female. The usual response is “F**k I’ve just been fragged by a granddad and my mum!! (my usual match partner is a 38 year old Dutch women and she’s deadly) I know, the things that give us pleasure eh :mental:

I digress.

Yep, I agree with pretty much all of the section. I’ve got some of those re-mastered rock music CD’s.
It’s a shame that the recording engineers didn’t take more care when recording this stuff because some of it is now considered to be must have classic rock. As an example, I replaced my vinyl copy of Stand Up by Jethro Tull with the re-mastered CD version. Some of the tracks seem to have fared better than others under the re-mastering engineer’s hands/ears. The first track is barely listenable to imo.

Yes my categorisation of music/HiFi enthusiasts was bi-polar but this was deliberate as I’m sure you realize.
HiFi snobbery is rife and particularly difficult to get past given the faith versus science nature of the debates, especially when it comes to purchase power. The last resort of the faithful is always “well, that’s what I hear” or “that’s what I believe” and the following implication is often that there is something wrong with your hearing or your system if you don’t agree with them.
It’s very difficult to subject an unwilling subject to the final solution, the ABX test.

“Although your assertion that classical music is as badly recorded as anything else is one I find debatable (a large symphony recording with poor dynamic range would be unlistenable on any equipment), I would still say that better playback equipment is still capable of squeezing out the maximum fidelity of even a less-than-perfect recording than poor playback equipment can.”

I can’t argue much with this either; hence my dislike of listening to recorded classical music. What I find irritating is it is often the classical music/Hi Fi buff who waxes lyrical about the near concert performance they get from their replay system. It has nothing to do with being a fan of one particular medium over another; it has to do with the science behind audio reproduction.
In the case of the analogue recording or hi res digital their listening environment and equipment noise floor probably wipes out the harmonics/whatever they say they are hearing.
Now I’m a modern music fan primarily (I also play an instrument which may help or hinder depending on your view point) and even I can tell from going to live classical/un-amplified music concerts that a comparison between live and recorded, no matter what the playback medium verges on the ludicrous for all but the tone deaf.
It is just so unlikely that the recording equipment even captured the higher harmonics and the infra bass frequencies let alone them having the equipment able to reproduce them. We are talking amps with massive bandwidth, speakers as big as fridge freezers and listening rooms similar in size the original venue to mention a few of the obvious problems.
But, yes in theory, better kit has the potential of squeezing the last drop of information/emotion from a recording. However, you can’t reproduce what isn’t there.
These days I tend to smile sweetly and let them believe whatever makes them happy but I still enjoy debating the matter providing the dogma doesn’t outweigh the science.

Regarding the remaining audio comments……..
Drama, I can do that.
Knee jerk! Whole body jerk with me :lolsign:
I do have a few friends who do tend to purchase luxury goods just for the sake of ownership and the prestige they believe it gives them.
However, I think I owe you an apology or at least a friendly handshake for my “a bit sad” comment
I’m as acquisitive as the next man so any pity I have I should probably keep for myself.

“Taking that to its logical conclusion, I guess you have no use for "art"?”

Hmm, a tricky one this.
“because of something that thing can do” is the key point for me. Art can elicit emotion.
But in general no, I’m a bit of a cultural peasant when it comes “classical” art in particular.
I’m not sure why exactly, but I don’t approve of the “ownership” of art in general and certainly not making large profits through its sale. Art, even the stuff I don’t appreciate if it is generally acknowledged to be of great merit should be available to the people and in the custody of the state.
(Am I beginning to sound like citizen Smith here)

I’ll be back with some comments concerning our degenerate youth and anti social society later.
Oh yeah, he’s a long haired rotweiler with a tail.

Steve Toy
16-08-2010, 23:23
Marco and Steve Toy.
I don’t like having to do this, but if you two are going to continue bickering about who is boss I’m going to have to send my mate Sunny over to keep the peace.


John,

In simple terms, I was one of three bosses at OP back in Jan 2008, then one of two, then I sold out in May (literally) leaving just Marco.

Simples... --- and no further argument and importantly, no on-going disputes between us on that score. :)

Steve Toy
16-08-2010, 23:38
To add;;;;; The Art of Sound is not about willy waving with purchases of consumer goods, (hi-fi goods), it is about how you implement them and maximise their potential i.e. getting the most from your given expenditure along the way.

Thus it's not a case of your dick being (measured) big but how you use it...

THAT, folks, is The Art of Sound.

Amen.

Dr. Flicker
17-08-2010, 00:19
HiFi snobbery is rife and particularly difficult to get past given the faith versus science nature of the debates, especially when it comes to purchase power.

Well, I don't think you can separate the "faith" (I prefer alchemy) or the "science" from the equation. Since it requires both, and there is an hazy overlapping of the two, there is never going to be a consensus. Certain things can be passed off as empirical, and certain things can't. There are only things that sound "different" from each other.

The worst kind of hi-fi snobbery, is the phoney one. I would call this the Bose Factor. During a 4 year old's birthday party on the weekend, I was having a chat with an acquaintance, and the topic of audio somehow came up. He declared his allegiance to Bose, and how it is basically the final chapter in audio. Since it was a 4 year old's birthday party, I decided to bite my tongue (but I think I rolled my eyes). I just said I was a "tube" guy and that Bose wasn't really my thing. He felt obligated to encourage me to just do the right thing, and switch to Bose. He informed that 7 of his recording industry friends had ALL switched to Bose (in other words...come to their senses).

There's no point in fighting Bose marketing...you can't win. That is, until you sit them down in front of a decent set up. That's what I like about good hi-fi...you don't need "golden ears" to immediately here the difference. Some of the "faithful" just can't handle the fact that they have been wrong all this time, and you never know what strange reaction they may have. Sometimes it's better to not confront "faith".




However, you can’t reproduce what isn’t there.

Well, you can add or subtract to what was there. And that's not always bad. Depending on well a live recording was miked, mixed and mastered, the recording can sound better than the live performance because of less than perfect equipment, venue acoustics, set up, etc. I've also heard live recordings of 3 piece & quartet jazz groups in small clubs where it really did feel like I was there sitting at a table 12 feet from the stage. I think I probably like a bit of added harmonic distortion my single ended tubes add. What it boils down to is the completely unknown factor our brains contribute to the experience. It can't be part of the "science", because we don't know how to measure it.



I do have a few friends who do tend to purchase luxury goods just for the sake of ownership and the prestige they believe it gives them

Vanity cannot be completely illuminated...we are all a little guilty. And it probably plays a healthy role in our self esteem. But it's those "things" that we truly have an intimate relationship with that has nothing to do with other people that give us pleasure...not pleasure in vanity. Most of the things I "collect" and take great pleasure in doing so, are completely off the radar of any of my friends...nobody is impressed.



“because of something that thing can do” is the key point for me. Art can elicit emotion.

I think it is possible to purely concern yourself with function or utility, and I think you can purely concern yourself with aesthetics (art). But there is also the case where the two are inexplicably linked..."fashion" being the obvious one.

Audio is a strange category, as it will include people all over the map. The function & utility is not always the same for everybody(sometimes it's cost efficiency, convenience or sonics). It is possible to manufacture audio products where most the emphasis on utility...or aesthetics...or both. It's also a bit like golf...always looking for perfection, and never finding it. It's a rabbit hole you can fall very far down if you want.

I've never felt like telling anybody they were "wrong", except when it involved a hard fact (or if someone tries to make me a Bose convert). But I'll "debate" the subject till someone feels like hanging themselves.

MartinT
17-08-2010, 09:54
Nice comments, Kevin. I feel like you do about Bose, and also about Apple. I rarely get into a debate about it for the reasons you state, that people get entrenched in their views and it becomes a belief system. The odd time I do demo my system to a new person I usually get a good reaction but I don't need that fix any more. I love my car for its engineering principles and the superb way it goes about transportation, but I do get accused of being a 'BMW cock' by those who think I bought it according to my class values.

I also like the engineering principles behind the hi-fi equipment I use and do certainly admit to pride of ownership over and above the great sound they make. There is a technical empathy that I get a great kick from and which I see as one of my little pleasures.

It's the little vanities and 'off the beaten track' collections that make us individual. I hardly have anyone to talk to about classical music, none of my friends having a clue, let alone my collection of Lesley Charteris 'Saint' books or my predilection for HP reverse notation calculators (I so used to love loaning it in a business meeting only to have it returned 30 seconds later without comment as they were unable to use it).

Ultimately, I discuss music with few people and hi-fi with even fewer as it is unproductive overcoming the resistance in individuals to accept that I can spend such money and get so much pleasure from them. I simply don't care any more, happy with what I have and generally enjoying it all alone.

AoS is pretty much the only outlet I need to talk about common issues and learn about new music.

Alex_UK
17-08-2010, 09:58
<snip>

AoS is pretty much the only outlet I need to talk about common issues and learn about new music.

Great post Martin, (edited for brevity, but had to leave in the last bit - hear hear! :))

Marco
17-08-2010, 10:01
Superb post, Martin! :)

It's contributions like that which remind me of why you're so valued here.

I'm also enjoying the debate between John and Kevin.

Marco.

hifi_dave
17-08-2010, 10:14
If certain companies invested as much time and money into producing their products as they do in marketing, they might make something half decent...:rolleyes:

There is a website devoted to exposing Bose and their products. Anyone here know the www address ?

MartinT
17-08-2010, 10:51
This one?

http://www.intellexual.net/bose.html

hifi_dave
17-08-2010, 11:36
That's the one. Thank you.

MartinT
17-08-2010, 19:52
I rarely listen to music in the car because driving itself is a task I enjoy and like to devote my attention to

You made me analyse my behaviour in the car. When I'm mooching along on auto pilot I play a variety of music at reasonable volume and leave the gearstick in 'D'. This constitutes most of my commuting.

When I'm in tune with my car, engineering aesthetic to the fore, I play 'driving' music ('scuse the pun) which compliments my enjoyment of the country roads. The volume is set louder, my gearstick is snuck over to 'M' and I'm on the flappy paddles.

When I'm very tired I turn the music off entirely as I need all my faculties to get me home safely.

Snoopdog
17-08-2010, 23:08
You made me analyse my behaviour in the car. When I'm mooching along on auto pilot I play a variety of music at reasonable volume and leave the gearstick in 'D'. This constitutes most of my commuting.

When I'm in tune with my car, engineering aesthetic to the fore, I play 'driving' music ('scuse the pun) which compliments my enjoyment of the country roads. The volume is set louder, my gearstick is snuck over to 'M' and I'm on the flappy paddles.

When I'm very tired I turn the music off entirely as I need all my faculties to get me home safely.

Jean Jeanie, Radar Love, You ain't seen nothing yet. You can't beat a bit of 'driving' music:)

Steve (BMW 'Cock')

MartinT
18-08-2010, 06:28
Jean Jeanie, Radar Love, You ain't seen nothing yet. You can't beat a bit of 'driving' music:)

Oh yes indeed. Wicked Game, Telegraph Road, any Black Sabbath, Autobahn, Born to Run...


Steve (BMW 'Cock')

;)

Alex_UK
18-08-2010, 11:13
My wife is the one with the BMW in our household, what does that make her?! :eek:

MartinT
18-08-2010, 12:33
Erm :scratch:, BMW Hen?

Alex_UK
18-08-2010, 13:49
BMW Chick! ;)

DSJR
19-08-2010, 08:45
BMW chick - in Ipswich????? I don't think the two are mutually compatible :lolsign:

Alex_UK
19-08-2010, 09:38
BMW chick - in Ipswich????? I don't think the two are mutually compatible :lolsign:

Only if the BMW is 15 years old with "Carlos Fandango" wheels, an exhaust the size of drainpipes and ears bleeding from the awful stereo that has more power than the car... :lol:

nqqZ28m8uCo

Oh dear, we have drifted way from the topic, Sorry!

I must say (in an attempt to redeem myself) that I definitely take the opportunity to have music playing at every opportunity, so even at work I have an ipod classic, CMOS headamp and i-Grado 'phones (amongst several others) which puts up a brilliant performance for what it is (actually I meant to post a piccie in Goraman's "mobile rig" thread so I'll do that.)

The model of car I chose was partly based on the stereo (in mine it is a Boston Acoustics "premium" system which sounds pretty darn good) - so for me, the "Art of Sound" is to listen to my music at the best quality I can given the situation, and at any and every opportunity. It is no exaggeration to say that after my family and friends (and of course health and wellbeing) music is the most important thing in my life, and if it was taken away from me, I really don't know how I would survive!

MartinT
19-08-2010, 11:29
It is no exaggeration to say that after my family and friends (and of course health and wellbeing) music is the most important thing in my life, and if it was taken away from me, I really don't know how I would survive!

Hear, hear! I feel the same as you :)

Reid Malenfant
19-08-2010, 17:25
Sorry for going a tad :offtopic: At least i might be...

I nearly spat out my Weetabix this morning whilst reading the daily mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1304145/British-fisherman-Guy-Barnett-lands-billionaire-Canadians-daughter-Sarah-Risley.html) :eyebrows:

Yes, a £100,000,000 yacht fitted with a Bose sound system :doh: :lolsign: I see that money doesn't buy taste or decent hearing :mental:


Inside there is a lift to carry tired sailors between the decks, while the top deck has a gym containing treadmills, exercise bikes and a rowing machine, as well as several flat screen TVs and a Bose sound system.


Back to reality...

MartinT
19-08-2010, 17:31
A tiny fraction of the £100M could have bought a very nice sound system indeed. Bose just indicates that the owner is not interested in sound and had something installed by default. Money indeed does not buy taste or skills of any kind.

Techno Commander
20-08-2010, 16:28
Oh dear!! How sad.

Steve Toy
20-08-2010, 16:45
Bose. Shudder!

michaelhigh
15-10-2010, 17:01
Solidstate is our representative offering the basis for starting point #4. Without actually stating the obvious, guys in this particular camp are more than likely valve amp users, possibly with vinyl-only sources.

It's an extremely valid approach and one I personally wish to investigate with the possible risk that I may wish to trash my entire system, fall in a heap and begin again from scratch if it meets some of the other critera, notably mine.

This notion of trashing my whole rig(s) and starting over is appealing to me. Catharsis?:scratch:

michaelhigh
15-10-2010, 17:15
I think of melody being linear, horizontal (and juxtapositional), and harmony vertical and more akin to addition/subtraction (contrapuntal). While rhythm follows the form of both melody and harmony, with vertical and horizontal characteristics, by nature of its unique space in time it can possess qualities unlike either other. Me or us? hmmm.

michaelhigh
15-10-2010, 17:39
I have some theories about how sound differs under various physical, atmospheric conditions, and by and large, we tend only to consider indoor environment minutiae as we evaluate systems. I love to cobble the biggest rig possible, take it out into the country where no sonic alienation can be sought or wrought, and play holy hell with the wind as my listening companion.

Ali Tait
15-10-2010, 18:42
Nice if you have the opportunity and the space!

Alex_UK
15-10-2010, 20:36
I have some theories about how sound differs under various physical, atmospheric conditions, and by and large, we tend only to consider indoor environment minutiae as we evaluate systems. I love to cobble the biggest rig possible, take it out into the country where no sonic alienation can be sought or wrought, and play holy hell with the wind as my listening companion.

I've been playing an extension of my system in the garden over the summer, and I know what you mean - no walls, ceilings or glass to introduce any reflections, no problems with furniture or TVs to get in the way of speaker positioning - the sound of the wind and the birds adds a certain something - or maybe it was the bbq'd food and nice wine? ;)s

Marco
15-10-2010, 20:40
I've been playing an extension of my system in the garden over the summer, and I know what you mean - no walls, ceilings or glass to introduce any reflections, no problems with furniture or TVs to get in the way of speaker positioning - the sound of the wind and the birds adds a certain something...


You could do it bollock naked - that would add "a certain something" else, too..... :eyebrows:

Marco.

Ali Tait
15-10-2010, 20:43
Only in your head ye pervert!

Alex_UK
15-10-2010, 20:46
You could do it bollock naked - that would add "a certain something" else, too..... :eyebrows:

Marco.

Who said I didn't? Well, only wearing an arab strap, but that's near enough naked in my book! :stalks:

Marco
15-10-2010, 20:46
Only in your head ye pervert!


Moi? I'm just a shy boy.

Marco.

Ali Tait
15-10-2010, 21:05
Aye I've heard that! S'why ye wear the dresses... :lolsign:

Marco
15-10-2010, 21:08
Only on a Sunday, like! Otherwise I'm just in my Lycra catsuit.

Marco.

Ali Tait
15-10-2010, 21:14
Ah,just like Uma in Kill Bill....

Marco
15-10-2010, 21:23
I was thinking more like Bella Emberg in the Basil Brush show.... http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/8288/904572.gif (http://img844.imageshack.us/i/904572.gif/) http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/600/freerandomsmileys352.gif (http://img230.imageshack.us/i/freerandomsmileys352.gif/)

http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/8038/fart3.gif (http://img42.imageshack.us/i/fart3.gif/)http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/8038/fart3.gif (http://img42.imageshack.us/i/fart3.gif/)

Ali Tait
15-10-2010, 21:53
Aye well,if the cat suit fits....

michaelhigh
16-10-2010, 01:00
You could do it bollock naked - that would add "a certain something" else, too..... :eyebrows:

Marco.

True, this is the advantage to country living.:eyebrows:

michaelhigh
16-10-2010, 01:17
Perhaps the Art of Sound is the ability to transform previously unlistenable music into beautiful toe-tapping stuff.
The problem is you will probably have to bin all your previous favourites.

A turd had no integral strength. How do you polish it without totally liquifying it, rendering it useless? I've never been able to retrieve a lost (to/on me) source from sounding lousy, if I never liked it, musically speaking, no amount of lipstick could make me smooch that piggie. Werd.:mental:

michaelhigh
16-10-2010, 01:25
Hi-Fidelity is by definition about RE-production of sound, - not production.

Some one once said that the ideal hifi set is a cable with gain.

I can well understand that many wish to alter the sound of their replay kit till it pleases them but that can be different for say, modern commercial recordings, and 40yr old vinyl.

This amounts to "added effects". In the ideal situation you would have a black box with many knobs, so that with all knobs at centre zero, the set simply had gain and didn't alter or colour the sound at all, then either because of deficiency in the recording, or because of personal preferences, one could tweak the knobs and achieve a modification of the output sound. That is adding "effects".

I say if your hifi won't do "gain with no effects" then it can be of only limited use.

Digital systems are almost perfect in this respect since "effects" are very easy to control and the kit can be set up to give "straight gain". Once that has been achieved then the desired effects can be applied to each recording individually and saved with it for later perfect satisfaction in replay. You can even undo some of the effects of compression in the original recording.

This could amount to everyones library of music being tailored to his idea of perfect re-production with no two "songs" necessarily the same anywhere in the world. This would make listening to someone else's hifi and music collection of some interest.

In order to achieve all this it's necessary to have loudspeakers which are uncoloured in the first place. and of the highest tonal accuracy. Undoubtedly this is the hardest thing to achieve presently, but without it good HiFi, and all that I have suggested is not possible.

I'm studying this guy. He knows.;)

michaelhigh
16-10-2010, 01:34
A lot of interesting thoughts here.
The proposed categorisations, which I see as aspects of emphasis in system selection, can certainly be illustrated from my own experience.
Most notably, when upgrading my speakers nearly 2 years ago.
I was fortunate to be able to audition 1 of the potential contenders in my own system for some time with a view to purchase.
The other contender was an unheard, import only proposition, roughly price equivalent.
Not perhaps a complete unknown as I owned a lower model in the range at the time and a higher model using the same driver was exceptionally well reviewed by a tntaudio writer with whom I share an affinity of tastes in reproduction.
The speakers in question had received very good press and for more than a week I was very taken with them, they mated well with my amplifier, made everything sound great, tremendous sense of scale, not quite as dominating of my living space as the ones I eventually bought.
They definitely covered the first two aspects and were not remiss in the fourth.
Until I stopped being in the first flush of love and heard what they were missing, then followed a week of tinkering to see if the problem was elsewhere, I set up a switchbox to switch between them and my then current speakers to check what I was hearing and finally decided that what I was noticing was the compromises that had been made in the design to achieve their design goals.
I still find it a mystery why a speaker with a nominal sensitivity very similar to what I am using now should not reproduce the micro detail I hear now.
Be that as it may, I reluctantly returned them to the dealer with recompense for his trouble in delivering and picking them up again, feeling that it was only proper to do so and also that it was a cheap letoff.
Those speakers have now gone to a home where they are loved, but they were not for me, much as the effortless sense of scale was intoxicating.
I then went through the import thing and after nearly 2 years am constantly delighted with what I hear, yes they are ruthlessly revealing, yes they do not do the bottom octave and I may add bass augmentation at some time but at present, for most of what I listen to and the comfort of my neighbours, they are more than adequate.
Quality of bass, for me, exceeds quantity for most music. They have also proved an excellent system tuning tool.
Enough illustrative digression.
I would propose, and it is covered in various ways earlier in this thread, rather two categories, the first resolution and the second re-presentation.
The first being the ability of the system to retrieve the recorded information and the second its ability to faithfully re present (as in present again) that information.
I expect this is similar to what Marco is referring to as accuracy and feel it most closely resembles category the third, though it embraces the other 3.
I do not set out to find problems with the re-presentation of my system, but should some particular distortion intrude upon the music, then I will embark on tinkering and tweaking to ascertain its source and if possible resolution.
Whilst improved fidelity has often revealed recordings to be less than might be desired, the balance of improved sounding recordings is very favourable and the improvement made by some changes been much greater than expected.
An example here would be the improvement to the performance of the DL-103 after changing from a cheap SUT to an active headamp, another, a particular distortion in vocals on a couple of recordings eliminated after using Mr Yips protractor and painstakingly realigning my cartridge.
The results of the above 2 examples, improved information retrieval for the latter and harm minimisation in the former, resulting in more accurate re presentation, instead of a screech of massed violins there are individual violins, instead of one singer there is a backing singer and some studio reverb.
If the information is retrieved with accuracy in the time domain and re presented with phase coherence then I think tunefulness and all else will/can be re presented given a minimum damage amplification chain and suitable output transducers.
I think that is enough of an essay.

I'm studying this guy:), too.

michaelhigh
16-10-2010, 01:52
Hi John,



Not if you're listening to original recordings on vinyl from the 1950s, which were made using valve microphones and mixing desks in the days when quality prevailed over cost and convenience, and which were produced by some of the most talented recording engineers ever born ;)

I have many records from that era, where the recording quality is utterly stunning (the nearest thing you'll hear to live music) - eons better than anything produced today on vinyl, CD or anything else....

I agree with your above statement, but the fact is, when you hear some of the amazing early stereo (and even mono) recordings on vinyl, played on a top-notch turntable, through a suitably capable system, it leaves digital for dead!

Having the pleasure of hearing that quality of music at home in all its glory is the reason why I own the type of system I do.

Marco.

REALLY feeling this. Uh Huh.

michaelhigh
16-10-2010, 02:06
Hi John,

You make some very valid points here:



We don't have any kids, and thus I'm able to dedicate a (comfortable, nicely furnished) room at home which is simply for my hi-fi system and music collection. Therefore I can set my system up optimally with specialist equipment supports, and connect it to a dedicated earth and mains supply and have cables placed where I want them, with no concessions whatsoever to 'WAF' nonsense. All that matters is what sounds best, not what it looks like. We have a separate lounge for all the non-hi-fi stuff where the TV and all the 'normal' stuff lives.

I realise that I'm lucky in that respect. However, and this is the key, I'm far from being the 'lonely boy' who's locked away in his room from the real world with only his hi-fi for a friend, which can all too easily become the case with this hobby of ours.........

Quite often my wife will join me when listening to music and we'll share a nice bottle of wine and just relax and have a chat. The secret is to create an environment at home which is conducive to this.

I'm also lucky that my wife loves music, and crucially, is pretty interested in hi-fi. She even goes to shows with me and is an active member here!

We do this because we're genuinely interested in each other's hobbies and like to share our mutual interests, which is something that I find is sadly lacking in some people's relationships, where many married couples are like disparate souls leading separate (and often quite unhappy) lives. We're nothing like that, and indeed very close and do pretty much everything together.

Having that sort of relationship with your partner makes listening to music and owning a quality hi-fi system a joy, not a lonely existence. And not only does my wife often join me when listening to music, but we have many friends who share the same interests, so there is nearly always someone visiting who's into hi-fi and music, and we make it really enjoyable by sharing some lovely food and wine with them, so that the focus is not just on hi-fi and music, but a social occasion where there is plenty of fun and good banter! :cool:

As for the analogue vs. digital debate, I know where you're coming from. All I can say is that I have a fairly substantial music collection and own a very (VERY) good CDP, and also turntable. Whilst I enjoy superb sounds from CD and have heard some very good computer streaming set-ups, nothing I've heard digital-wise, and I mean NOTHING, gets close to the sound produced by my T/T when playing mint superbly recorded vinyl of the type I mentioned earlier.

Clicks and pops? There's (almost) no such thing if you have plenty of brand new vinyl, only buy the best condition second-hand records, own a professional record cleaner, and above all, take care of your records and store them properly! ;)

Owning a top-notch vinyl replay system, and both maintaining it and looking after records, is definitely a labour of love. But I enjoy every bit of it, as I much prefer this more tactile 'human' way of accessing my music collection than some 'soulless' files stored on a computer, which are worth bugger all in monetary terms, and which could be lost in the blink of an eye with a software failure!

No, give me a physical music collection and the ritual of pulling a record out of its sleeve, popping it on the turntable, and placing the stylus in the lead-in groove, and then sitting back and admiring the cover artwork and gatefold as I listen to the music, any day over some utilitarian computer set-up. It's such a dispassionate way of accessing one's music collection and yet another example of how modern technology, in some instances, has dehumanised us......

Don't get me started on that one though! :eyebrows:

Marco.

I really dig this sentiment. I hope I can find some reason to come down on the side of lossless listening as I don't particularly enjoy the up-and-down, back-and-forth to the machine. I hope I'm not over-quoting y'all, I just really appreciate y'all's POV. It's refreshing after hanging out with Yankees on American sites, I must say. Carry on.

michaelhigh
16-10-2010, 02:28
No problem with any of that Marco me old china.
I must admit I do miss the record sleeves; a pixel light image on a screen just doesn’t cut it.
Shame you’re mainly into classical and I wasn’t about when I unloaded my vinyl; even the 78’s went (sob sob)
What I wrote about listening to classical music though, I just can’t do it through a HiFi not mine or anyone else’s I’ve heard.
Maybe your kit would do the trick but you ain’t going to give it to me are you?
I’ve always believed you would need a huge listening room and kit capable of at least 10Hz to 40 kHz to cover what can be heard, felt and, if you believe that perception of sound goes beyond aural capacity, perceived. Even then, there is something about dressing up, an attractive lady on your arm and the entire ambiance of the concert experience.
Fortunately a lot of the more modern music often sounds better once the recording engineer has straightened out the final mix. I cant think of many live rock/whatever concerts I’ve been to where live matched recorded in quality and I’m a modern music fan.
Maybe Tower of Power were one of the exceptions to this.
However, despite all of our different perspectives and different means of replaying the music we like, I have a feeling that if it hasn’t already happened it wont be long before a handful of bits shunted through a USB or Firewire cable will produce audio indistinguishable from the master mix.
Let’s hope so or we may all be listening to mp3 on a white fruit company pod thingy.

Shudders! (as y'all say) hehe

Welder
05-12-2010, 12:27
A more macabre take on the art of sound
http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/animation/watch/v134824064MmRtXE

MartinT
05-12-2010, 21:37
Gosh, that's dark. I wonder what the creator of that was on?

Marco
05-12-2010, 21:42
It was indeed - and I loved it! Nice one, John... That kinda stuff is right up my street :)

Marco.

Jonboy
05-12-2010, 21:51
It was indeed - and I loved it! Nice one, John... That kinda stuff is right up my street :)

Marco.

You weirdo Marco, very strange but clever stuff indeed :mental::scratch::eek:

Marco
05-12-2010, 22:04
Lol - I just love anything dark, macabre and psychologically disturbing... You wanna see my taste in films! :eyebrows:

Marco.

MartinT
05-12-2010, 22:14
I should imagine you'd like Eraserhead.

Reid Malenfant
05-12-2010, 22:17
I should imagine you'd like Eraserhead.
That's about as messed up as it gets :eyebrows:

Recommended ;)

Frog
20-05-2011, 15:57
To bring it back on topic (although a very clever video) my preference is to get the tonality and dynamics of teh system right, and then everything else, tuneplaying, detail etc seems to fall into place.
Example, if you have the tonality right the microdynamic details that tell you the violin isn't just a high screech but "a wooden bodied instrument played in a room (which an acoustic signature) by dragging a bow across the strings with varying amounts of force" tends to be there, making listening to it a believable musical experience.

Yes?

John
20-05-2011, 16:22
Well I think if the toneality seems right our brains tend to compensate for the rest, so yes the rest will fall into place.
A friend who sets up systems etc told me a little story that illustrates this. He went round to a person house, intially he found the system really tiring. After a few hours his ears adjusted and could enjoy the system.

idc
20-06-2011, 12:29
I want to be emotionally attached to the music and experience the felling of getting it and the happiness an artist must feel when they get a perfect take. That perfect take could still be compromised with little mistakes having been made, or it is the best out of a bad bunch after a hard days recording. So perfect is the wrong word, but the take that will be used on the album.

I love to imagine I was there.

I love Neil Young and Crazy Horse on 'Ragged Glory'. They are playing together, with one take in what sounds like a shed and are having a brilliant time. That shines through in the music.

On Led Zeppelin's Physical Graffiti the track Black Country Woman, recorded outside starts with the sound of an airplane flighover head and some laughter, Jimmy Page saying to leave it and then the music starts. They too are in the groove.

I would have loved to have been there to high five Roger Waters as he finally got his perfect sound for one of the tracks on DSOTM.

Even the that I'll do attitude of many of the punk bands may not be musically perfect, but it has the energy and passion that is more important. Nick Mason hated the way Pink Floyd recorded music and he produced one of the first punk albums Damned, Damned, Damned' which is a riot of short tracks, get on with it and energy.

I love hearing those differences and hate bland recordings flattened out by the Loudness Wars. Such music is the mass produced posters of cute cats for peoples walls and far removed from real art.

jimdgoulding
04-07-2011, 21:36
The near accurate reproduction of the sound of instruments, their setting and atmosphere of what is in our recordings. I would say live music but that is recording dependent.

lurcher
04-07-2011, 23:49
But what does an electric guitar sound like?

Where is the reference that it is accurate to?

jimdgoulding
05-07-2011, 01:17
I should have said acoustic instruments. Pardon moi.

louie3
23-07-2011, 22:25
For the last 10 years or so I have been photographing the performances of the Chattanooga Symphony in a marvelous restored early 20th century movie house.

Lucky me, I get to hear music live and get paid for the trouble.

I want my little system to come as close as possible to what I hear from the rehearsals I get to attend.

I sit about 15 rows back, and am usually, although not always, alone in the seating area of the hall (fast, long lenses, ya know?).

Rich, brash, loud, soft, detailed, huge crescendos, and fiddles of all sizes that sound pretty much like fiddles.

Over the last 10 years my system, and quite possibly my ears have improved fairly dramatically.

I don't know which camp I fall into, but when I close my eyes in my listening room things are much closer to row 15 than they have ever been...and nobody is rattling paper, coughing or shuffling around in the seat next to me.

Audio Art indeed!!!!:)

jimdgoulding
28-07-2011, 19:31
That's very similar to my experience, also, even tho I have a small room. It's about speaker placement and listening position as much as it is about equipment. And the recording, of course. I listen to a lot of recordings made on location.

Joe
29-07-2012, 09:10
'If we have data, let's examine the data. If all we have are opinions, let's go with mine'.

Some American CEO.

Floyddroid
08-12-2012, 21:21
The Art Of Sound are genuine people from all backgrounds with the same passion for listening to music and enjoying the virtue of Audio Engineering and nostalgia. Plus lively debate.
:eyebrows:

nat8808
08-12-2012, 22:01
I want to be emotionally attached to the music and experience the felling of getting it and the happiness an artist must feel when they get a perfect take. That perfect take could still be compromised with little mistakes having been made, or it is the best out of a bad bunch after a hard days recording. So perfect is the wrong word, but the take that will be used on the album.

I love to imagine I was there.

I love Neil Young and Crazy Horse on 'Ragged Glory'. They are playing together, with one take in what sounds like a shed and are having a brilliant time. That shines through in the music.

On Led Zeppelin's Physical Graffiti the track Black Country Woman, recorded outside starts with the sound of an airplane flighover head and some laughter, Jimmy Page saying to leave it and then the music starts. They too are in the groove.

I would have loved to have been there to high five Roger Waters as he finally got his perfect sound for one of the tracks on DSOTM.

Even the that I'll do attitude of many of the punk bands may not be musically perfect, but it has the energy and passion that is more important. Nick Mason hated the way Pink Floyd recorded music and he produced one of the first punk albums Damned, Damned, Damned' which is a riot of short tracks, get on with it and energy.

I love hearing those differences and hate bland recordings flattened out by the Loudness Wars. Such music is the mass produced posters of cute cats for peoples walls and far removed from real art.

Some great albums were notoriously terrible to make with band arguing and hating each other, perhaps even each coming in to record their part on their own..

Not sure I'd like to imagine I was there for those!

I prefer to try to be in the place the band or artist wants to fool me into believing I am - whether it is real or not. For that, it just has to sound as the artist intended which requires a system that can do everything.

Can't remember who said this but someone experienced in the high-high-end - I think was a high-end dealer either on a forum or maybe in person to me when I bought a customer trade-in? - as you move into the very high priced gear and speakers, they become less capable as all-rounders but instead begin to hone in on particular aspects of sound like dynamics or midrange tonality etc etc and you have rich audiophiles who love that particular aspect above all else and are willing to pay high prices for something they can't get elsewhere.

In other words, if you have a wide taste in music and you simply want the music to be replayed exactly as intended, you should ignore all the flagship products and aim lower.

MartinT
10-12-2012, 08:51
I'm not sure I agree with that, Nat. Yes there are expensive but narrow paths (such as some single-ended valve amps) but there are also some great high end products of universal appeal.

It's all about system design and construction, working with the room and your music. I would hate to build a system that only suited certain kinds of music.

Anti Meep
12-05-2013, 08:06
Detail for the sake of detail? Not me.
Zero colourations and lifeless? Yeah nah!
Toes tapping, head bobbing, eyebrows going up and down, bum wiggling and singing along badly( after 3 too many ) My Oath!
Don't really know how to explain my style of listening, apart from thinking its more like being 5 rows back from the stage rather than sitting in front of the monitors and watching the band through the window:)

irb
03-07-2014, 11:04
Interesting thread. Here's my take, and I apologise if this has already been said better by someone else.

Music is a puzzle. I have no idea why humans can get so much emotional pleasure from listening to it. But we do. We don't all get the same pleasure from the same music, however, so there is inevitably an enormous subjective element in the enjoyment of music which makes analysing the pleasure we get from it even harder.

When it comes to the hardware we use to replay recorded music, pursuit of objective fidelity is desirable, and not to be scoffed at. However, the concept of fidelity has an irreducibly subjective component, because we're trying to create a emotional response. What works for me might not work for you, etc. This means there is huge scope for snake oil purveyors, because we can and do fool ourselves. The placebo effect is real. Vigilance against irresponsible foo is necessary and desirable, then, but there are bound to be areas where it's really hard to say what's foo and what isn't. (There have been several occasions over the years when I've 'upgraded' through several steps and convinced myself that my system's never sounded better, only to swop back to a much older system configuration for some unforeseen reason, to discover that the old system didn't in fact suck, as I'd expected, but actually gave more pleasure than the new one.) To sum up, neither unqualified objectivism nor unqualified subjectivism can be allow to stand. We all just have to muddle through, hoping to enjoy what we hear and trying not to be ripped off in the process. The message I take from all this is that a little humility is essential in any attempt to discuss what we hear.

We also need to remember that listening to recorded music involves the imagination - we hear sounds emitted by an audio system, and we imagine we are hearing people singing, instruments playing etc. If all goes well, we get the emotional pleasure we sought.

What this implies, of course, is that people who can enjoy music fully via lo-fi reproduction have superior ability to recreate a musical experience imaginatively compared to those who enjoy music most via hi-fi. I therefore regard my own hi-fi habit as sign of a kind of musical disability, and I try to remember this any time I post on a hi-fi forum. :)

anthonyTD
03-07-2014, 11:10
Good post Ian! :)
A...

Marco
03-07-2014, 11:16
Excellent post, Ian. I agree with much of it! :thumbsup:

Marco.

Barry
03-07-2014, 12:38
Interesting thread. Here's my take, and I apologise if this has already been said better by someone else.

Music is a puzzle. I have no idea why humans can get so much emotional pleasure from listening to it. But we do. We don't all get the same pleasure from the same music, however, so there is inevitably an enormous subjective element in the enjoyment of music which makes analysing the pleasure we get from it even harder.

When it comes to the hardware we use to replay recorded music, pursuit of objective fidelity is desirable, and not to be scoffed at. However, the concept of fidelity has an irreducibly subjective component, because we're trying to create a emotional response. What works for me might not work for you, etc. This means there is huge scope for snake oil purveyors, because we can and do fool ourselves. The placebo effect is real. Vigilance against irresponsible foo is necessary and desirable, then, but there are bound to be areas where it's really hard to say what's foo and what isn't. (There have been several occasions over the years when I've 'upgraded' through several steps and convinced myself that my system's never sounded better, only to swop back to a much older system configuration for some unforeseen reason, to discover that the old system didn't in fact suck, as I'd expected, but actually gave more pleasure than the new one.) To sum up, neither unqualified objectivism nor unqualified subjectivism can be allow to stand. We all just have to muddle through, hoping to enjoy what we hear and trying not to be ripped off in the process. The message I take from all this is that a little humility is essential in any attempt to discuss what we hear.

We also need to remember that listening to recorded music involves the imagination - we hear sounds emitted by an audio system, and we imagine we are hearing people singing, instruments playing etc. If all goes well, we get the emotional pleasure we sought.

What this implies, of course, is that people who can enjoy music fully via lo-fi reproduction have superior ability to recreate a musical experience imaginatively to those who enjoy music most via hi-fi. I therefore regard my own hi-fi habit as sign of a kind of musical disability, and I try to remember this any time I post on a hi-fi forum. :)

What an excellent post Ian! I think you have hit the nail on the head there.

Well done.

MikeMusic
03-07-2014, 14:31
Well put Ian, particularly

Music is a puzzle

peter haynes
19-11-2014, 08:32
We believe that the actual process of selecting components and their ancilliaries before assembling and setting them up to make a system through which we can enjoy listening to music is more an art than science. Like with any art an element of technical expertise is of course essential. Just as painters need to master the techniques of mixing paint and putting brush to paper before they can create a masterpiece, the components chosen to deliver music into your home will have been well designed and engineered by by experts with considerable technical prowess.

However, whilst favourable measurements taken of THD, dynamic range, power output, current delivery, slew rates, impedance, sensitivity (and whatever else we can actually measure) can be used to support your reasons for choosing a particular piece of kit, these arbitrary measurements will never be able to substitute what your ears and your own judgement can tell you regarding the effectiveness of the components in delivering enjoyable music into your listening environment. If you choose your kit relying solely on such measurements, the end result is unlikely to be particularly inspiring.

Therefore, such a faculty for discernment using yor ears is vital to the success of building the kind of system that, with the right kind of music, will move you to tears, plant a big grin on your face, get your feet tapping and/or keep your attention for any length of time. If you do not place much importance on the process of actually listening for yourself and making your choices based on what you hear then perhaps there are other sites that will meet your needs better than this one.

Because of the very subjective nature of The Art of Sound, it is inevitable that for different people there will be different points of departure for how they would like their hi-fi system ultimately to transport them to their musical nirvana. These starting points outlined below are just that - starting points, for surely all of us would want absolutely everything from a system without compromise if such a thing were ever possible. As such the starting points listed below are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive so you are free to add to or combine them in any way you see fit:

1) Playing the tune or tunes. Components are selected on their ability to make more sense of different melodies, how they fit together in time and generally give the greatest possible insight into the musical performance. The method used to make the selection is often refered to as "the tune dem."

2) Recreating (or getting close to) life-like dynamics, scale and visceral impact. If you are a regular concert-goer you may seek a system that can recreate the drama and thrill of the live band at the arena or the orchestra in the concert hall.

3) Detail retrieval. You want to extract the last tiny little drop of detail embedded in those silver or black discs.

4) You want to listen to your system all day long without experiencing listener fatigue. For you tonal accuracy, low coloration and distortion are very important.

Me, I fall into the first category although I seek elements of the other three in my system. People often think of Linn/Naim when tune or timing are mentioned. Some will even argue that there is no such thing as musicality/tunefulness and that it is just a marketing ploy touted by the aforementioned manufacturers and their brand-loyal followers. For me it is simply a way of evaluating kit, especially as there are a lot of manufacturers out there that excel in this area and it is by no means a foregone conclusion as to which brands or products are likely to be chosen using the tune dem method.

For tune dem read also deriving the greatest insight into the musical performance.

This has got to be the most sensible thing I have read about Hi Fi - thanks for the insight:)
Peter

peter haynes
19-11-2014, 08:35
Interesting thread. Here's my take, and I apologise if this has already been said better by someone else.

Music is a puzzle. I have no idea why humans can get so much emotional pleasure from listening to it. But we do. We don't all get the same pleasure from the same music, however, so there is inevitably an enormous subjective element in the enjoyment of music which makes analysing the pleasure we get from it even harder.

When it comes to the hardware we use to replay recorded music, pursuit of objective fidelity is desirable, and not to be scoffed at. However, the concept of fidelity has an irreducibly subjective component, because we're trying to create a emotional response. What works for me might not work for you, etc. This means there is huge scope for snake oil purveyors, because we can and do fool ourselves. The placebo effect is real. Vigilance against irresponsible foo is necessary and desirable, then, but there are bound to be areas where it's really hard to say what's foo and what isn't. (There have been several occasions over the years when I've 'upgraded' through several steps and convinced myself that my system's never sounded better, only to swop back to a much older system configuration for some unforeseen reason, to discover that the old system didn't in fact suck, as I'd expected, but actually gave more pleasure than the new one.) To sum up, neither unqualified objectivism nor unqualified subjectivism can be allow to stand. We all just have to muddle through, hoping to enjoy what we hear and trying not to be ripped off in the process. The message I take from all this is that a little humility is essential in any attempt to discuss what we hear.

We also need to remember that listening to recorded music involves the imagination - we hear sounds emitted by an audio system, and we imagine we are hearing people singing, instruments playing etc. If all goes well, we get the emotional pleasure we sought.

What this implies, of course, is that people who can enjoy music fully via lo-fi reproduction have superior ability to recreate a musical experience imaginatively compared to those who enjoy music most via hi-fi. I therefore regard my own hi-fi habit as sign of a kind of musical disability, and I try to remember this any time I post on a hi-fi forum. :)

Big puzzler for me Ian is why my wife doesnt particularly like any form of music and certainly not why I have to have kit that enables me to enjoy it. Great post
Peter:)

awkwardbydesign
19-11-2014, 09:11
I remember reading many years ago, round about the time Andre Previn and others were extolling the virtues of pretty average hifi, that these musicians carry the performance around in their heads, so only need a reminder of how it sounds. Whereas us mortals need all the help we can get.
As I can hear the difference between mains cables, I obviously need more help than most. :mental:

Kung fu dog
17-08-2015, 17:59
This has been one of the most interesting things I read for a long while. For me I think I fall in to all four camps . Probably 2&4 mostly. I m a keen guitarist and in pursuit of tone for a long while. I ve owned many different guitars each with their own particular voice. To my wife she can barley hear the difference between them but to me it's obvious . If the artist has struggled as much as I have with selecting the right instrument and amp settings to get the tone they want then I don't want my hi fi system to change the tone of it. You wouldn't go to see the mona lisa and view her through orange tinted sunglasses.
The other thing I want from my system is to convey the music but not get in the way of it. I suppose my plan is to build a system that shows off how good my music is not to play music to show off how good my system is .

Oddball
15-11-2015, 23:15
Cracking post that Ian :)

I am minded to mention the documentary on TV a while ago , that illustrated just how music can lift people in old folks homes , out of a state of total lack of interest into singing for their supper!!

Audio Advent
16-11-2015, 01:00
Cracking post that Ian :)

I am minded to mention the documentary on TV a while ago , that illustrated just how music can lift people in old folks homes , out of a state of total lack of interest into singing for their supper!!

You're surely not saying that they didn't get fed if they didn't sing are you? These budget cuts are rediculous!

r100
16-11-2015, 08:10
Cracking post that Ian :)

I am minded to mention the documentary on TV a while ago , that illustrated just how music can lift people in old folks homes , out of a state of total lack of interest into singing for their supper!!

1+ @ Ian, John

re documentary
I saw it too and it was really touching. The good news is that dementia does not affect the part of the brain which connects us to music ;-)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zo_JQZo3Y0p