I found out something about myself

[JJack]

I recently found out something about myself, and I think it informs some of the questions and debates that audiophiles have.

When I started down this path some years ago, I thought I was a "they are here" music lover; that is, I was seeking to bring, say, the Berlin Philharmonic into my listening room. It's a cool trick, and I was impressed by how close I could come to doing it.

But.

But something was missing.

I started listening to high, high-end systems ($100,000 and up). I can't afford those, but I noticed that listening to those systems revealed something in my listening preferences, heretofore unknown: I wasn't a "they are here" listener at heart: I was a "I am there" listener. These high-end systems revealed details that I couldn't capture in my home system. There was lots of there there, and I love it. I love the scratch of the bow on a violin, the outsized crack of the leading edge of a drum snare transient.

So, rather than having, say, the Tom Petty in my living room ("they are here"), I'm in the studio, the control room, listening to the drummer at the start of Breakdown. I am there. I accept the artifice that this is a recording, perhaps overdubbed and almost certainly edited.

As a former performer with orchestras, I suppose I knew the whole time that I couldn't bring the LPO into my living room. The scale isn't there. The sheer horsepower is unobtainable; a stereo cannot reproduce a crescendo of the Vienna Philharmonic, no matter what the db meter says. So I wasn't able to fully suspend my disbelief, and now I don't have to; I'm not a participant, I'm just eavesdropping.

So what's the downside? They are easy to spot: a focus on smaller details versus the sweep of a piece. Foregoing the neat trick of sometimes believing that Marvin Gaye is still alive, singing in my listening room. Feeling less a part of an event, and more of an observor.

I don't think I chose to be this way - I think I just uncovered the fact that I always was wound like this. Perhaps these core differences result in the vinyl versus digital debate (or tubes vs. solid state, single-ended vs. etc., etc.) and the lack of understanding therein.

Maybe this is a useful construct for others, maybe not.

[walpurgis]

I think that's why some people go the low wattage 300B SE amp and high efficiency full range driver in a big horn route. It's usually coloured, not great at bass definition or extension, but it is often massively transparent and atmospheric and it gets you 'there', or nearer 'there' than most other interpretations of Hi-Fi. In other words, you are given a view deeper into the sound and performance. It's not the way my Hi-Fi is, but not that far off by the way.

[Barry]

I recently found out something about myself, and I think it informs some of the questions and debates that audiophiles have.

When I started down this path some years ago, I thought I was a "they are here" music lover; that is, I was seeking to bring, say, the Berlin Philharmonic into my listening room. It's a cool trick, and I was impressed by how close I could come to doing it.

But.

But something was missing.

I started listening to high, high-end systems ($100,000 and up). I can't afford those, but I noticed that listening to those systems revealed something in my listening preferences, heretofore unknown: I wasn't a "they are here" listener at heart: I was a "I am there" listener. These high-end systems revealed details that I couldn't capture in my home system. There was lots of there there, and I love it. I love the scratch of the bow on a violin, the outsized crack of the leading edge of a drum snare transient.

So, rather than having, say, the Tom Petty in my living room ("they are here"), I'm in the studio, the control room, listening to the drummer at the start of Breakdown. I am there. I accept the artifice that this is a recording, perhaps overdubbed and almost certainly edited.

As a former performer with orchestras, I suppose I knew the whole time that I couldn't bring the LPO into my living room. The scale isn't there. The sheer horsepower is unobtainable; a stereo cannot reproduce a crescendo of the Vienna Philharmonic, no matter what the db meter says. So I wasn't able to fully suspend my disbelief, and now I don't have to; I'm not a participant, I'm just eavesdropping.

So what's the downside? They are easy to spot: a focus on smaller details versus the sweep of a piece. Foregoing the neat trick of sometimes believing that Marvin Gaye is still alive, singing in my listening room. Feeling less a part of an event, and more of an observor.

I don't think I chose to be this way - I think I just uncovered the fact that I always was wound like this. Perhaps these core differences result in the vinyl versus digital debate (or tubes vs. solid state, single-ended vs. etc., etc.) and the lack of understanding therein.

Maybe this is a useful construct for others, maybe not.

Good post Jack

I have always distinguished systems which purport, or try, to allow one to (erroneously) say: "such and such" is playing in my listening room, with those that convey the illusion that "you are there" - that you are in the audience. The latter only works for small scale ensembles: folk, chamber and string quartets (and maybe quintets). It's nonsense to believe, or state, that the Berlin Philarmonic (or any other large scale ensemble) are performing right inside your listening room!

Sadly, those systems that do seem to convey the latter: SETs with horn-loaded speakers, are just too coloured to effect the illusion realistically for me.

[synsei]

I get this totally and it completely defines the recent changes in the character of my system. Not so very long ago I remember extolling the virtues of the Valhalla amp and how it seemed to bring artists into my listening room. Well, the recent changes such as installing a Quad 306 in place of the Valhalla plus a set of RFC Neptune IC's have massively increased the ability of my system to portray ambiance and atmosphere, and I believe it is this ability which is responsible for the feeling of 'being there' I get now, especially when listening to live recordings.

[Oldpinkman]

This accords a little with my own experiences too. It almost defines the "pink triangle" sound. Transparency, breathy proximity, and "almost touch them" feeling. My Dad on his barbeque visit when he cried at his favourite Bach (and wanted to stay to listen to the end of the piece) had that comment that "when I opened my eyes I expected to see the players, not the living room wall"

The price is less bass weight, less "slam", less "I'm really at a motorhead concert". However Hi the Fi it can never get reggae right for my rastafarian friend Bernie, cos whether live or recorded reggae needs a 25ft bass driver driven to distortion to be real.

"Being there" was Pink Triangle. "Smooth, swinging and sexy" was the Linn / Naim party we broke up

It wasn't that simple - but the concept resonates..:)

[killie99]

Totally agree with this. I have Impulse H2's. I know they are coloured, I know the bass isn't great but they somehow manage to totally enthrawl me and make me feel like I'm actually 'there'. I've had many speakers come and try to replace the H2's and as good as some of them were, emotional they just didn't cut the mustard. Maggie 1.7's, LV Avatar 2's, Event Opal's ... they were all good in their own way but they didn't take me 'there'.

[Gordon Steadman]

I know exactly what you mean but this is something I have never tried to achieve. Either one really. I know its all a construct so the one and only thing I care about is whether or not the music enthrals, draws me in and grabs my attention or if I can do something else at the same time.

For the former its valves and 57s (Although the Quad 306 came quite close as did the 50Ds). For the latter its almost any other system I've heard (OK OK I know there may well be a few out there but I can't get to hear everything) No matter how impressive, loud or supposedly accurate, if it doesn't allow the music to speak for itself, it ain't working for me. I make guitars and repair most other instruments so know all about the extraneous noises they make when being played. Not too fussed about reproducing those myself, especially the clack clack of wind instruments.

I've been listening to hi-fi for nigh on 50 years now. Technically things improve apparently but I remain to be convinced that any of it actually makes any difference if it can't do music. I would just add that it also has to be tonally accurate too!!!

[JJack]

Okay, so I'm not alone; that makes me feel better.

I have a good example from this morning, playing a Bruckner 8 that had some strident strings. My Harbeths would have made those "more musical" while my TADs just laid their shortcomings bare. I'll accept that the Harbeths would have made it sound more like the orchestra was in my living room; while the TADs were transcribing the studio mic feed more accurately. I'm actually surprised that I'm in the latter camp.