Why Hi-Fi?

[Joe]

This question was raised by Marco in our discussion yesterday evening about the importance of speakers vs electronics. I didn't comment on it specifically at the time, but here's some thoughts about why we bother with hi-fi.

I think there's two sets of factors at work here; one sonic, the other not. The two are, IMO, inextricably linked.

The not-sonic factors first. We're almost exclusively blokes, so we like 'things'; some of like to take them apart and use a soldering iron on them, others just like reading spec sheets and watching the LEDs. This aspect of hifi is related to train-spotting, cameras, all sorts of 'collecting' hobbies, and DIY done from wish rather than poverty or necessity.

Now the sonic factors. As I said, I think all the talk of 'emotion' and 'musicality' is beside the point; both can be had from very basic musical reproduction devices, and many music lovers have very lo-fi systems.

The analogy I'd use is films. Many films 'work' on a small screen, and if a film is badly acted and/or poorly directed or scripted, it won't be any better on a big screen, though the visual and sonic impact might distract from the weaknesses.

In the same way, good music will shine through the medium; poor music won't be any better via hi-fi, but listening out for tiny details in the recording might hold the listener's attention for a while. However, just as some films come to life on a big screen, some music (eg opera, large-scale orchestral pieces) do really benefit from a more 'spacious' acoustic.

[Macca]

I'd disagree.

Some music lovers use lo-fi systems and they still enjoy music - true.

But to take your film analogy:

I was happy with my 28'' Phillips widescreen CRT television for years - and I watch a lot of films. A friend bought a 50'' £5K Pioneer Plasma and I went around and watched a couple of films with him. That was it. Once 'exposed' to the larger screen I could not go back to what was now a 'tiny' screen and enjoy my films anything like as much. So I got a bigger screen.

If someone really loves and enjoys music (even though they listen lo-fi) and they are then 'exposed' to better quality - then they will seek it out to the extent of their budget. If they don't then I suggest that they do not appreciate music as much as they claim to.

[aquapiranha]

Can't disagree with the geek aspect, just look at how many hifi forums have a photography bit, likely the most geeky pastime of all! lol.

I can see what you are saying about the music aspect, but I need to think about it...

[Joe]

I'd disagree.

Some music lovers use lo-fi systems and they still enjoy music - true.

But to take your film analogy:

I was happy with my 28'' Phillips widescreen CRT television for years - and I watch a lot of films. A friend bought a 50'' £5K Pioneer Plasma and I went around and watched a couple of films with him. That was it. Once 'exposed' to the larger screen I could not go back to what was now a 'tiny' screen and enjoy my films anything like as much. So I got a bigger screen.

If someone really loves and enjoys music (even though they listen lo-fi) and they are then 'exposed' to better quality - then they will seek it out to the extent of their budget. If they don't then I suggest that they do not appreciate music as much as they claim to.

I can happily watch my favourite films on anything from a full-size cinema screen to a portable TV. Perhaps I focus more on dialogue and less on the visuals.

With music, I think music experts (and particularly musicians) need less 'help' in listening to music; they can hear what's going on even from a low-quality system, whereas the ignorant & tone-deaf amongst us (eg me) benefit from the clearer 'window' into the music provided by hifi. But I can still enjoy music on the Sony micro system in the kitchen, or on my MP3 player.

Maybe I'm just easily pleased.

[Macca]

I can happily watch my favourite films on anything from a full-size cinema screen to a portable TV. Perhaps I focus more on dialogue and less on the visuals.

With music, I think music experts (and particularly musicians) need less 'help' in listening to music; they can hear what's going on even from a low-quality system, whereas the ignorant & tone-deaf amongst us (eg me) benefit from the clearer 'window' into the music provided by hifi. But I can still enjoy music on the Sony micro system in the kitchen, or on my MP3 player.

Maybe I'm just easily pleased.

But which set up do you prefer to listen to/view?

[Steve Toy]

The added musicality and emotional impact enjoyed through good hi-fi over the transistor radio/MP3 player is derived from its greater dynamic capability - i.e. greater ability to reproduce loud versus soft. On a favourite pop song the chorus should overwhelm because it comes across louder. On an MP3 player this simply does not happen - it is too dynamically compressed. I suggest that with the more compressed media the imagination is simply filling in the gaps. Live music is dynamic. Rythms are portrayed not just in terms of temporal patterns but also through varying intensity in striking notes or percussion instruments. Dynamic capability also gives us insight into vocal inflection as well as texture, harmonic structure and telling the full story of a note's envelope from leading edge through to decay.

Such dynamic prowess is achieved through choosing top-notch electronics from source components and amplifiers, preferably active pre and power. Attention should be paid to power supplies at every stage.

Passive components like cables and interconnects should not be used as tone controls masking unpleasant noises along the way. They should add as little if their own character as is possible and remove as little information from source.

Speakers are also passive components and the same rules apply.

Supports should play the role of affording unwanted vibration the fastest route to ground. They are not there just to look pretty. Anything that stores unwanted energy kills dynamics by causing causes time smear, i.e. the blurring of leading edges and glossing over subtle tming cues that put that extra smile on your face as a listener.

A well setup system will sound musically satisfying, i.e. dynamic with quite modest speakers. The very best speakers reveal everything coherently, warts and all and as such should only be added to a system once everything else has been sorted.

Do not shoot the messenger - we don't listen to speakers, we listen through them.



With music, I think music experts (and particularly musicians) need less 'help' in listening to music; they can hear what's going on even from a low-quality system, whereas the ignorant & tone-deaf amongst us (eg me) benefit from the clearer 'window' into the music provided by hifi. But I can still enjoy music on the Sony micro system in the kitchen, or on my MP3 player.



Good musicians are more able mentally to fill in the gaps. This is an active process and quite a fatiguing one over time. I can enjoy the odd song on the radio but I cannot listen to lo-fi for extended periods. In the car while working my radio is silent.

[markf]

I have never really bought into this idea of "mentally filling in the gaps" if it was true
then how could you ever listen to two different versions or interpretations of a song
if your mind was constantly adding/subtracting to create it's own ideal version.

[Steve Toy]

...because the human mind is a powerful tool. The additions/subtractions are subtle and probably unconscious to a degree but they take their toll over longer-term listening.

[Joe]

Good musicians are more able mentally to fill in the gaps. This is an active process and quite a fatiguing one over time. I can enjoy the odd song on the radio but I cannot listen to lo-fi for extended periods. In the car while working my radio is silent.

Ah, that's where we differ. Though I prefer to listen via hifi, I can listen to lofi too. Paradoxically, if working I prefer lofi, because it's easier to ignore.

[DSJR]

I find I can listen to old favourite tracks on practically anything, even the squeakers on this laptop, but hearing a good full range system once again as I did yesterday (I feel a new thread coming on ;)) reminds me just how much easier it is to relax into the music - and those big Harbeths (and their new babies too) do a wonderful job of stopping you listening to the gear and just getting into the music being played - lovely :)

[Marco]

Ah, that's where we differ. Though I prefer to listen via hifi, I can listen to lofi too. Paradoxically, if working I prefer lofi, because it's easier to ignore.

Yes, but how else is one to unravel the complexity of the 'musical message' behind the repertoire of Celine Dion without a hi-fi system?

Marco.

[Joe]

Yes, but how else is one to unravel the complexity of the 'musical message' behind the repertoire of Celine Dion without a hi-fi system?

Marco.

Indeed. That sort of music definitely requires 'active listening'!

[Beechwoods]

Don't get me started. Mariah Carey can definitely get very messy on the wrong kind of kit.

Personally, I'd draw the line at laptop speakers, but good music still entertains in the car or on headphones at the bus-stop. In fact I do more listening via my portable music player (a Cowon iAudio M5L and Sennheiser GX 400II in-ear headphones, running Rockbox firmware) than anything else. If only because I'm away from my kit in an office most of the day.

I have though found myself with the kit I have because I have (on a budget, and with a vintage aesthetic) sought to bring myself closer to the music. There's something exciting about getting closer to the sound the artist or producer intended. I'll be the first to admit that my system is not high-end. I can't afford much better than I have at the moment, though I will insist on focussing on sources rather than front end :) And until we move, the semi-detached nature of our house will insist on me not being able to have the kind of large, vintage speakers, and level of bass impact and slam that I would like.

An interesting question though would be 'what is hi-fi'? I suspect that we all have differing views of what constitutes high-fidelity. Is a Series 3 Quad setup into homemade Kef transmission-line speakers with BBC design crossovers hi-fidelity? In the late 70's you might have said yes, but now? :confused:

[Puffin]

I was a 70's Disco Kid. I just loved the visceral impact and total immersion in the music. I was lucky to live in London and had the pick of the clubs. I have no idea what the PA equipment was at any of them, but they sure did it for me.

I need a system that delivers impact both at low and high volumes. I like to think that what I have now not only does depth and slam, but it also delivers on detail and I am hearing enough of what is on the disc/platter or when streaming.

A case in point. Mrs Puffin was out earlier this evening. Walter Becker's album out last year is quite reggae tinged. One track is a dub style offering. I was really cranking it and at one point could hear what sounded like a low level intrusion. I backed off thinking that something was wrong, there wasn't it was just that until I had hit that particular sound level, I had never noticed this bass reverb type thing.

Music has to stir the emotions. I can get that from my MP3 player at low volumes on a train or similar when circumstances dictate that it has to be discreet. However my weapon of choice is a full fat, full frequency (30Hz - 40kHz) system which just keeps giving more as the volume goes up, no stress, no strain. Deep tight bass a plenty and all the other bits to complete the recipe.

[Alex_UK]

I doubt any of us here are not music lovers, else what would be the point? So, my theory is that we will make the best out of the situation - whether it be budget, space or time constraints - as Marco has pointed out, everything in hi-fi is a compromise, but I suspect as true music lovers, we do our hardest to limit those compromises - be it buying better headphones for our ipods, ripping files to lossless or tube rolling - I hope we are all doing it to get closer to the artists and the music they recorded.

[Joe]

An interesting question though would be 'what is hi-fi'? I suspect that we all have differing views of what constitutes high-fidelity. Is a Series 3 Quad setup into homemade Kef transmission-line speakers with BBC design crossovers hi-fidelity? In the late 70's you might have said yes, but now? :confused:

Another can of worms there! Regardless of the kit used, it raises the old 'faithful to what?' conundrum. Was the music recorded on tape, with valve amplification? Single mic or multi-mic? What post-recording work was done, if any?

Your best bet is to do what Puffin has done; ie find a system that makes music sound the way you like it, and not worry too much about what constitutes hifi.

[Themis]

Yes, but how else is one to unravel the complexity of the 'musical message' behind the repertoire of Celine Dion without a hi-fi system?

Marco.
Don't know about Dion, but surely La Solitudine:

Marco se n'è andato e non ritorna più
Il treno delle 7:30 senza lui
È un cuore di metallo senza l'anima
Nel freddo del mattino grigio di città .

needs nice italian gear. ;)

[Themis]

Another can of worms there! Regardless of the kit used, it raises the old 'faithful to what?' conundrum. Was the music recorded on tape, with valve amplification? Single mic or multi-mic? What post-recording work was done, if any?

Your best bet is to do what Puffin has done; ie find a system that makes music sound the way you like it, and not worry too much about what constitutes hifi.
The problem is that "the way you like it" is not something constant over time. ;)

[Puffin]

Your best bet is to do what Puffin has done; ie find a system that makes music sound the way you like it, and not worry too much about what constitutes hifi.

The more I hear systems said to denote "HiFi" the more I realise that my system is essentially a sound system. It might aspire to hifi, it might have some bits that could be classed as hifi.......?:mental:

[Stratmangler]

The problem is that "the way you like it" is not something constant over time. ;)

I dunno - glaciers move faster than the components in my system. That said, I am still head over heels with my SB3 / Beresford TC7510 , and by some folks' standards that is bleeding edge technology.

Chris:)

[Beechwoods]

I don't worry about what constitutes hi-fi, it's just an interesting question, given the differing levels of experience, and spend on here. I'm happy as Larry, 'cept I'd like it that the house was detached so I could crank it up a bit!

[Joe]

I dunno - glaciers move faster than the components in my system.

Same here: two systems since I started this malarkey in the 80s. I still have the speakers and turntable I bought in 1982 in the upstairs system. Been through plenty of cartridges though!

[Puffin]

I have been lucky to have a dedicated room in my last 2 houses. The first was a semi with an integral garage on the outside wall. I converted it and soundproofed it. I could crank it to mental levels and walk outside and it sounded like a tranny radio playing.

The room in this house is smaller, but it is detached and the neighbours are about 2 house widths away.

[Joe]

I don't worry about what constitutes hi-fi, it's just an interesting question, given the differing levels of experience, and spend on here. I'm happy as Larry, 'cept I'd like it that the house was detached so I could crank it up a bit!

I'm in the middle house of a terrace of three, but next door's lad plays the drums, so I don't feel too bad about playing music loud. The other side is a garage!

[sburrell]

Would anyone mind if I refer back to the parallel with movie playback? This thread brings to mind something I've noticed a great deal recently because I've been watching a lot of TV-on-demand (4oD, iPlayer etc.) on my laptop. In particular, The IT Crowd comes to mind, because the quality of streaming video is sometimes noticeably blocky. But what I'm darn sure of is that I still thoroughly enjoy the show, more so because I've accepted that there's nothing I can do about the quality of the transmission and I can just sit back and enjoy the fine comedy---which is, on the whole, not marred by the blockiness. However, there was one show that I recently watched on TV-on-demand that I later saw on TV---a nice big 32'' Sony Bravia---and all of a sudden got a joke that previously had slightly baffled me, though by no means enough to spoil my enjoyment of the show: I just let it wash over me. Thanks to the higher-fidelity of the broadcast, something I'd missed before became apparent.
Another thing I recall is a review from a hifi mag (not What HiFi) where the reviewer was listening to a top-end turntable system. I've always remembered how he described his "almost orgasmic release" (he definitely used the word "orgasm" in the article!) at suddenly perceiving a previously unrevealed nuance of the bass line which, on this system, was revealed to be building to a climax of its own that he'd previously not noticed.
I guess my point is that hi-fi (high-fidelity) is a matter of revelation. Music is not a joke with a single punchline (well, good music anyway), but a blend of several different threads each offering something to the listener. Perhaps lo-fi obscures the dénouement of half-a-dozen stories, but it still reveals a half-a-dozen others.
So: why hifi? If you want to view a sunset, you don't look through a mud-smeared window. However, if you can't get an unobstructed view of the sunset, you'll make the best with what you've got, and probably adapt what you have to hand to create a new view: sunset plus obstruction. As the Americans say: if life gives you a lemon, make lemonade. :)
PS: sorry for all the metaphors, it's the only way I know how to write!