And so the next major audiophile engineering challenge is, err, well what?

[Labarum]

Nah. I don't go with that at all. Hifi isn't real, but it has its benefits. You can't compare the two. There's all kinds of ways in which hifi is superior to live music, as well as being deficient. It's a false start IMO to assume that hifi is always inferior to live music. Sometimes it can be better. And vice verca.

I'm a musician myself so there

Well I go with Quad's motto

"The closest approach to the original sound."

Accuracy and fidelity are the aims, but of course you cant fit a whole orchestra into the front room of a Semi! It can only be a picture.

For that reason I don't often listen to orchestral music. I prefer the small ensemble: something that might conceivable be performed in my lounge.

And as I said, the rules for popular music that has no existence apart from the electronics present a different set of issues, for there is no "original sound" to approach.

[Labarum]

Hozepipe, what instrument(s) do you play, and what sort of music?

[Hozepipe]

"The closest approach to the original sound."

Shouldn't that be:

"The closest approach to the original recording"

As soon as the pressure wave his the mic's diaphragm, it's not 'real' anymore. But an engineer can do quite wonderful things you know.

[Marco]

Gareth,

I agree with much of what you say but I think there's a danger of you considering that only musicians and concert goers appreciate real music or what's considered as 'real music' through a hi-fi system. I'm afraid that this kind of absolutist thinking is way off the mark. It's far more complex than that.

Marco
(A fairly regular concert goer, hi-fi and music lover and knower of a good sound, who unfortunately doesn't play a musical instrument)

[Hozepipe]

Hozepipe, what instrument(s) do you play, and what sort of music?

The penny whistle. Heavy metal and a bit of Techno...

[Marco]

Marco.

[Marco]

What about a test that measured listening behavior - something that's a lot less subjective and can be easily measured without pressurizing the victim, I mean subject, and skewing the data? Lets just use Audiophiles and Audio Engineers as subjects to give the best chance of getting a positive result. Over a period of a few weeks say (a very expensive and improbable test, but also hypothetical so its free) measure how often and for how long each individual listens to the system as a measure of their satisfaction/enjoyment of it, half of the time with and half without the component change. Not forgetting to use a placebo control group where no change is made over the period. This would, in theory give you an objective measure of enjoyment that the system provides.

Do you think that this would be a fairer, more accurate test? It would show more conclusively any statistically significant difference between the component change group and the placebo group.

Yes!

I like this model for testing and think that it would likely give more meaningful results for audio enthusiasts.

Marco.

P.S Why as a Welshman are you spelling like an American? Tim's got an excuse!

[Labarum]

Shouldn't that be:

"The closest approach to the original recording"

As soon as the pressure wave his the mic's diaphragm, it's not 'real' anymore. But an engineer can do quite wonderful things you know.

You have hit the nail right on the head. I stand by what I said

"The closest approach to the original sound"

The purpose of the project is to recreate that original experience, but my approach only holds for music that has an existence apart from electronics; what you say is true for music that begins in the electronic rather than the acoustic domain.

[Labarum]

Gareth,

I agree with much of what you say but I think there's a danger of you considering that only musicians and concert goers appreciate real music or what's considered as 'real music' through a hi-fi system. I'm afraid that this kind of absolutist thinking is way off the mark. It's far more complex than that.

Marco
(A fairly regular concert goer, hi-fi and music lover and knower of a good sound, who unfortunately doesn't play a musical instrument)

Who is Gareth?

I think there's a danger of you considering that only musicians and concert goers appreciate real music

I neither said nor implied that. I did say that such persons should be selected as those best qualified to form a panel make a judgement of the accuracy of a system's presentation, because they would know more intimately the sounds to be imitated.

[Hozepipe]

P.S Why as a Welshman are you spelling like an American? Tim's got an excuse!

What's wrong with 'fairer'? 'More fair and accurate' just sounds wrong to me.

You and your pedantism!