How close to the real thing?

Hotmailjbc, your photo versus reality is right on. I was just on the Serengeti plains with thousands of animals all around. I took many high quality photos but none could capture what I saw.

Today I tried a new H-Cat dac and got clarity and imaging that thrilled me, but sorry not real like being there and Frank is dead.

I think that too many assume that if we hear live music that is the goal of this hobby but there are big variations in live music. With only limited experience, I think most would agree that some venues sound better than others.

I still remember when CES was still in Chicago, we were eating at Bergdoff's where there was a small jazz group going from table to table. When they came to our table, I noticed that the bass was boomy when the bass player was only about five feet from me, but had not been when he was further away. Some real is good and some is not.

I am convinced that my "realism" has greatly improved in the last several years, but I would never make an estimate of how close it is to a live performance in my room. When I am startled by a new instrument coming in or involved in the emotions of the music, I am happy.

One final comment. Long ago I had a friend who was a concert pianist. He had heard my system often and had often requested some classical piano performances and seemed to enjoy them. Finally, while at his home, I asked what he listened to. He took me into his study and showed me an old Webcor portable record player!! I must have looked shocked as he said he listened only to the performer's choices in the piece and other than that paid little attention to what he was hearing. He said he heard it all in his head.

Bjesien, I fully agree that playback satisfaction varies greatly. I suspect that for performing musicians listening to recorded music is not relaxing and staying at their best entails much practice. My friend used to read a great deal within a silent study.

I do find it valuable not withstanding that we share our experiences, but to assume any consensus is beyond us. I have some friends whose options I greatly respect, that is the best I can do in guiding my buying decisions.

Once I allowed myself to think that I was hearing 90% of what was real. Shortly after that I got something new and thought it was a very great improvement suggesting that before it I was only at about 50%. I decided that this was a waste of time. Sometimes when I leave my music room with something playing, I close the door and while descending the stairs, ask myself whether it sounds like real music being played. My answer always, thus far, is no.

Irvrobinson, I had a jazz band in my kitchen but the only musician playing music has been a guitarist. He liked the room and said he liked classical guitar played on my system. I asked him if it sounded real. He hesitated but said no. I fully agreed with him.

Paulsax, if I don't leave my ss gear on 24/7 it takes at least an hour to sound its best. With the high cost of tubes and electricity, few leave their tube gear on.

Mikewerner, while I agree, this doesn't mean that one cannot get closer. I have heard speakers that are very easy to listen to but which are not at all realistic sounding.

With the same speakers and electronics, I have heard great differences in realism with the same recordings. Of late I am hearing greatly more ambiance and note decay with double DSD versus 44.1 PCM on many different recordings. All this means, of course is that the filters have been moved upward to nearly 100k Hz. Also, I've heard the benefits of having linear power supplies rather than the cheap switching supplies so common in our electronics.

I have also heard greater realism using the Tripoint Troy with the new Thor SE grounding cables that keep RFI and EMI out of the signal. Subtleties in the music and background are revealed once the garbage is removed.

I've also heard the importance of what my components sit on. Two different technologies dominate the field, IMHO. Stillpoints converts vertical vibrations into heat and Star Sound takes the vibrations to ground rapidly with the use of a mix of brass and steel. I hear brass and high hat as well as drums sounding better with the Star Sound and more of a sense of ease with the Stillpoints.

Finally, there are magnets in cabling. High Fidelity Cables has shown me that the more the better using magnets. These cables have dramatically revealed realism for me that I once thought was impossible. Each and every version of these cables have increased the number of magnets used, the price, and the realism.

Would Iever go back to what I was listening to just three years ago? Not unless I was very curious as to how bad it was then.

Veroman, I think there is much more to it than you say, such as ambience, note decay, sharp leading edge, human noises, timbre of instruments, but this is a senseless argument. I seldom buy seats that would give me the perspective that the mikes enjoy.

I don't live in a big city but used to attend meetings in Chicago and sought to buy returned seats in the center and front of Chicago's orchestral hall for the Chicago Symphony performances. I also heard many jazz singers performing there. My university has a very poor theater. The only good seats are in the front three rows. I've heard symphony performances, musicals, opera, jazz groups, and rock groups there. Frankly, my home system save for the visual perspective is better than those at the university.

My greatly improved music reproduction is largely based on vibration control, better grounding, ics and other cables, power cords and other ac conditioning, and digital sound source.