Hi-Fi and the Folly of Perfection

I know that, without question, the sound I hear coming from my speakers today is "better" in all sorts of ways than what I heard back in the 80's. But I do, in my more self-analytic moments, wonder if "better" is, well, better. How much is one's endless quest for audio perfection (a quest I adore and wouldn't give up for anything) actually a quest to listen again with the ears of that young man diligently respooling mangles cassettes with a pencil and a lot of patience?

I wonder if anyone else indulges in such lugubrious ruminations?

That reminded me of a Stephen Fry anecdote my friend Mike told me he had read.

Apparently in Fry's autobiography (the fry chronicles) he recalls the time he was able to finally afford a top notch separates system after achieving success on British TV and was surprised to find he had similar feelings to yours, a strange sense of disappointment.

He also 'knew' his Arcam based system was 'far better' than the one he had in sixth form at school and yet... something essential was obviously lacking.

In my own case I had a similar feeling for many years too.
For years and years I found that no subsequent system could equal the sheer pleasure I experienced from my original all in one music centre.

It was only when I got my Tannoy Berkeley's, about 10 years ago, that this feeling finally lessened somewhat, but not entirely.

Of course we were all younger then and everything was brand new but there might be something else here too.

Something to do with audio systems and their ambitions?

My first system was not ambitious at all. It featured a basic BSR turntable, a 10 Watt amp and a pair of simple 2 way speakers, and yet, within it's limited constraints (it was almost all midrange based) it hardly put a foot wrong.

Most importantly, it was tonally right.

Subsequent systems all grew successively more ambitious in image size, scale and bandwidth, but none quite recaptured that near perfect midrange.

I also remember reading a review of Siegfried Linkwitz's LX521s where a friend of his remarked that, despite the grandiosity of its ambitions, it took 3/4 iterations of this renowned design before it was finally able to equal the coherence of his tabletop radio.

Perhaps one reason for dissatisfaction is because it's simply far easier to design a good sounding but modest system that's far less ambitious in scope than one which seeks to a achieve 'audio perfection'?

Perhaps the first casualty in the quest for audio perfection is all too often this sense of coherence?

As you said, 'But I do, in my more self-analytic moments, wonder if "better" is, well, better.'

Well, I don't think you're the only one to question what exactly 'better' really means when it comes to audio playback.

Perhaps there should be a Danger Ahead! warning as we prepare to embark on our audiophile journey?

@jengelmann

I have also crossed into the stage of less critical listening and more enjoyable listening.

That elusive peace of mind probably what we’re all looking for.

I have read here of people who say that their system is ’good enough’ and that after a period of some years they no longer actively seek ’upgrades’.

That elusive feeling of being content with your system must also bring with it a sense of considerable relief.

In my own case I’d say that I’m 80% there and that I’d probably be happy to stop at 90 before things get stupidly difficult and expensive.

Barring a major, seismic technological advance, that’s as far as I’m liable to get anytime soon.

Unfortunately for me, even at this theoretical 80%, I can still regularly hear things wrong with my system. These are mainly audible in the time domain, particularly in the midbass when the music gets ’busy’.

Strangely enough, I don’t have any of these niggling problems with my car system whilst I’m driving.

Perhaps the driving itself is enough of a distraction in itself?

In the same way you might not worry about a lack of height/ too much height/ lack of hair/ too much hair/ being too young/ too old/ overweight/ underweight etc etc when you’re in good company.

Perhaps it’s because during those relatively carefree periods one’s mental landscape is temporarily transformed into a pleasant place to inhabit?

Or maybe it’s simply that’s just because my car system is relatively unambitious. It has no pretensions of sounding ’lifelike’ in scale and depth, and certainly none of any real world bass, but then again it also has no timing issues either.

Paul Gambaccini still sounds reassuringly like the Paul Gambaccini that I’m familiar with on Radio 2s Pick of the Pops.

@danoroo 

You're not the only one.

Just yesterday whilst doing the late Christmas shop I was telling my daughter just how much the rippled label on the honey jar was bothering me.

Unfortunately all of the jars had labels with that same rippled effect.

Now it could have been the intensity of the last minute shop and hoping that you can get everything essential on the list or it could have been a joke.

Or maybe I'm a little sick too.

Anyway, a couple of hours of listening to Christmas compilations seems to have helped with psychological readaptation.

For now.