High Performance Audio - The End?


Steve Guttenberg recently posted on his audiophiliac channel what might be an iconoclastic video.

Steve attempts to crystallise the somewhat nebulous feeling that climbing the ladder to the high-end might be a counter productive endeavour. 

This will be seen in many high- end quarters as heretical talk, possibly even blasphemous.
Steve might even risk bring excommunicated. However, there can be no denying that the vast quantity of popular music that we listen to is not particularly well recorded.

Steve's point, and it's one I've seen mentioned many times previously at shows and demos, is that better more revealing systems will often only serve to make most recordings sound worse. 

There is no doubt that this does happen, but the exact point will depend upon the listeners preference. Let's say for example that it might happen a lot earlier for fans of punk, rap, techno and pop.

Does this call into question almost everything we are trying to ultimately attain?

Could this be audio's equivalent of Martin Luther's 1517 posting of The Ninety-Five theses at Wittenberg?

-----

Can your Audio System be too Transparent?

Steve Guttenberg 19.08.20

https://youtu.be/6-V5Z6vHEbA

cd318

Showing 6 responses by dougeyjones

I listen to more “new” music than old/classic, despite having an enormous collection of the latter. EDM has been my thing since I was a kid, so I keep up with whatever’s new. The old curmudgeons on here who think all new music is poorly produced should be ignored because it’s just not true, they just don’t like the content. 
You’re way ahead of me then, I only speak English and very bad Spanish. 

In that case it makes sense that your posts are long sometimes, you’re just making sure your meaning is accurately conveyed. 
His analysis, and this thread, remind me of selling LCD projectors 15-20 years ago and having clients comment on the “screen door” effect that was apparent if the projector was perfectly focused. The person being Demo’d would inevitably be like “that’s annoying, can anything be done about it?!” 

My response was always the same, to take the focus wheel on the projector and back it off perfect focus just enough to blur the lines between each pixel, but not enough to make the picture look fuzzy overall. Customers were always satisfied, and with good reason, 35mm film in theaters doesn’t look like modern 4k video production. It stands to reason that poorly recorded or produced music may be more enjoyable on systems with less resolving power. 
I think we’re all in agreement in here.. Resolution just for resolutions sake isn’t always the ultimate goal. That concept is actually built into my system, it’s why I personally go by the numbers/measurements for DACs, because I want that piece of the chain to be brutally accurate. If I decide that I want to soften some hard edges after the fact, I’d rather do that with speakers or room treatments. 
Is English your first language Mahgister? Not giving you a hard time, just curious. 
Mahgister, I’m not reading a book every time you reply lol, tl;dr.

Not sure which part of my post was confusing. I’ve been super up front on this board that when it comes to DAC’s, I consider the units with very high SINAD measurements to be technically superior to whatever flavor of the month tech AudioGoners are obsessing over. FOTM right now is old technology (R2R Ladder), which people seem to be choosing because the nature of that technology means that building an r2r ladder network that can resolve greater than 19-21bits of information becomes very cost prohibitive, and so when most models encounter bitrates higher than that, the additional info is truncated. From peoples reviews, that truncation can be graceful and sound pleasing, which is why manufacturers are even bothering to make new DACs with this design.

I’m not interested in using a tech like that for the same reason that I don’t want a tube power amp or preamp. It’s like adding a distortion pedal for a guitar amp, you’re purposefully adding noise. 

Just not my thing.