2. speakers
  3. 159485-102681

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 rvpiano

rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano
2,769 posts
 
Should read “does NOT sound good“
Sorry
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano
2,769 posts
 
I listen to mostly classical music, which you might think would be a natural for accurate reproduction of real instruments in a real space.  But even here, producers generally have a hand in “shaping” the music.  In the early days of stereo, an orchestra would be recorded with just two or three microphones placed in an optimum spot above or in front of the musicians.  This did  produce a natural sound which a high resolution audio system could come close to reproducing. Gradually, however, producers endeavored to “improve” the final sound by placing several microphones at various places above instrumental choirs, thereby giving them more control over the final product.  This multimiking caused several abnormalities in the natural sound. All sorts of distortions we’re now possible.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, though, because talented engineers have produced some wonderful results using this method.
I do  believe a high resolution stereo system should be. able to sound good on the majority of recordings. After all, even the worst engineers are not out to produce aberrant sounds.  Of course there are great variations in quality. But a good balanced audio system shouldn’t produce extreme distortions.
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano
2,769 posts
 
Maybe, just maybe, Magnepans, Quads and the like for all their high reputation, are not well balanced, but tweaked to achieve a certain end.

rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano
2,769 posts
 
And, by corollary, a system which does sound good with good and bad recordings is similarly not balanced properly.
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano
2,769 posts
 
On the question of “diminishing returns,” I do believe after a certain point, the improvements in a system become so minimal as to not justify tons of money being poured into it. (Unless money is no object to you.) I’m not speaking about a $5000 system compared to a $50,000 (or even a $25,000) system, but a $50,000 system compared to a $200,000+ system.
Assuming musicality is the object, how much more MUSICAL enjoyment is there? 
After a certain point, it becomes not musical but technical improvement.
rvpiano's avatar
rvpiano
2,769 posts
 
Very, very well put!
More to discover