2. misc-audio
  3. 186655-129831

Real or Surreal. Do you throw accuracy out the window for "better" sound?

I visited a friend recently who has an estimated $150,000 system. At first listen it sounded wonderful, airy, hyper detailed, with an excellent well delineated image, an audiophile's dream. Then we put on a jazz quartet album I am extremely familiar with, an excellent recording from the analog days. There was something wrong. On closing my eyes it stood out immediately. The cymbals were way out in front of everything. The drummer would have needed at least 10 foot arms to get to them. I had him put on a female vocalist I know and sure enough there was sibilance with her voice, same with violins. These are all signs that the systems frequency response is sloped upwards as the frequency rises resulting in more air and detail.  This is a system that sounds right at low volumes except my friend listens with gusto. This is like someone who watches TV with the color controls all the way up. 

I have always tried to recreate the live performance. Admittedly, this might not result in the most attractive sound. Most systems are seriously compromised in terms of bass power and output. Maybe this is a way of compensating. 

There is no right or wrong. This is purely a matter of preference accuracy be damn.  What would you rather, real or surreal?

128x128mijostyn

Showing 6 responses by inna

inna
7,132 posts
 

The essence of music is conveyed via emotional component of it not via its mathematical constructs. But the mathematical constructs are necessary to make music happen at all.

Most of the recordings that I listen to are quite bad. If I can somehow make them sound a little better I will do it. But I would not be doing too much of a "remastering engineering" either. I'll try to find a balance. 

Live music is not hyper detailed, it is just detailed.

inna
7,132 posts
 

Right. If there is full satisfaction there will be no journey. I wouldn't call it a problem, though, it's the way it is.

inna
7,132 posts
 

Certain music should have a bite on edges, if it is too smooth it won't sound right. The flow of any music should be coherently and continuously smooth but that's different meaning of smooth.

As for the concept of "good enough", it's an interesting one. No system is good enough for me because it is still far from real. Problem is not only the system but the recordings, most of them. So I just do one or two significant upgrades every few years and don't think much about it.

I

inna
7,132 posts
 

frogman, you are a musician, so you got almost everything wrong. Music is first of all mathematics not art in a usual sense.

There is no music without sound. Sound is the foundation. Silence also sounds.

Neither sound is in the service of music nor music is in the service of sound. That one was beyond wrong. It's a different system.

You are romantic, and this one is good.

inna
7,132 posts
 

I have not heard of any SS amp unquestionably better than top Boulder. 

If I win a lottery I won't give anyone a cent. Even less likely will I subsidize any school. They will learn nothing there, anyway, waist of time and effort. I will buy Berlin Philharmonic along with the concert hall. I guess, for that I must win big lottery. I don't need London orchestra or any other.

inna
7,132 posts
 

I never met a music lover who didn’t like good sound too. This of course doesn’t mean that they all became audiophiles, most didn’t. When I asked them why not they didn’t know what to say except for usual nonsense like time, money, space etc.

No, that mathematical part doesn’t in fact explain anything when it comes to emotional impact.

Anyway, I’ll remain confused and will keep enjoying what I enjoy no matter what it is.

More to discover