Does it have to sound good for you to like it?

London Calling by the CLASH, was recorded to sound rough. But was quite smooth. Don't sign anything you don't understand.

I think most all of us prefer listening to a good recording but if the music that I love is only available on a poor recording I will still listen to it. 

I find when I play a lousy recording, it makes my start thinking, is there something wrong with my System, lol....please no thanks.  

@viridian 

Not to imply that is not as valid a choice as any, just dont understand it.

I don't either, unless it involves replicating what one hears night after night, in a particular venue from a particular group of musicians. 

@soix 

 I’ve built my system and it has evolved so it just sounds “right” to me, which may have little to do with if it sounds that way to someone else.  I think the goal of achieving “live” sound is probably a misnomer and may more aptly be described as a desire for everything just to sound “right” however each individual perceives that. 

+1 

+1 @viridian If something’s recorded live it should sound live, and if it’s recorded in a studio and meant to sound that way then it should sound like a studio recording.  BTW, I always thought the phrase “The Absolute Sound” was just ridiculous — sound is relative based on a myriad of things not the least of which is personal taste/preferences, so there is no “absolute sound” IMHO.  I’ve built my system and it has evolved so it just sounds “right” to me, which may have little to do with if it sounds that way to someone else.  I think the goal of achieving “live” sound is probably a misnomer and may more aptly be described as a desire for everything just to sound “right” however each individual perceives that.  Just my take.

We spend our time and money trying to build great sounding systems. There is nothing worse than playing a poor sounding CD,Record or music stream. It makes you stop and think how can I fix this. Interconnects, new speakers, amps soundproofing. Just don't do it. It creates a money pit we all swirl around in

"Live music" in which venue, from which seat, through whose ears???

Similar to live music, how else ?

On the other hand, I don't want to 'imagine' how it should sound, I want to hear sounds as close to the reality as possible. It is not possible to get deep into the music if you don't hear enough of it. It makes no difference whether you are a professional musician or not, we are all to a degree musicians.

@soix

Sure that’s possible, but I’d argue that same avid music lover could get even deeper into the music and appreciate it even more with a better system. I can appreciate driving a Mazda Miata, but I can appreciate driving a lot more in a Porsche 911.

Maybe. Perhaps I don’t want to believe this is true because I know I can’t afford to chase better and better sound. Or maybe "appreciation" is more dependent upon the capacity of the listener to tune into the music (and less dependent upon sonics) than your statement suggests. Maybe it’s simply too variable to make any broad assertions.

Regarding your driving example, I wouldn’t know how to go about comparing the respective attributes of a Porsche vs a Miata. Such fine points woulds be wasted on me. I’ve eaten in restaurants with folks who’ve eaten the same food and derived far less enjoyment than I have. One concluded I was a "super-taster" (a phrase I’d never encountered). My assessment was that their palates simply weren’t as developed.

@frogman 

While, as I wrote earlier, the two can live side by side, I think that one is being unrealistic to think that when listening to music we can appreciate ALL that the music is offering if we are also scrutinizing the sound and allowing ourselves to be bothered by what are ultimately relatively minor imperfections in the sound relative to what quality of sound that is really necessary to fully appreciate the music.

This is consistent with my experience as well. 

it is possible to be an avid music lover with a very modest system and still get deeper into the music than someone with a very expensive system.

Sure that’s possible, but I’d argue that same avid music lover could get even deeper into the music and appreciate it even more with a better system.  I can appreciate driving a Mazda Miata, but I can appreciate driving a lot more in a Porsche 911.

@stuartk , yes, and yes. I would say that this is to be expected. I would also say that I think the key to having the fullest appreciation of the music is to develop the ability to turn off the need to constantly scrutinize the sound. While, as I wrote earlier, the two can live side by side, I think that one is being unrealistic to think that when listening to music we can appreciate ALL that the music is offering if we are also scrutinizing the sound and allowing ourselves to be bothered by what are ultimately relatively minor imperfections in the sound relative to what quality of sound that is really necessary to fully appreciate the music.

Audio as a hobby is great fun, but as a previous poster pointed out about his “listening club buddies”, it is possible to be an avid music lover with a very modest system and still get deeper into the music than someone with a very expensive system.

With over 100 posts it’s time I give my perspective. To answer your question(OP) NO, but many factors can dispute this since a plethora of recorded music has both great content and SQ. For many that own physical media the SQ of a recording should have equal importance since were using more of our time/money/effort and physical space as opposed to those that mainly stream(sample) music. As previously stated if one has a very wide taste in music genres the SQ issue is not as significant. Being selective regarding a recordings SQ does not diminish the admiration one has for the music.

@frogman 

However, FOR ME, the idea that the pursuit of great (subjective) sound quality as the end-all is worthy of anywhere near the level of concern or attention as does the appreciation of the vast artistic riches found in a great performance of great music strikes me as odd. FOR ME and others audio is a hobby while music is much more than that.

You are a musician, no?  I've often wondered whether those of us who play music aren't inherently more inclined to focus on upon music more than sonics. 

"We take turns meeting at each member’s home, allowing each member to host and present/share their music, food, wine/drinks and good company. Most of the members have various consumer-level listening stations: AV receivers, Bluetooth soundbars and even the TV!"

One of the most memorable music evenings I ever had was when I was in college and frequented the local record shop.  They didn't have much of a jazz selection but what they had was well curated by an older guy who worked in the shop.  It got to where he's set things aside for me.  One day he asked if I wanted to come over to his house and listen to 78s.  I happily accepted, and we spent a terrific evening in his "listening room"--a spare bedroom filled with shelves of 78 albums and singles, and a little KLH bookshelf system with the speakers plopped randomly on stacks of LPs.  The music was wonderful. ;-)

@soix, ha, ha.  I have to chuckle a bit because I’ve been guilty of nudging a couple of the guys to upgrade, if just a little.  One of the guys actually went from Bose cubes to KLH 5’s!  The only snag (to me), was he kept an AV receiver in the chain.  But this guy knows more about music than I can ever hope to know, and with those speakers he’s in heaven, though he won’t take that next plunge just yet, (I’m lurking patiently).  The other guys remain immune to my charms. So far.

Huh?

We take turns meeting at each member’s home, allowing each member to host and present/share their music, food, wine/drinks and good company. Most of the members have various consumer-level listening stations: AV receivers, Bluetooth soundbars and even the TV!

@audiodidact  , this KIND OF (remember, I did type "kind of") reminds me of when I was in the Air Force in the late '70s through early '80s.  Most of us had rack systems and some had better systems than that, and when I lived in the barracks (which I assume was a lot like a college dorm) a bunch of us would get together in someone's room and we'd play LPs and 8 tracks and drink beer.  Then in the early '80s my rack system and I moved off base to an apartment with a couple of other guys and people would come over and we'd drink beer and use cannabis products and whatever else might be around at the time and play LPs and 8 tracks or one of the local FM rock stations and turn on the TV with the sound down.  A friend of mine had what we considered at the time a pretty good system--Bose 901s and some huge Japanese watts in front of them. He had a great LP collection, and I remember an outdoor keg party he had at the little house where he was living and I got to play DJ and it was a great party and I had a blast picking the tunes and spinning the LPs..

In retrospect, I am positive the sound was not very good back then, but I also remember having a lot of pure fun with the MUSIC.  Way more pure fun than I have now with far superior gear and SQ.  But that was a long time ago, long before I had ever heard of critical listening, and if I wasn't listening the way I am listening now-a-days, I probably wouldn't be listening to anything, except maybe the radio in my pickup when I was driving some place.

Let’s not forget how we perceive...

If a "lesser quality" track or record is played in between good recording, it will be bothersome for most. I read one comment about a boot leg. I got one from back in the day recorded via some Shure Ear Plug type of microphone 30 rows out from a Europe concert and it really captured the stadium with "all that" it was a great listen but playing this following a studio track and it became awkward.

I would argue, if you come with an empty (or open) mind and listen to a great performance even on a lesser quality recording it is more enjoyable. I think we often stereotype what we are listening for (ha! pun of the day)...

i think it misleading to suggest that love of music and love of sound quality are antagonistic. I don’t deny myself enjoyment of any music. If I love it, I listen to it. But, I do limit the recordings I listen to in my main listening room to well produced recordings. I know I’m not alone among members here in having spent a lot of time and money to build a resolving system that as faithfully as possible presents what is stored on the source medium. I doubt I’m alone in having built my system not simply to enjoy the sound of sound, as Mr Parsons suggests. I built it to enjoy music I love. When the source is wonderful, my main system enhances the pleasure of listening to well recorded music: my listening room is filled with the beautiful sounds of beautiful recordings of beautiful music! But, if the source is noisy, its presentation is noisy, and I fatigue fairly quickly. Not always, but mostly I avoid those recordings on my main rig. Not to worry, I have a second system perfect for those sources. It is neither highly resolving nor capable of wide and deep staging. The presentation is distant, As such, it is perfect for the poorly recorded music I love. I can happily dance the night away in that room with nary a thought to sound quality. What’s more, I feel confident better recordings of some personal faves would only diminish my listening pleasure. Some music is intended to be offensively noisy and I like it like that. The music is all I need to be transported. But, listening to a great recording on my main rig is more than transporting. It’s transfixing. It’s a different listening experience. And, I like that, too.

We take turns meeting at each member’s home, allowing each member to host and present/share their music, food, wine/drinks and good company. Most of the members have various consumer-level listening stations: AV receivers, Bluetooth soundbars and even the TV!

@audiodidact That’s awesome, and I’m very jealous — thanks for sharing that. Out of morbid curiosity, have any of the guys with “lesser” systems shown any interest in building a better stereo system after hearing what yours is capable of? Think I know the answer but just wanted to ask. 🫣

I try to but when you buy the cheapest copy ,you do get burned. Buyer beware.  

I've learned to listen within a multi perspective context. Poorer recordings acceptable, even involving if I perceive the recording as historical and/or unique. This acceptance may wear off after hearing said recording many times, at this point I may not be able to hear past the recording.

Mediocre recordings make up the vast majority of recordings in general and recordings I listen to. All have certain liabilities but generally don't rise to the point where they are unlistenable.

Quality recordings can spoil one. The superiority of these recordings used to make it difficult for me to return to lesser ones.

Listening in a contextual mode allows me to just go with the flow, my listening habits these days find me simply choosing a particular genre and let Roon choose at random, recordings within my library, both streams and rips. Listening to music in this manner means recording quality all over the place, I find I'm far more relaxed when NOT making either the music choices based on particular desires at that moment OR making those choices based on recording quality. Letting go of this manner of self consciousness means I much more easily enter the consciousness of the artists. I entered this hobby with that very intention, takes both equipment and mindfulness to get there.

This all requires fairly long listening sessions (4 hours up) for me, and this is the exclusive way I listen with my main system these days.

No.  Lots of punk and metal aren't recorded well, and can be some of the best music of all time.

**** But, I love these guys, and the way they love music; and, most of them know their music, to the nines!  I learn so much from them and get inspired hearing music I never would have known about without them.  I can then return home and listen at my level of appreciation. ****

…..and THAT is the point.  Good on you, audiodidact!

+1 audiodidact …am in a vinyl club with similar experiences 

This conversation has had a lot of contributors Skating  Backwards and some even Crying (a little bit)

There is No Crying in Baseball! (I mean audio)

I belong to a small group of friends who get together once a month “for music night”. It all began at my home with my  system, which, in this forum, is a tad beyond entry-level,  but to all the others in the group,  is extraordinary.  Though I have the more robust system, we don’t convene at my home exclusively. We take turns meeting at each member’s home, allowing each member to host and present/share their music, food, wine/drinks and good company. Most of the members have various consumer-level listening stations: AV receivers, Bluetooth soundbars and even the TV!  But, we’ve (I’ve), made it a central tenet that equipment level is not a requirement, other than having something to play music on.  Some evenings  this can be a bit of a challenge for me, as I do love it when music sounds good, and quietly nash my teeth when it’s being played on less than  “adequate” equipment.  But, I love these guys, and the way they love music; and, most of them know their music, to the nines!  I learn so much from them and get inspired hearing music I never would have known about without them.  I can then return home and listen at my level of appreciation.  And that’s fine.  And, when its my turn, I get to show-off a little and be  the  “audiophile” of the group.  Cool beans, especially for the A’goner tadpole that I am.  So, to to OP, thanks for the post!

immatthewj, of course the better your rig is the more you hear all the distortion and noise and compression and lack of things that should be there, but on the other hand you also hear more of what you want to hear. I strongly prefer this to hearing less of everything, both good and bad, on lesser system.

Of course the music has to sound great. Why spend thousands or tens of thousands of dollars on equipment if a car radio is good enough? On the other hand, who wants to listen to music beautifully rendered if you don’t like it? The other aspect is how distracted do you get when the production quality is good but not great? I get too distracted by that for my own good.

@soix for you :

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ewryuajc58j4dpz0t06og/h?rlkey=43h8t7huoafmw8rlyoxb4vps3&dl=0

Besides, that's when true audiophile rig shows real class - when it achieves an impossible task of making poor recordings sound tolerable.

Actually, @inna  , what my experience has been is that the better my system became, the less tolerable poor recordings/ masterings became.  Perhaps we are defining the word "better" differently.  

If it is bad enough I cannot listen for very long.

However, last night, in the course of auditioning/breaking in a pair of new speakers I started with Witches Bew (the Living Stereo 24 bit disc, NOT the SACD) and it sounded pretty good to me (and I am not a really a fan of classical, which may say something about the speakers). While that disc was playing, the desire to hear Lou Reed sing Sweet Jane came over me (". . . those were different times . . .") so I put on Rock And Roll Animal. The quality of that is on the rough side, but for the reasons @mrdecibel frequently cites, I got into it. However, with that last sentence typed, I probably wouldn’t want to listen to too many hours in a row with that quality.

I used to listen to poorer quality recordings when my gear was in the living room and I would be doing other things while jamming out and not paying as much attention to detail. After I moved to a smaller dedicated room there are no distractions but that has a price. For me, anyway, it does.

It's interesting how varied our preferences for music can be. The experience of music is deeply personal and subjective, influenced by many factors including the melody, lyrics, and the emotional connection we have with a song.

For some, the quality of the voice and the production value are paramount, while for others, the emotional or thematic content of the music can outweigh technical considerations. My son's great tolerance for low-resolution, unconventional music highlights how diverse and individualized musical tastes can be. Platforms like Spotify cater to this diversity by offering a vast range of music that appeals to different tastes and preferences.

Ultimately, whether one values high sound quality or meaningful content, music remains a powerful form of expression that resonates differently with each listener. It's this variety in taste that makes music such a rich and universal art form.

Hello rvpiano!  If a recording of a good performance or a well liked song is flawed, I'll keep it for the value of the music. But even the finest recording of an unwanted song isn't worth keeping, even in these days of streaming which I am just getting used to.  Why bother win something you don't want to hear?

If you have a piece of equipment that is the only thing you have that will play certsin media, it may be worth keeping, even if it's performance is second rate.

Right. Sometimes I do listen to mostly for the sound but rarely, though the music still has to be good. If I don't like it I won't listen at all.

mikhailark, if the band, Pink Floyd in this case, decides then why did they settle for less? They had enough resources to make that recording much better. Analog recording technology was fully developed by 1975.

Oh, so "audiophile" is about gear then. Well, this is exactly what Alan said.  He has tons of real gear in properly treated rooms at his workplaces :-) For some reason I don't think they elevate cables off the floor.

@mikhailark No, the point is Parsons isn’t necessarily in touch at all with what drives audiophiles, and from the video showing both his home setup and words that would certainly seem to be the case.  And you have no idea what equipment he has at his workplaces or how the rooms are treated, so that’s just pure conjecture based on nothing but your imagination.  The only thing we know is that setup/room in his house which is crap that no audiophile in his/her right mind would have or endure. 

@simonmoon Great back-story, thanks for sharing.

For the vast majority of time, I listen to music, and pay almost no attention to how my gear is performing. I am a music first audiophile.

Same here.

et al

Each to his own, but I was honestly just trying to apply a little levity and the statement doesn’t offend me. It’s just someone’s opinion after all.

If everyone is honest, this part "Audiophiles use your music to listen to their equipment.” is sometimes true for everyone here as simonmoon suggested.

Who doesn’t have a set of reference material to audition gear or show your system in its best light to a friend?

@drbay 

Some of the best songs in the world are very poorly recorded. Eg: The First Time Ever I Saw Your Face by Roberta Flack. 

Beautiful song and an amazing singer. I have my parents to thank for exposing me to her and many other greats as a little kid (I was born in 1964). Dad had a reel to reel that was like a hard shell suitcase. I wish I knew what is was.

Have you listened to the Qobuz HR version of First Take? It sounds pretty good to me. 

@inna - Ultimately, the band decides. Parsons own recordings are better. But then again, technology improves with time. 1975 and 1990 is a big difference. I just got 2018 remix of Animals on vinyl, haven't have time to dig into it.

Does great recording quality make average music sound better and almost acceptable ?

By the way, Wish You Were Here by Pink Floyd is average quality. Who produced it ? Great album, though.

Oh, so "audiophile" is about gear then. Well, this is exactly what Alan said ;-)

He has tons of real gear in properly treated rooms at his workplaces :-) For some reason I don't think they elevate cables off the floor.

Parsons has videos on youtube on his home gear and speaker setup. He owns pretty expensive stuff.

@mikhailark I assume this is the YouTube video you’re referring to since it seems to be the only one out there.  You gotta be kidding me!  If this is his home stereo it’s pretty clear he’s no audiophile and would explain why he doesn’t seem to even understand audiophiles or what drives them.  Both his system/room/setup and just the way he speaks about audio equipment is pure audio engineer/musician with nary a hint of audiophile in there.  But, with this perspective I can certainly better understand why he’d make such an inane statement about audiophiles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnCKVuBrY-s

@rvpiano , I haven’t suggested otherwise.  I’m sure it will be brought up again.  As I also said, I hope you can find some resolution.  Cheers.  

@frogman

“On this forum, the OP has asked what is essentially the same question many times over the years; in a variety of different ways and approached from different angles.”

The relevance of this post is borne out by the number of members (including yourself) who have responded. I think It is an important issue for many and worthy of repeating in different ways.

I don’t give a crap about Parson’s resume, he doesn’t get to lump all audiophiles into one overgeneralized group like that. That’s just a stupid and ill-informed statement IMHO.

Some audiophiles probably do that but I believe most don’t. Arrogant statement indeed.

I agree.

I believe he is describing a minority of audiophiles, not the majority.

His quote also seems a bit of a false dichotomy.

As if a music first audiophile, at times, I can also be a gear first audiophile. It’s not an either/or situation.

@macg19

Great quote. That is exactly what I do, sometimes.

 

I actually think it is not a great quote.

First of all, it seems to lump all audiophiles as one monolithic block of listeners, who care much more about their gear, than the music. Which I believe describes a minority of audiophiles.

I have actually met Alan Parsons several times. A great friend of mine was one of the leading experts in the world on analog synthesizers. When he worked at Moog toward the end of his life, he met Alan and they became good friends.

I actually confronted Alan on this quote while at my friend’s house, and he literally used the "no true Scotsman" fallacy on me. He said if I love music more than my gear, I am not an audiophile.

He is a great guy. And a really good musician. But he is simply wrong.

As far as using my gear to listen music, or listen to music to listen to my gear. I do both.

For the vast majority of time, I listen to music, and pay almost no attention to how my gear is performing. I am a music first audiophile.

But that doesn’t, every couple of weeks, for several hours, I can’t also have loads of fun by just paying attention to my gear, and maybe making changes to speaker placement, adjusting room treatment, changing out a piece of gear. I am temporarily a "gear first audiophile".

Parsons has videos on youtube on his home gear and speaker setup. He owns pretty expensive stuff. All his recordings sound great - at home. Perhaps because he knows home music reproduction well.

But hey - people discuss Ethernet cable performance. Surely they know networks more than any network stack engineers. Who is Alan? Just a recorder of some Pink Floyd…