I know you know because you studied "system/room"...
I read your post story about your rooms journey...
It feel good to be approved by you...
yes.
"audiophiles listen to their equipment"
That quote is misattributed to Alan Parsons, as I understand. Anyway saying there's a problem with wanting good sound is like saying an instrument designer, aiming for beautiful sound, could not possibly be a music lover and is only interested in the sound of the instruments. I.e. the sound is inseparable from the music. For me the beauty of the sound, good microdynamics, and so on, are the "doors" to the meaning of the music.
74 responses Add your response
There is audiophiles focusing on gear upgrades without end because they can afford it... They ignore acoustics controls...( at best they buy panels) There is non audiophiles who pay the least for the gear and claimed their system beat audiophiles one, they mock audiophiles... But they also ignore acoustics controls...( they read gear specs thats all )
But there exist audio wise people who learn how to set a system right and learn acoustics basics...They listen to the system/room... They are neither subjectivist nor objectivist... They know....
|
An interesting question. Is this much different than going to a concert of Mahler? What are you hearing or listening for? Mahler? The CSO, NY Phil? The particular conductor leading the orchestra in performance- or recording? I suggest we are all striving to get as “close to the music” (whatever that means) in all our critical listening- live or recorded. As a classically trained musician, sometimes “listening to the singer/pianist/orchestra/conductor” has its place in my enjoyment (or not!) of a performance/recording. I think we have it within ourselves to determine “what we are listening for” both in person and on recording. Each session may differ. Sometimes I want to hear “x’s” Mahler 4, whether orchestral, conductor or singer. Sometimes the piece itself. Sometimes- I admit I just want to find which Verdi Requiem recording has the best “b_lls to the wall” Dies Irae. Each approach to listening has its place and purpose in our audio enjoyment. After checking out the opening go to 09.00 for the brass choir. |
I'm both an audiophile and an amateur musician. I've studied harmony and counterpoint and I do a little piano improvisation in classical styles. I only have a digital piano at home, so when I'm improvising, I'm focusing on the notes and chords and a rough sense of the rhythm. If I listen to a recording of Glenn Gould performing the C# minor fugue from the Well Tempered Clavier Book 1, even on an iPod with earbuds I can tell the notes he's playing and his rubato, so I can enjoy it to some extent. What does my main headphone system give me? All the qualities beyond notes and rhythms! For example, beauty of timbre. And especially microdynamics. In classical performance by the best players, there's a sophisticated use of small dynamic changes. So much more of the performance comes through in a system with dynamic resolution. It's worth sitting for a while and doing nothing but listening. Why do musicians care less about home audio quality? I think it's because they are so connected in body and mind to musical patterns that they can sense them and feel moved by them even in poor reproduction. They invest their money in their instrument. I've noticed when driving home from an L.A. Philharmonic concert, listening to classical KUSC on the poor quality car system, I am transported back to the beautiful sound I just heard in the concert. If I hear horns on the radio, I think of how beautiful and powerful the live horn sound is. I used to be a brass player, so this is easier for me than if I had had no exposure to live sound. Now just imagine being exposure to live orchestral sound every day. I'm sure that simple systems will sound very evocative to you. |
... And what of us who listen to our equipment to better hear the music? Having designed/built my own speakers, I’ve spent years developing the crossovers to attain the sound as close to as I desire from the set of components at hand. For example, I can spend hours instantaneously A/Bing conjugate capacitors of just a few mfd difference, or even different architecture, to listen for a difference, and if so, which I prefer. And because tracks vary so widely, it takes a lot of tracks to decern if there is an audible difference and which is preferred. BTW, for those out there that like to tinker, or are just never quite satisfied with the system, by all means build your own speakers and you can spend years tweaking the crossovers at very little cost when compared to swapping out components and/or cables. |
I can enjoy how it sounds and listen to music at the same time if I'm listening to my main system with all the right pieces in place. When there is a suboptimal component in the string, it is easy to become less engaged listening to the music. When I get bored after a long stretch of swapping different components in/out just to see what changes for better or worse, it's another trigger to stop and revisit other hobbies for a while. Stepping away from it for a while helps to hit the reset button in the brain for me. I've found this to be necessary to appreciate the system more too. I've learned swapping components may not always be better, just different types of sound. A good friend convinced me a while back it's all about personal preference and your mood at the moment. Stop and revisit later if you need to. When the desire to listen to different music kicks back in, I restart for another stretch to simply listen to lots of different music again, and let the components be. |
I'm old so... First it was the table radio with the pretty glowing tubes. Wonderful... how does it all work? Then Ham Radio to talk with the world, and more equipment fascination. As a teen it was all about the music... loved the Do-Wop but how bad was that sound? Darn Barry Gordy left us no SQ. Then, sixty years of equipment and sound fascination at the same time. Thousands for stuff for slightly better sound? Better cables in my rig? Pretty stuff? More realistic? You bet. The best of both worlds. Now to enjoy hours at a time. My ears, my money. All good... |
”psychoacoustical experience of a tri-tone interval has little to do with sonics.” If the system is incapable of reproducing it, then you are correct: there will be none to be heard. As I have said elsewhere, audio is not an end in itself: its purpose is to faithfully reproduce what the artist, with the help of the recording engineer, intended you to hear. I can’t believe how we go through this topic with seemingly infinite variations. |
@sudnh I agree. New music is always the most entertaining, and I don't need as high a quality. For example, streaming Tidal on my music server is not as high quality as playing from its SSD, but it's a way to hear much new music, so I really enjoy it. |
@stuartk my mistake. Cables was another thread audio listeners create a system, and they upgrade their equipment just like musicians play instruments and upgrade their instruments… It’s the same thing, I don’t know why you can’t comprehend that but it’s the same thing
the instrument is part of it for the musician just like the equipment is part of it for the listener, same thing |
I actually agree with the quote. I listen to music, of course, but I have 5 systems in my home, and I often listen to the same music on all 5 of them to see how the rooms and equipment changes the sound. This is especially true when I make a tweak. I’m a car guy too, and drive the same roads with multiple cars and appreciate the differences between them. Of note; every single system is “best” in certain songs, and not others. It’s fascinating to me, and not always what I expect. |
So you don't own a good system yet you're sure AC cables have no effect ? Am I hearing you It's not crazy money to get a system capable of hearing AC cables ... under $10,000. You've had decades ... you have $10,000 what's needed is the intention and effort to listen. audiophiles don't record music or play music so their "creative" satisfaction is to adjust their system. It's satisfying and I'm all for it ... as a musician you should be too. They pay for music. They love music. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
... and working musicians (as opposed to millionaire Rock/Pop stars) are infamous for not owning high-end audio systems or caring about home audio sonics. FYI, I’ve played guitar for over 50 years. Tonality is my top priority when it comes to audio.
With all due respect, as a creative person, I don’t agree with this assertion.
I don’t understand what you mean by "contribute to the process of creativity". Do you mean changing gear is essentially a creative process? Do you mean when audiophiles change gear, they are contributing to the artist’s creative process? Or something else?
|
@stuartk all of the musicians I know are very much into tone
these tend to be guitar players, keyboard players, bass players, the sound of their instrument / their equipment is an essential part of their whole process for the audiophiles their equipment is the instrument… Changing the gear overtime is their contribution to the process of creativity, no different than musicians, changing their instrument or gear chain |
I put together two good stereos - living room and home office. I listen all the time, and I have a fair-sized collection of vinyl, CD’s, and even cassettes. Also I have a good streamer and subscribe to Apple Music. I was getting way into the audiophile side of things for a while as I got the systems to be as good as possible within my financial restraints. I’m good at buying quality gear at good prices. I’m so happy now with these setups, and my small collection of excellent headphones as well. I’ve been on a huge music discovery kick, in and out of record shops, and online moving between Wikipedia and Apple Music, reading, learning, listening. That’s the joy for me. I know my stereos can be improved, which will enhance enjoyment. But I am so settled in to loving it as it is, and digging the music, which is what it’s all about. Don’t want to hear music on a shite system, that’s for sure. Just make it so you’re happy, don’t get obsessed with so-called "perfection", and enjoy! |
@hilde45 ...
I think listening to ones' equipment is analogous to considering how your dish was prep'd, cooked, and plated... ...but my spouse is a food show junky....a format that's so ripe for parody I almost can't stand the lack of.... |
The term 'audiophile' began its' life in the mid 1950s.... "a person who is especially interested in high fidelity sound reproduction." Notice 'music' is not mentioned... The 'haters' like to claim audiophile status just for liking music... not. We search out equipment... cables... tweaks... room treatment... moving speakers a 1/4"... to perfection... all for reaching the best possible reproduction of sound ... that we can afford. And we try everything... even cable risers... and as our systems get better, we don't stop... we just keep listening for the next best thing. That is an Audiophile... everything matters. |
The “better” the system is, the more it gets out of the way & lets the musical artists & sometimes the recording & mastering engineers talents to shine through. It is more “faithful” to the original recording. While I can & do enjoy a great song in my mediocre car system, I can enjoy it much more w/ the fidelity of my home system & the greater detail & nuance etc. it offers.
|
| Post removed |
Everyone has their own taste. Some people like tubes, some don’t. Some people like speakers that are warm and musical while others find those same speakers to be veiled and muffled. Some people take their joy from putting together the best equipment they can while others are not so particular about that. Trying to define for someone else how they should listen to music doesn’t really work |
@audition__audio I don't spend a lot of time thinking about it, but I saw it on Audio Science Review, in a post in which dozens of "engineer-types" chimed in to mock audiophiles, so I think it was worth thinking about it long enough to give an answer. Plus, it actually connects with my philosophy of listening and music-making (i.e. the sound is inseparable from the music) which is worth some time thinking about. |
@onhwy61
Not necessarily. I love live classical music, and I love reproduction that gets close to the characteristics of live. I know a recording engineer and musician who wrote a book on recording as a way of practicing, aimed at other musicians. He said, "Just listen to the recording the same way you listen to live music. Some engineers will tell you it's not supposed to sound like live music. Don't believe them."
|
| Post removed |
@magon yes, live music is different than reproduced music. Good luck with your further explorations in the meaning of music. |
If you didn't personally work at....say....Yamaha's musical instruments division or their hifi division, how the heck would you know? As a end user, you can't compare yourself to the guys who designed instruments or equipment
|
@ghdprentice Great description of the problems that occur when we listen too analytically and make decisions while in analytical mode. I did something similar... choose an impressive headphone amp years ago and eventually it was my only working amp... and discovered recently that certain "warts" in the sound were not coming from my DAC but rather from my amp. It had an overly forward upper midrange, and this was killing enjoyment. As you can imagine I listened to my system much less during this time. I thought I just had found other hobbies and was keeping busy with them, but no, turned out my system was just not as enjoyable.
|
@onhwy61 So many misconceptions. If you ever study orchestration you realize that music is a phenomenon of sound. I mean, you can realize that easily if you just pay attention, but I pick this as in incontrovertible example.
First of all, many audiophiles do not "need audiophile quality sound" to enjoy music. When listening for new music in particular, I love what I discover on YouTube or the car radio and really enjoy it. Yes, CAR RADIO with the presence of road noise and wind noise. I'm focused on classical music, and you seem to unaware that live acoustic concerts, which many people insist on for the most enjoyment of music, are better than audiophile quality. So, no, "audiophile quality" is not an elusive thing that no one has heard or that "everyone but audiophiles" rejects. Note that by "audiophile quality classical music" I mean approaching the qualities of live sound. |
Good question. I think it's because people who are caught in the endless upgrade cycle need a touchstone to help skyhook them out of it. That skyhook is, "This is supposed to be about the music." To which all I can say is, "Says who?" |
I agree and admit that the sound of an audiophile system is “inseparable from the music”. For me, it is because the nuances of sound reproduction of an audiophile system, especially timbral accuracy, image density, micro-dynamics, macro-dynamics, and retrieval of ambient queues, bring me closer to memories of lithe sound of concerts I attended. However, I have two listening modes. Critical listening is reserved for system analysis, especially when contemplating a spend for new equipment, or when demonstrating my system to others. In this mode I focus on the sound of the equipment. I estimate I am only in critical listening mode 10% of the time. 90% of the time I am in musical appreciation (enjoyment) mode, not listening to equipment but rather to the composition and performance. There was a time in my life when I focused only on the equipment, leading to a feeling of never being satisfied. I have learned, or perhaps it is just an old age maturation process, where I am satisfied with my system and simply enjoy the music. |
In order to choose new equipment we bring out our analytical skills and look for variables we can detect between equipment. The easiest is details and slam. They are both very easy to detect and rewarding... hearing stuff you never heard before. As you pursue the hobby you add additional parameters. The problem arises that you can get caught in the analytical mode and when you go home you stay in the analytical mode because what you bought A sound spectacular pleasing to the analytical mode, but does not communicate the music... there is nothing to drop back to. Over time, you end up with an incredible electronic instrument for reproducing sound and lost the music. Music and its emotional connection is primarily communicated through the midrange and rhythm and pace. You can completely loose that. Then when you sit down and listen, to your system. What is there is incredible bass and detail, imaging but it doesn’t grab you and suck you in. Easy trap. One symptom of this is that you get bored with listening after forty five minutes or an hour. A musical system will glue you to it. After three hours of listening to my system I have to tear myself away... just one more tune! Lots of high end audio manufactures have had to cater to what people want: incredibly detailed, shiny spectacular, transparent sound with huge kick...so that is what they give them. Some companies have remained true to the goals of producing the best music possible. They add detail and bass, but not at the expense of the music. The gestalt of the presentation must be right. Most of these still use tubes (Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, VAC for instance), although some solid state manufactures are getting better. |
@hilde45 +1 Too many "Drama Queens". |
No one wonders how we can BOTH think about the taste of our food and then go back to enjoying it. So why is this such an issue for sound and music? Honestly, it's only a dilemma for those in the grip of nervous audiophile syndrome. The rest of us can move between analyzing and enjoying without needing to call our therapist in the middle of the night. |
