Do you spend more time analyzing the sound of your system, worrying it could be better?
no
Do you spend more time analyzing the sound of your system, worrying it could be better?
Great article here from Dan Wright of ModWright:
If it Sounds Good, It IS Good
68 responses Add your response
No, it could ALWAYS be better sound than mine for sure... But all is a question about S.Q. /price ratio...Mine is over the roof at this price scale ... Diminishing returns law play some part if we think about upgrade at some levels scale near one another and not too far away of one anther for sure... And more importantly i am lucky enough to have acoustic control over the room in my case... i dont bother about upgrade and i dont bother about my sound quality at all...no more frustrations... I listen music.... 😁😊
Acoustic method surpass most upgrading of a piece of gear ...No reviewer claim that, i claim it...They sell product, i motivate people to learn about acoustic at low cost... And it is better to understand why a system/ room may sound so good instead of just plugging a piece of gear in the wall and claiming that it sound good whitout ever knowing why.... I know exactly why and HOW my system/room sound good, i dont only claim it... How and why did i know it ? Because i can modify all aspect of acoustic cues at will: timbre, dynamic, soundstage, Lev/asw ratio, bass impact and clarity... Thanks to Helmholtz...
|
@mahgister as do I. Love the one your with. |
Here's another way of framing the question: "Do you ENJOY spending time enjoying improving -- or just tinkering with -- your system?" If the answer to that is "yes" then there is no problem that Dan Wright needs to solve. Honestly, for a forum focused on hobbyists, there's a lot of hand-wringing about being, well, a hobbyist.
|
Not my HiFi system these days, I've heard what's out there and most of It's not a whole load better, but more with stuff like smartphones and portable speakers etc. As @edcyn said above I also can't stand spitty sibilants etc. I don't think I'm exaggerating if I was to say that I find such things slightly painful. Nor am I exaggerating too much if I said that most smartphone speakers are pretty awful. It's slightly frustrating that reviewers will spend a huge amount of time comparing gaming and camera performance and waffle on and on about refresh rates and super fast charging yet pay no heed to the screechy noise emanating from the sole speaker firing from the base. Thankfully I was able to upgrade from my Moto G7 to the Redmi Note10 Pro. The sound is not great, but it's listenable which I couldn't always say about the Motorola. |
@hilde45 1+
I suspect a lot of people who answered no aren’t being truthful and have the constant desire to wish to upgrade. I am currently in a good place, but I know that to improve my current set up I would need to ascend to a whole new price area that I am just not willing to enter |
I am in the same situation than you... And i am truthful... But with a bit of advance compared to many people OVER upgrading gear alternatives possiblities compared to acoustic ... It is called acoustic method... So powerful that even if an upgrade of gear is possible and it is always possible, in my case i even know what piece of gear to buy but i dont give a damn , guess why? Acoustic cues are mutiples, and together they constitute an INTEGRAL SET so intricate acoustically that almost no SINGLE piece of gear would have been enough to improve my system on ALL counts WITHOUT acoustic method... In my case upgrading all my system will cost me at least 10,000 bucks, perhaps 15,ooo i cannot be sure here... My actual system cost me 500 bucks.. 😊 I listen music now , sound is no more a frustration, and it is enough NOW because i have it... Thanks to Helhmoltz not to the "upgrade" of one piece of gear...When a system is relatively good at some point in our journey, we must look for acoustic, not for an "upgrade" of a single piece of gear alone...It will be deceptive to do so most of the times...... I call what i have achieve with acoustic method and a low cost system : a minimal acoustic threshold of satisfaction...It exist objectively but vary a bit from one individual and system to another one... But when a piano fill the room with his bass note in 3D it is enough to enjoy music without frustration and without lying to ourself, even if there exist for sure better possible acoustic state or experience... Ratio S.Q. /price is a tag also in our journey, willing it or not....It is here that acoustic method can optimize ANY system to his true potential...Most of the times it is enough...it was for me... Nothing is more fun than tuning your room save listening music at higher quality level each week during this long process... 😁😊
|
@mahler123 I suspect you're correct. And as hilde45 mentioned, this is a hobby, keeping this in mind will keep your mind in order. Keeping your mind in order means being mindful this is a hobby and/or a process to be enjoyed for it's own sake or values, in other words a learning process which is a good thing.
The more I think about the continuing unhappiness I see in the pursuit of highest fidelity the more I think this has much to do with the extreme material nature of the hobby. When expected return on investment/audio purchase not met unhappiness sets in, relatively high expense of high end audio brings expected high level benefits.
I suspect many of us go into hobby with high expectations of fidelity we're going to achieve, when not attained, only avenue seemingly open to us is ever more expenditures, not a good place to be for many.
I suspect realistic goals for those entering audiophile hobby would make for much less angst. How to do this, I have no idea, far too many human variables make this impossible task. I presume most get into hobby after hearing a very nice audio system, or they enjoy live music and want to replicate that at home. This pursuit is not easy and goals not easily achieved. My take is don't even start, try to be happy with what you have, or enjoy the pursuit. While the early years were difficult for me, I did learn to enjoy the pursuit, contentedness with a relatively high level of audio fidelity has been the result. |
For me, it begins and ends with music. I've always enjoyed quality sound because I love the beautiful, rich tones of instruments, voices, and that intangible magic. Some people just like to hear their favorite songs, some people like to savor it to very deep levels. It's why I invested in the best gear I could afford. If I had more extra money I'd quite probably upgrade but I don't so I love what I own. Now, there's nothing wrong with being a tinkerer, gearhead, tweaker, etc. As others have stated, you should be enjoying what you do, whatever it is. If you are worrying, stressing, or unhappy you need to rethink things. |
I like the way you put that. The further question is, why is one oriented around the "material"? (Here’s where a Marxian explanation would veer toward a fundamentally materialistic basis of reality and the lives within it. Some psychologists might chase it back to our fundamental rootedness in the body.) We can see in @mahgister an approach that is joyful in its adjustments and experiments without being dragged into a materialistic -- consumeristic -- quest. He is very concerned with the materials involved in acoustics, of course, but they are instruments to create events and experiences. (In my humble opinion, even a small adjustment by him in the devices embedded in his embedding would be another lever worth pressing, but he prefers to stick with his $500 system. Whatever.) Adjusting my system is like whittling. It’s fun to do. It’s part of the hobby. And just as with cooking, I like to rotate changes through for the same reason I like to listen to different music or watch different movies. In other words, the challenge of upgrade-itis isn’t about material after all; it’s about a dogmatic and myopic idea -- that "perfection" is singular and final. If perfection is about plurality and change, the "disease" of audiophiles goes right away, with the hobby left intact. |
I wish i could explain myself so clearly and with few words as you... This hobby is about " plurality" yes, (not universal perfection, with a universal recipe, and some universally good gear) because of the acoustic specificity of any content in a room , of any gear and of any particular ears... And it is about fun learning of acoustic or /and electronical design yes... Music was fun all along....From my few bucks battery radio at 13 years old till my system/room now... Thanks to say it so eloquently...
|
Not lately. It must sound REAL good! But I only got here because I did obsess over sound for a couple of years on this particular house of stereo system of mine. It was all worth it. I have to say my listening sessions are much more satisfying now that I don't spend anymore time analizing every sound that comes out of my system. Plus I don't have to listen to the same couple dozen reference albums over and over. In fact I hardly ever listen to them anymore because I can't enjoy their music anymore. Overload. Sound obsession ruined them for me. So I listen to thousands of others 😇 |
I have been a member of this Forum for many years and have read posts by many audiophiles to whom I believe their systems are nothing but a source of grief and anxiety. I know 1 or 2 people like this personally and I don't think there is a cure for it. As audiophiles, we all think about how things might be improved, but for some, it seems to be a constant voice in their heads that cannot be silenced. As someone who has owned some relatively expensive gear, i.e., $15k preamp, $10k CD player, the solution was actually downgrade to a less expensive system, which just sounds good for what it is. I don't expect miracles and I don't get them. I just get good sound that I find pleasing. Life is easier once you lower your standards. Not saying you should do it - it's your life after all. |
@chayro +1 Thank you. |
@hilde45 I like your philosophy. Has anyone noticed that there is a preponderance of men in this hobby? It is in part driven by the instinctive nature of men. We like tools, tools to do just about anything. A car is a tool to get places. A saw is a tool to cut up wood, a stereo is a tool to listen to music. Aside from being extremely vicious creatures it is one of the main reasons humans are so successful. I think some of us are miffed by the extreme cost of some equipment and feel they could never have a great system because they can not afford a SAT arm. We come up with creative reasons to justify the system we have. This is IMHO a defeatist aptitude. Anyone can build a great system for reasonable money. It takes knowledge and creativity. What makes it difficult is having to wade through the mountains of BS that surround this hobby. You can get off the train at any time you want. I like the ride and prefer to stay on it. But, most of the time I am analyzing now it is not so much the system as it is the recording. I know exactly where the weaknesses in my system are and have a plan to correct them. It should only take me another 20 years or so. |
@mijostyn and many of us males are tools. Present company excluded.
|
Once a system is thoughtfully put together, dialed in, used for a length of time and sounds good for what it is - no. Aside from tubes/styli I have not made any changes to my main setup in over a decade (I like it as is). I recently (5+ weeks ago) put together a mini system to listen to CD’s while at the computer. As the new setup was made from both new and old electronics/speakers/cables (didn’t sound too hot for the first couple of weeks) I "am" listening for changes in the SQ. Two new/unfamiliar to me parts of the new setup are a Tripp-lite surge protector and Canare 4S11 speaker cable. If I’m not satisfied with the sound after six months, or so, I will probably start by replacing the Canare with some of the 47 Labs OTA cable that I have been using in two other systems for the past 15-20 years (I have @ least 100’ left), or maybe try some Neotech 22 gauge solid core copper hookup wire (save the OTA for a rainy day). If that doesn’t do it I’ll borrow a power conditioner/surge protector from the main rig. I’ve been using a pretty much the same mini system in the living room for 15 years (duplicate Sharp SD-EX111/Polk RT15i speakers) so have an idea of how it should sound. http://www.laaudiofile.com/sdex111.html
DeKay |
I have an ARCAM AVR 550, Paradigm Prestige AVR, BlueSound Node 2i, OPPO 105, two REL SHO's. I have a dealer that would sell me a brand new Luxman 509 for $7,000 ($3,000 off). He would also sell Focal Kanta 2's speakers for $6,000 brand new. The reason why I purchased the ARCAM was to be able to watch TV and movies through speakers. I have not added the rear surround speakers yet because my wife won't allow me to buy them. I thought at the time the ARCAM was more audiophile quality than the large Murantz I have in the family room. I have been thinking of adding the Luxman to my ARCAM for 2 channel listening. However, is it better to upgrade my speakers to the Kanta's. When I first started I listened to Focal Aria's and even the 848's lack bass. I think my REL's would fill in the bass now. Who do you believe? What makes the most sense. So far, the majority in the group feel spending money on the source is better than adding speakers. I have always thought the opposite. What ever I do, when upgrading my speakers, I will be searching for the most efficient. This group is certainly knowledgeable. |
I went the same way (got something that I could play my TV through) and am now enjoying better sound from all my sources. Removing the soundbar and it's stand not only got me better sound but better looks, to boot. A lot less clutter. I'm also enjoying FM on a level that I never thought possible.The sound is so clear, full and enjoyable that I turn it on first thing in the morning and leave it on until I choose something else. That can sometimes take hours and it's simply lovely to have it in the background again, after way too many years of going without it (the reason being it never sounded this good with my precious set ups). No need for room acoustics here. To me, it's a waste of time and kind of self defeating. Talk about chasing the dragon. I listen in the near field (7.4' from the plane of my speakers) and the sidewalls are far enough away to not worry about 1st reflection points. I've even had a sound engineer and a high end audio dealer over and they both said the room is great the way it is and not to waste my money. For me, the process has always been one of synergy (I don't like that word but it's apt) and after being in this hobby for some time now I can (mostly) ferret out the BS and pretty much hit on what I'm after. It takes a while. Sometimes a long while, but I get there. The thing is to be patient. Let things settle. Experiment a bit if needed but don't go down that rabbit hole and buy one thing after another. This "last piece" of mine (my new integrated) took 8 years of waiting (with one misstep) to finally get it right. Ignore the naysayers who advocate their special way and please discount their claims. They just like to bloviate. All the best, |
No. I know of all the problems of my system. If it had bothered me too much, I did something to cure it. Now just enjoy the music. Lucky me also, to live somewhere that does not have any stereo boutiques to entice me with better. Reading words is one thing. When you hear it, it is a different dilemma. |
+1 @hilde45 |
NO! I stopped being neurotic about sound quality long ago!
I'd like to think I'm gradually getting there too. Of course some of the seismic events of the past few years might also have something to do with it. Perspective, whether you seek it or not, has a strange habit of imposing itself upon you as the years roll by. |
@mijostyn Thanks. Appreciated.
That’s about as concise as a version as the false-dilemma driving this thread can get. False dilemma: Either you love your system's sound (and are just agog, all the time, passive) or you are neurotic (frantic, chasing the dream). The third option is the happy tinkerer. The experimenter. That’s what makes this forum fun. Anyone who is just happy with the sound of their system should prove that by going off and listening rather than telling others they’re neurotic.
|
@hilde45 I like to tinker. That is why I ride Italian motorcycles and cars. |
Very clear thinking! Thanks... This false dilemna is related to another one... FALSE DILEMMA: Either you make of your gear brand name a fetich, claiming that it is your subjective TASTE, Or you claim that the measuring specs tell all there is to tell about your gear, and then the objective measuring process and tools are the fetich... the third option is acoustic/psycho-acoustic process where the SUBJECTIVE EARS and the OBJECTIVE MEASURES are CORRELATED continuously in acoustic experiments and tuning... It is the reason why i became an experimenter in acoustic... We listen to the system/ room relation not to the gear ALONE or DIRECTLY , and the acoustic measures are AT LEAST as important as the electrical one because in acoustic we LISTEN to assess and test what we just measure in the room ...
|
To point to what bpoletti just said, I became involved with hi-fi audio to become more engaged and satisfied with this beautiful, precious thing called music. If I then engage in inordinate fretting and anxiety, that’s on me. I’ve accepted that this is my personality and that I need to balance these proclivities with healthy gratitude for what many would consider indulgent extravagances. There’s nothing wrong with people whose enjoyment is the “process” itself: analyzing, tweaking, experimenting, etc. If people do what they want and it ain’t hurtin’ anybody, no harm no foul.
|
@jerryg123 , I ordered a Ducati Diavel 1260S in Black and Steel! Its due in end of May. I got the touring package and the racing exhaust with it. I'm going to put it all on myself. Nothing like Italian tinkering........well maybe British tinkering:-) |
Generally information in audio forum is about "sound" more than about the best interpretion of Barber Quartet adagio , which is by Bernstein by the way among all other versions ...Try it.... You cannot listen music without listening to sound at some point for some time , ask a maestro, or a musician and you cannot assess what a good sound is without knowing how a natural sounding instrument timbre or voice can sound...This is acoustic matter....And musical knowledge can help.... When the relation between your sound speakers/room is tuned, and the right pieces of gear well chosen for this acoustic process , we all listen music in ectasy forgetful but thankful to our acoustic well working installation... Before that , we are obsessed, frustrated, and embark in an upgrade chasing of the tails...Because it is more easy to give money than study acoustic... And because we dont know what is "timbre" or listener envelopment/sound source ratio, or imaging soundscape , or Schoeder time we speak about bass and highs or mid range appropriated for this musical style or this other favorite styles not knowing that a good acoustic , and well designed pieces of gear must be GOOD when they are acoustically optimized for all musical genres anyway heavy metal included... Then "listening music" or "listening sounds" does not means the same for all people at different point in time in their audio acoustic journey....
I listen music now after i got married with "sound"... One is the bride, the sound, i spend all day with her; the other is my mistress, the music, and my nights are for her ...They are my twins... 😁😊 The taste of bread is better cooked by my bride but making love more exciting with his sister...It is impossible to choose between one of them and they know it, the little rascals i love so much....
|