I remember playing CCR, Cosmos Factory over and over on a red and white suitcase record player. Now I have newer equipment and I still like listening to that album.
So, a reviewer just said something I need to talk about.
I will not mention the reviewer, nor the specific equipment being reviewed, but this statement was made, talking about sax and strings: "the strings had real body, and it sounded like real strings being played". The tonality of the instruments was what he/she was talking about. I get this. The tone, the spatiality of the instruments, the stage that was presented. All well and good. What about the engagement between the listener and the musician. I have stated so many times here, ad nauseam, that the most important aspect of music listening, for me (and not enough with other listeners) is the "playing of the instruments". The artistry of the musician behind those strings. I just don’t get it. When I listen to Jeff Beck (RIP), using him as an example, what I am attracted to, FIRST & FOREMOST, is his PLAYING. Reviewers talk about "sound". Most people here talk about "sound". I spend more time now on other sites, that speak about the music playing and, the compositions. For whatever reasons, I seem to be realizing, that A’gon members, as so many reviewers, talk about sound. They very rarely mention MY most important aspect of listening. The musicianship and the compositions. Another rant from me. What are your thoughts on this? How do you listen? What do you listen for/to? What does your system convey to you? I know I am out of line again, but........My best to everyone. Always, MrD.
60 responses Add your response
I love the music… the result, regardless of the skill of the musician. It inspires my subconscious and causes me to appreciate it. I have a relationship to the music not its creator. Some music is not musical or beautiful in a musical sense, but a musician showing off his skill… for instance how many notes he can cram into a unit of time. I remember when The Art of Noise came out with their first album… what a revelation. Music created with noises. When I go to the symphony, I go to listen to music… I close my eyes. Sure it is fun to watch the performers sometimes… but that is not why I am there. Many people go to see the performers, I understand. |
I'm a bit confused when I read reviewers talk about gear that gets them 'tapping their toes'. To me, it's the MUSIC that will get me tapping my toes, just like it did when I was a teenager in the 60's with a handheld transistor radio. I had no problem at all moving to music; the gear isn't what made me do that. |
@mike_in_nc +1 my man! @bolong, very honest and real. He was inviting them to hear his/their playing. @hilde45 "the ability to hear the strings and body of the violin creates a conduit to hear the musician, to resonate with their intent and emotion". As @mike_in_nc stated, not everyone is into the "music", but enjoy the sound. Interesting that I can so much enjoy hearing Sticky Fingers in my car, or on the pool deck, and experience as much musical enjoyment as when I am sitting in my sweet spot. What does this say about me? My system sucks?, I am deaf? Or I REALLY love the music. Some here, can only enjoy music through their system (main rig), and with only the best "sounding" recordings, ex. Chesky, RR, Sheffield, you get the point. Sad. And if you are one of them, that places " sound" 1st, Sad. Have a good day. Enjoy! MrD. |
+1 @hilde45 very true, and an important distinction. |
Not every audiophile (and that includes reviewers) really loves music. It took me decades to understand that fully. Many are just in love with beautiful sounds -- hardly the same thing. Others are looking for some kind of nostalgic experience, like those who listen only to music of one time period decades ago. Sometimes I revisit my young years, too, but I don’t let that determine my musical boundaries. Of course, it’s also true that reviewers try to convey what is unique about the sound produced by a component. That is difficult enough to express in words without adding an additional layer of abstraction and subjectivity, i.e., how the listener connects with the artist’s musicality. |
The ability to hear the strings and body of the violin, for example, creates a conduit to hear the musician, to resonate with their intent and emotion. The better a system reproduces "sound" the more access I get to personality/feeling/intention. The predilection of reviewers for talking about the conduit (the sound) rather than the musician is, I think, smart on their part. They are telling me something which is a bit more shared and intersubjective -- "If they can hear it, I can hear it" I reason. When a reviewer talks at length about how they had a mind-meld with the musician, well, that just sounds subjective and, honestly, useless for me as a reader. People get all kinds of squishy feelings about music and artists -- and that's fine -- but in my book, as an audio consumer, it is too much noise and not enough signal. |
| Post removed |