If you like Pilsner I guess, and I do. I also like Belgian beers, not had much exposure to German beers in recent times. We have a pretty vibrant craft beer scene here now which is what I most focus on.
We have the same thing going on here as well, lots of Micro breweries popping up. some really nice stuff. So many beers, so little time 
Maybe we could record the sound of beer foam bubbles popping and see whose Hi-Fi system is good enough to identify which beer is which on playback? That would be a new test. Bet we could get an article published by AES!
Considering that most of the hifi worriers are men, it's hardly surprising. If your wife doesn't want those ugly speakers in the room, she's hardly going to take kindly to panels and tubes. I have managed to hide mine behind a fabric wall and a Persian wall rug. I haven't managed to hide the speakers though. 😀
To properly appreciate german and czech beer you really have to go to Germany or the Czech Republic.
The vast majority of german beers for example is local. It is not being exported and you may well struggle to find it elsewhere within Germany.
Am I interested in hifi? Personally I would ask myself; Am I interested in music performed live?
The thing is that I'm so brain damaged regarding this hifi thing that I can' listen to live music anymore. Every time I do that I get a strange feeling of that something is missing. In real life the sound quality just can't be any better - it's perfect. Perfect staging, the timbre is subtle and the dynamics is state of the art - at least live music. So the whole part of me that normally is involved with judging sound quality just haven't anything to do.
I'm not really an analytical listener - I normally don't try to try to locate instruments and such things, but one thing that's active very often is the sense of the music being "alive" and that I get that feeling of that I'm participating In some real musical event.
So, in real life I actually am participating i real music performance and I don't have to get a "feeling" of it.
How many times can you hire a string quartet for those money you spend on a high end system? And would you prefer that?
To narrow down the thing; I usually build amplifiers and I would say that amplifiers is what sparks life in a stereo. Good speakers generally defines what level of detailing and realism one wants to obtain.
I have a couple of old Snell E3 as TV-speakers. They aren't very analytical or correct but they are fantastic music performers and they are sensual. Despite their shortcomings they are very good at judging electronics and a good amp really blows life into the performance.
The thing is that I'm so brain damaged regarding this hifi thing that I can' listen to live music anymore. Every time I do that I get a strange feeling of that something is missing. In real life the sound quality just can't be any better - it's perfect. Perfect staging, the timbre is subtle and the dynamics is state of the art - at least live music. So the whole part of me that normally is involved with judging sound quality just haven't anything to do.
I'm not really an analytical listener - I normally don't try to try to locate instruments and such things, but one thing that's active very often is the sense of the music being "alive" and that I get that feeling of that I'm participating In some real musical event.
So, in real life I actually am participating i real music performance and I don't have to get a "feeling" of it.
How many times can you hire a string quartet for those money you spend on a high end system? And would you prefer that?
To narrow down the thing; I usually build amplifiers and I would say that amplifiers is what sparks life in a stereo. Good speakers generally defines what level of detailing and realism one wants to obtain.
I have a couple of old Snell E3 as TV-speakers. They aren't very analytical or correct but they are fantastic music performers and they are sensual. Despite their shortcomings they are very good at judging electronics and a good amp really blows life into the performance.
Ooh! Well here's the thing; that is a real (cheap) Persian carpet, not a modern machine made copy, and it was my wife's choice. As she lets me get away with murder otherwise, I'm hardly going to complain, am I? And I like it too. But even if I didn't it would be a small price to pay for being allowed to have "real hifi"!
I involve my wife in the hifi choices, as she loves music as much as I do, and the black leather fronts, steel bars and side veneers on the speakers were all her choices. Even the colour of my current power amp.
But I choose the beer. Although she likes Hoegaarden and Sharps Doom Bar.
Given the recent silence on this subject, should we infer that the above standard is unachievable as a practical matter given limitations in microphone and recording technology? Or, maybe that obtaining a sufficiently good quality reproduction system and listening environment is too complicated and expensive to be practical for most people?
Well I am off to Covent Garden tomorrow to watch the Royal Ballet. Hoping for good seats acoustically 🙂
Agreed. See post 427: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/204456-you-really-interested-hi-fi-43.html#post4937918
Reading either the EBU or ITU standards has a guideline spec for reverberation time in critical listening environments. Unless one's environment is abnormally live or dampened, most rooms will fall within spec, even untreated...
Live-Fi?
That brings us to the question as to whether an acoustically bad seat at a live performance is really Hi-Fi. You can claim to have attended a live concert, as opposed to an optimized playback and listening environment at home.
So which is better? I have been to maybe one or two concerts in my lifetime and except for that piano concert at Carnegie Hall I do not remember anything special about the sound.
Sometimes live music is the equivalent of a bad studio mix?
That brings us to the question as to whether an acoustically bad seat at a live performance is really Hi-Fi. You can claim to have attended a live concert, as opposed to an optimized playback and listening environment at home.
So which is better? I have been to maybe one or two concerts in my lifetime and except for that piano concert at Carnegie Hall I do not remember anything special about the sound.
Sometimes live music is the equivalent of a bad studio mix?
I suppose it depends on one's definition of critical listening environment. Sometimes even otherwise seemingly reasonable early reflections can interfere with some critical listening activities. Bass reflex speakers which rely on resonance effects to extend low frequency response can also cause problems for some people working in mixing and mastering environments.
For example, in the case of early reflections, things like comb filtering, and noticeable echos are more well understood, but subtle micro-timing of percussive sounds that contribute to groove feel may be discernible by expert musicians down around 5 ms or less, but probably more than 1 ms.
Also, I wonder if the term "most rooms" refers to rooms intended as control rooms, or most living rooms? I have seen a lot of variation in home listening rooms.
Finally, in EBU Tech. 3276, it said something about harmonic distortion shall not exceed 3% at LF, or 1% at higher frequencies. That could actually be quite a bit for trained listeners. Some might find the guidelines inadequate for their needs.
For example, in the case of early reflections, things like comb filtering, and noticeable echos are more well understood, but subtle micro-timing of percussive sounds that contribute to groove feel may be discernible by expert musicians down around 5 ms or less, but probably more than 1 ms.
Also, I wonder if the term "most rooms" refers to rooms intended as control rooms, or most living rooms? I have seen a lot of variation in home listening rooms.
Finally, in EBU Tech. 3276, it said something about harmonic distortion shall not exceed 3% at LF, or 1% at higher frequencies. That could actually be quite a bit for trained listeners. Some might find the guidelines inadequate for their needs.
Last edited:
I have watched a grand piano get tuned up by a piano tech before a concert. Typically, they don't do near as good a job as would be demanded in a studio. And forget stretch tuning, if wanted, by the average piano tech before a concert. Usually, then don't spend more than half an hour, and usually the customer doesn't want to pay for more than that much time for one live show.
After tuning, the piano may get rolled off stage until later when it is needed. Of course, the tuning should be rechecked after moving the instrument around, but that almost never happens in a live show setting.
Last edited:
Still, badly tuned or not, it sounds authentic, like the real thing.
See my post in
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...about-how-why-recorded-way-6.html#post4944969
I am starting to believe that True Hi-Fi does not exist, I mean I see no evidence of it.
See my post in
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...about-how-why-recorded-way-6.html#post4944969
I am starting to believe that True Hi-Fi does not exist, I mean I see no evidence of it.
Not clear the majority of the recording buying public cares all that much about authenticity. Musical instruments don't necessarily have to sound authentic to sound good. In fact, why not have them sound better than authentic? All the more to enjoy.
Regarding pianos, most people would probably prefer the sound of a near-perfect piano synth over a badly tuned real piano. Why not?
How are you defining, True Hi-Fi? DF-96 definition?
According to some reading on the subject, high fidelity recordings came about as an alternative to the less-than-amazing recordings of the 1930's. From this perspective, most any commercially released recording from beyond the 1950's would qualify as high fidelity. But, today, it is not so much the recording that is being called into question with the term "high fidelity", as it is the playback system. As hi fi evolved, it came to refer to a system designed to faithfully reproduce the sound stored on the source medium. As technology changes, we're able to more accurately judge the ability of the system to faithfully reproduce the content of the source. I suppose the question to be asked is, "what constitutes hi fi?" What are the minimum acceptable parameters that must be met for a system to be considered "high fidelity"?
sent from my mobile look-at device
sent from my mobile look-at device
In an earlier post I said much the same thing; I'm am amateur musician, and I always try to make my acoustic guitar sound as good as possible through the P.A. - better than reality, if at all possible. (For example, through using EQ to remove excessively bright-sounding strings and/or pick and finger noises.)
The other thing to remember is that a lot of the instruments you hear in contemporary recorded audio aren't instruments at all! They're samples, or even completely computer-generated.
As an example, check out PianoTeq, software that generates the sound of a piano through mathematical modelling of all the physical components that go into real acoustic piano sound: https://www.pianoteq.com/
So we've arrived at a point in history where most of the music you hear never was "real", in the sense that it never consisted of actual sound waves in actual air. It's manufactured with Pro Tools, MIDI, sampling keyboards, Autotune, Melodyne, PianoTeq, and who knows what else.
I grew up with the classic definition of Hi-Fi, as elegantly encapsulated by Peter Walker for QUAD's slogan: "(for) the closest approach to the original sound". But today, there usually is no original sound to use as a reference.
-Gnobuddy
The orginal sound meaning
Final output from the mixing and mastering stage?
Audio input at the microphones ? (+ manufactured sounds)
I would really like to know what my favourite artist sounded like 'live', in real life.
If anything out of curiosity. That would be Hi-Fi as well, I suppose.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.