Hi,
Keppel well attached and in SE style: does it matter? As long as you enjoy it?.
FDG answers, hell yes, it matters to me and alot of other idiots who want to relive a recording in their home in the best possible way....
When a piano starts to sound like a harpsichord on my system I know for a fact I won't enjoy it anymore. I'll either question the recording or my system.
So, you'll need at least some degree of fidelity in the first place...
From recordings and playback system alike.
Anything else is mere BS.
That some SEs want to turn the world upside down preaching the other extremes is absurd to say the least.
Cheers,
Keppel well attached and in SE style: does it matter? As long as you enjoy it?.
FDG answers, hell yes, it matters to me and alot of other idiots who want to relive a recording in their home in the best possible way....
When a piano starts to sound like a harpsichord on my system I know for a fact I won't enjoy it anymore. I'll either question the recording or my system.
So, you'll need at least some degree of fidelity in the first place...
From recordings and playback system alike.
Anything else is mere BS.
That some SEs want to turn the world upside down preaching the other extremes is absurd to say the least.
Cheers,
Frank,
please don't over interpret what I said, and besides it was mostly
meant as food for thought, not as claims. Of course we should
mainly strive for fidelity, but at some level, maybe individual
preference, practical matters such as listening room acoustics etc.
makes it reasonable to make some deviation from the strive from
ultimate fidelity? Besides, bad recordings are much more of a problem
than bad reproduction equipment I think.
As I said, some thoughts and speculations only. I don't have the
answers. If I had I could probably start an audio company and
get rich.
please don't over interpret what I said, and besides it was mostly
meant as food for thought, not as claims. Of course we should
mainly strive for fidelity, but at some level, maybe individual
preference, practical matters such as listening room acoustics etc.
makes it reasonable to make some deviation from the strive from
ultimate fidelity? Besides, bad recordings are much more of a problem
than bad reproduction equipment I think.
As I said, some thoughts and speculations only. I don't have the
answers. If I had I could probably start an audio company and
get rich.
Hi,
Chris,
If you reread my post and other members' contributions in this thread carefully, you'll realise I wasn't addressing you but rather SE's over the top liberal stance here.
Fine, fair enough we want to enjoy music at our own homes but without some degree of fidelity to the original score and recording it all becomes rather meaningless wouldn't you agree?
I've seen some people question the use of silver wire in audio, I've seen SE suggesting the use of magnetic wires too...
Sorry, but there's a point were the merry go 'round just has to stop.
Naturally, someone will ask for proof...Well this time it's just going to be on them, not us.
If you don't see through the malicious manipulations, I sure do.
Let them insult someone else's intelligence for a change...
And SE, don't even think about it or....I'll just ignore it.
Cheers,
Chris,
If you reread my post and other members' contributions in this thread carefully, you'll realise I wasn't addressing you but rather SE's over the top liberal stance here.
Fine, fair enough we want to enjoy music at our own homes but without some degree of fidelity to the original score and recording it all becomes rather meaningless wouldn't you agree?
I've seen some people question the use of silver wire in audio, I've seen SE suggesting the use of magnetic wires too...
Sorry, but there's a point were the merry go 'round just has to stop.
Naturally, someone will ask for proof...Well this time it's just going to be on them, not us.
If you don't see through the malicious manipulations, I sure do.
Let them insult someone else's intelligence for a change...
And SE, don't even think about it or....I'll just ignore it.
Cheers,
Frank,
Yes, I supposed you were referring a lot to Steve, although it
could perhaps been SE as in single ended, but since you
quoted from my post it was a bit puzzling.
Using silver wire etc. doesn't necessarily have anything to do
with what I said. You could use it because you think it gives
a better fidelity, or you could use it because you simply think
it sounds better, whether more or less true to the original.
The issue whether it makes any difference, or whether this can
be measured is an entirely different question that I think we'd
better leave out of this discussion, or it will increase by a hundred
posts until tomorrow morning
Further, as I said before, yes at least up to some level we should
most certainly strive for fidelity. What follows thereafter is perhaps
more an issue of what we consider fidelity than whether to
deliberately deviate from it. If you have an amp with odd order
distorsion but virtually no even order one, some people will
prefer, if possible, to add even order distorsion to mask the
odd order one. Is this more or less fidelity? It is more THD, but
is it necessarily less fidelity because of that? Maybe this turns
into a philosophical issue, though?
And yes, I quite agree I also hate when the piano sounds like
a harpischcord. However, if I must choose between a recording
with an outstanding pianist where the piano sounds like a
harpischcord and a boring recording where the piano sounds
rather good, I will usually prefer the first one. That is a different
issue, though.
Cheers
Yes, I supposed you were referring a lot to Steve, although it
could perhaps been SE as in single ended
, but since youquoted from my post it was a bit puzzling.
Using silver wire etc. doesn't necessarily have anything to do
with what I said. You could use it because you think it gives
a better fidelity, or you could use it because you simply think
it sounds better, whether more or less true to the original.
The issue whether it makes any difference, or whether this can
be measured is an entirely different question that I think we'd
better leave out of this discussion, or it will increase by a hundred
posts until tomorrow morning
Further, as I said before, yes at least up to some level we should
most certainly strive for fidelity. What follows thereafter is perhaps
more an issue of what we consider fidelity than whether to
deliberately deviate from it. If you have an amp with odd order
distorsion but virtually no even order one, some people will
prefer, if possible, to add even order distorsion to mask the
odd order one. Is this more or less fidelity? It is more THD, but
is it necessarily less fidelity because of that? Maybe this turns
into a philosophical issue, though?
And yes, I quite agree I also hate when the piano sounds like
a harpischcord. However, if I must choose between a recording
with an outstanding pianist where the piano sounds like a
harpischcord and a boring recording where the piano sounds
rather good, I will usually prefer the first one. That is a different
issue, though.
Cheers
Hi,
Agreed...I still feel silver wire brings me a major step closer to the recording venue.
Not all silver is alike as not all copper is either but we digress.
It does yield better fidelity as compared to copperwire, unfortunately you can't just use it at will, it will ruthlessly show up deficiencies elsewhere.
But this it not the point, the point is IMHO that if a recording is true to it source and hence should allow you to be able to enjoy the music assuming the means/equipment are up to the task.
If I enjoy a message perveyed in such a coloured way that it has no bearing to the original then it follows I'm just deluding myself.
You can still enjoy it but you're not being realistic, you're just deluding yourself, no?
If we have to start running questions like this anno 2004, I seriously start to wonder what it was I've strived for all these years....
A concert may be an illusion and I can tell the difference straight away between a live concert and a reproduction on a home system, I also know that some high end systems can come darn close of recreating the experience.
I also know that using DSP sources, I'm just kidding myself most of the time...Some are brilliant recording, others are downright appalling. Mind you, that was the case in the analogue days too.
Isn't that what hi-fi is all about or am I just dreaming?
I hope I'm wrong...
So much for philosophy,
Agreed...I still feel silver wire brings me a major step closer to the recording venue.
Not all silver is alike as not all copper is either but we digress.
It does yield better fidelity as compared to copperwire, unfortunately you can't just use it at will, it will ruthlessly show up deficiencies elsewhere.
But this it not the point, the point is IMHO that if a recording is true to it source and hence should allow you to be able to enjoy the music assuming the means/equipment are up to the task.
If I enjoy a message perveyed in such a coloured way that it has no bearing to the original then it follows I'm just deluding myself.
You can still enjoy it but you're not being realistic, you're just deluding yourself, no?
If we have to start running questions like this anno 2004, I seriously start to wonder what it was I've strived for all these years....
A concert may be an illusion and I can tell the difference straight away between a live concert and a reproduction on a home system, I also know that some high end systems can come darn close of recreating the experience.
I also know that using DSP sources, I'm just kidding myself most of the time...Some are brilliant recording, others are downright appalling. Mind you, that was the case in the analogue days too.
Isn't that what hi-fi is all about or am I just dreaming?
I hope I'm wrong...
So much for philosophy,
fdegrove said:
Frank, actually, I can't agree. Let's say we consider somebody who was never at classical music presentation and he never heard how the piano, or other instrument, sounds in reality.
Would this prevent him from enjoying classical recordings on an average system which is far from usually accepted fidelity? I don't think so.
It is not the accurate sound reproduction that determines what sounds good to us, but the way it touches our inner side, the way the music effects our emotions, that's the measure of the good sound.
In the late seventies I was deeply involved in punk music and I never cared for quality system to fully appreciate that genre. All I needed was to feel the beat and that was the greatest pleasure to me at that time. Even now, when my present system is much, much better than what I had in those days, I tell you, I can't enjoy that music anymore the way I used to.
Listening to Sid Vicious singing 'My Way' will never be the same again. I know that I grew up, but sometimes, I'm still nostalgic about those good old days.
Peter Daniel said:
That's certainly how I look at it.
Though that doesn't hold true for everyone. For some, accurate sound reproduction effectively is what determines what sounds good to them.
And that's cool too.
The point I've been trying to make is that each of these approaches are valid.
se
Hi,
High end snobs you mean?
You have to know what makes us enjoy music before you start to discuss anything else.
Now, what is it?
Frequency response down to cellar and up to stellar levels? I don't think so... Nonetheless, if the recording sucks so should the playback of it on any given system.
The recording should contain the message, unfortunately it not always does...No system can bring it back, though.
That's where it starts, from there you can only hope to pervey the already present frequency response and spatial clues back into your listening room.
For that you'll need a truthful system, anything else can likely be solved with a humble equaliser...No?
Let's all stop fooling ourselves,
High end snobs you mean?
You have to know what makes us enjoy music before you start to discuss anything else.
Now, what is it?
Frequency response down to cellar and up to stellar levels? I don't think so... Nonetheless, if the recording sucks so should the playback of it on any given system.
The recording should contain the message, unfortunately it not always does...No system can bring it back, though.
That's where it starts, from there you can only hope to pervey the already present frequency response and spatial clues back into your listening room.
For that you'll need a truthful system, anything else can likely be solved with a humble equaliser...No?
Let's all stop fooling ourselves,
I think you guys are kind of missing the point...that was touched by SE. In general, I think systems can give the idea of a jazz concert pretty well. I have been to many preformances at clubs and I would say my system can provide a good match for certain listeing conditions. The same can be said for chamber music.
I have been to a Pat Metheny concert a long time ago, it was summer right after a thunderstorm wind was blowing and so was the acoustics although it didn't matter. There is no way anybody's stereo is ever going to be able to capture that, the same can be said for rock concerts and symphony orchestra.
Under the strict sound standpoint, I rather listen to recorder rock pop than a live rock concert anyway.
Then there is the solo piano music...I dare anyone to find me a CD or an LP that sounds anything like it.
The bottom line if there is one? It's a very complicated question...
but there are absolutes.
I have been to a Pat Metheny concert a long time ago, it was summer right after a thunderstorm wind was blowing and so was the acoustics although it didn't matter. There is no way anybody's stereo is ever going to be able to capture that, the same can be said for rock concerts and symphony orchestra.
Under the strict sound standpoint, I rather listen to recorder rock pop than a live rock concert anyway.
Then there is the solo piano music...I dare anyone to find me a CD or an LP that sounds anything like it.
The bottom line if there is one? It's a very complicated question...
but there are absolutes.
Many systems sound nice and can sound natural and have great inner detail and whatnot. And everyone has their preference but i think everyone should at least once hear a benchmark low distortion system with bi-polar devices all thoughout, metal drivers, and with components chosen which really have no signature of their own. Flat impedence, high power, and flat response don't hurt either. I think this is the only kind of system that can make you think about and understand what a lot of music is about and not just let you dwell in it.
I love chip amps too though.. and i guess what i'm saying is that maybe one shouldn't limit himself to just one kind of system. But if you're making a system, make no comprimises (i don't mean spend lots of $$$$$$$$$$ but) if you're going low distortion, go low distortion all the way from start to end. If you're going chip amps, choose drivers which compliment the amps harmonics properly. Maybe not the best approach but i think it's a pretty good one. I'm not biased towards solid state, chip amps or tubes, and i'll be the first to admit if something sounds good, but i've just never heard tubes sound good. But then again, i also haven't heard any Audio Research stuff or 1000 watt triode amps.
I love chip amps too though.. and i guess what i'm saying is that maybe one shouldn't limit himself to just one kind of system. But if you're making a system, make no comprimises (i don't mean spend lots of $$$$$$$$$$ but) if you're going low distortion, go low distortion all the way from start to end. If you're going chip amps, choose drivers which compliment the amps harmonics properly. Maybe not the best approach but i think it's a pretty good one. I'm not biased towards solid state, chip amps or tubes, and i'll be the first to admit if something sounds good, but i've just never heard tubes sound good. But then again, i also haven't heard any Audio Research stuff or 1000 watt triode amps.
Yep. My system is enjoyable (to me) because the 50wpc class A amp cost ~$5, the DVD player cost $99, the main speakers ~$90, the 50+50 watt gainclone sub amp $0, and the newly renovated pair of subs that will now take 50+50 watts right down to 25Hz cost $155. Definitely enough.Steve Eddy said:
Sometimes if I don't listen to it for a week, I forget how good it sounds and when I listen again it is a nice surprise. It wouldn't impress snobby people who only buy prebuilt name-brand stuff because it it looks like junk, and that's fair enough because that is what it is made out of, but one thing's for sure - in the $$$ per performance area it is about as good as it gets IMHO. I would have to spend a disproportionate amount of money to get big improvements at this stage.
So, that's why =my= system is better than yours.
Edit -> That adds up to $266.98 USD, $349 AUD
Standards? Common goals?
Being an especially picky listener, I've always had to look at the quality of the source recording first. It's amazing, even with CD's, how much "deliberate" fuzz they add to the material. A good example of this is Creed's Human Clay. Any volume above "reasonably" loud , brings on the background of "newspaper-crackling". Surprisingly enough, artists like Rob Zombie have incredibly clean CD's. Even at very high volume levels, they are very clear, from the sharpness of the bass to the crisp, non-flaky highs.
Secondly, it is of my humble opinion that you have to have "good" equipment. While it may reproduce sound differently, according to the buyers (or builder's tastes), the equipment should perform well. Maybe I'm ignorant here, but I've always gravitated to equipment that "colored" the sound as minimally as possible and set the tone controls flat, so that I may hear the CD or record as closely the artist or studio intended. I believe you have to have a good amp or reciever with good sonic qualities, but more important is the speaker system as that's the only part of the whole thing that actually makes what you hear.
I'm not an expert, but it seems the speaker designs (excluding exotic designs such as electro-statics) are broken into two major groups, either open or closed. I have owned examples of both and I've tended to gravitate towards what most of the recording studios and pro's use, JBL. I've also had Cerwin Vega's, which were a closed system. The closed systems seem to be more efficient at lower volume levels, while the "open" or tubed systems seem to be able to handle higher power output. We actually did a face-off between a pretty good set of Cerwin Vega 4 way towers against my former JBL L-65's. They both sounded great, but as I stated earlier, the Cerwin Vega's were better at lower volume. Once you got over 125wpc and above, the JBL's sounded better. Probably because the woofer wasn't limited by the compression of air in a closed cabinet. While refurb'ng my own JBL's and visiting sites such as Parts Express, I see that you can get speaker drivers that perform just as well as the JBL parts and I wouldn't be reluctant to use them in place of the obsolete, hard-to-find and even more expensive to repair originals.
My standards for myself with a clean recording is as follows. The bass has to be tight, clean and clear, with no muddiness or delays. The midrange has to have an open, expansive sound to it and work with little effort all the way through its range. The tweeter has to be clear as well. The tweeter should reproduce a sound like a cymbal brush with clarity, yet not have any sizzle to it either. As a whole, a good speaker should have nice seperation between the drivers. You should be able to hear the singer for example as a single entity in the overall sound, seperated from the drum of the bass or the simultaneous highs of the tweeter.
If I demo speakers, I usually pick electronic music, as I believe it's the most demanding music a loudspeaker can play. The sharp electronic percussion and singular notes of a synthesiser make for easy evaluation of how a speaker performs to your liking. Listening to good music that sounds good is the pursuit of us all. Of course, it's all subjective and everybody has their own opinions and I respect that.
Being an especially picky listener, I've always had to look at the quality of the source recording first. It's amazing, even with CD's, how much "deliberate" fuzz they add to the material. A good example of this is Creed's Human Clay. Any volume above "reasonably" loud , brings on the background of "newspaper-crackling". Surprisingly enough, artists like Rob Zombie have incredibly clean CD's. Even at very high volume levels, they are very clear, from the sharpness of the bass to the crisp, non-flaky highs.
Secondly, it is of my humble opinion that you have to have "good" equipment. While it may reproduce sound differently, according to the buyers (or builder's tastes), the equipment should perform well. Maybe I'm ignorant here, but I've always gravitated to equipment that "colored" the sound as minimally as possible and set the tone controls flat, so that I may hear the CD or record as closely the artist or studio intended. I believe you have to have a good amp or reciever with good sonic qualities, but more important is the speaker system as that's the only part of the whole thing that actually makes what you hear.
I'm not an expert, but it seems the speaker designs (excluding exotic designs such as electro-statics) are broken into two major groups, either open or closed. I have owned examples of both and I've tended to gravitate towards what most of the recording studios and pro's use, JBL. I've also had Cerwin Vega's, which were a closed system. The closed systems seem to be more efficient at lower volume levels, while the "open" or tubed systems seem to be able to handle higher power output. We actually did a face-off between a pretty good set of Cerwin Vega 4 way towers against my former JBL L-65's. They both sounded great, but as I stated earlier, the Cerwin Vega's were better at lower volume. Once you got over 125wpc and above, the JBL's sounded better. Probably because the woofer wasn't limited by the compression of air in a closed cabinet. While refurb'ng my own JBL's and visiting sites such as Parts Express, I see that you can get speaker drivers that perform just as well as the JBL parts and I wouldn't be reluctant to use them in place of the obsolete, hard-to-find and even more expensive to repair originals.
My standards for myself with a clean recording is as follows. The bass has to be tight, clean and clear, with no muddiness or delays. The midrange has to have an open, expansive sound to it and work with little effort all the way through its range. The tweeter has to be clear as well. The tweeter should reproduce a sound like a cymbal brush with clarity, yet not have any sizzle to it either. As a whole, a good speaker should have nice seperation between the drivers. You should be able to hear the singer for example as a single entity in the overall sound, seperated from the drum of the bass or the simultaneous highs of the tweeter.
If I demo speakers, I usually pick electronic music, as I believe it's the most demanding music a loudspeaker can play. The sharp electronic percussion and singular notes of a synthesiser make for easy evaluation of how a speaker performs to your liking. Listening to good music that sounds good is the pursuit of us all. Of course, it's all subjective and everybody has their own opinions and I respect that.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.