Pleasurably better, not measurably better


I have created a new phrase: pleasurably better.

I am giving it to the world. Too many technophiles are concerned with measurably better, but rarely talk about what sounds better. What gives us more pleasure. The two may lie at opposite ends of the spectrum.

I use and respect measurements all the time, but I will never let any one of them dictate to me what I actually like listening to.

erik_squires

Showing 2 responses by 4krowme

I am on track with your thinking and have often felt the same way. Getting the sound accurately reproduced is really just the beginning. What I have recently experienced is a build that has a lot more bass detail and yet at the same time is bass heavy. But as it turns out, I enjoy this for listening. In fact, I get to hear what else is in the music. It was written, it was played and recorded, but not heard after that. Now, I hear those bass details and marvel at what was missing.

 Since my hearing has changed in the treble area, I really miss the 'air' of the music. I got a lot out of the venue where the music was recorded, but these days, I have to aim my interest elsewhere. 

 Midrange will always be important. Again, I like detail but short of harsh, that's for sure. And I want the lower mids to have presence but not at a level of distraction.

 So it becomes the end game, pleasing ourselves with music, not graphs.

bhvf,

 

  Only recently, I showed a tool to a couple of people who had no real interest or even understanding of it. Their reaction was one of 'why would you spend that kind of money on something so basic?' Same reason I don't understand you buying many multiple pairs of shoes. 

 Audio and how each person enjoys it varies, but as long as the enjoyment is there, what's to criticize.