2. misc-audio
  3. 190397-89202

The joys of mid-fi

What I’m writing about here applies to classical music but might have parallels in other music too. I’ve brought this topiic up in different ways before.

Years ago when I was blissfully ensconced in mif-fi, I could easily compare different performances of the same classical work with the confidence that the sound quality would be essentially the same. There would be no issues of soundstaging, detail, et al that would make it hard for me to compare. It was easy to judge a performance on its own merits without complicating factors. Now, it’s almost impossible to assess a performance without placing SQ into the mix. A mediocre recording might be extremely attractive due the sound alone, Conversely, a very good performance might be shunted aside as “unlistenable.”

Oh, for the good old days of mid-fi! 😁

rvpiano

Showing 3 responses by ghdprentice

ghdprentice
7,539 posts
 

@immatthewj

If I understand your comment. Yes, all that detail must be there, we agree on that. My comment centers around proportionality between different sounds. I have heard many systems where, say the cymbles stuck out like a solo instrument, when in fact it was intended to be just one component… or a key for celebration is hearing someone move their foot on the floor. 

 

Seating is importantly at a symphony. My seats are 7th row center and the microphones for recording are over my head.

ghdprentice
7,539 posts
 

@immatthewj

You are correct, my systems do produce great detail, however they do so proportionally. By that, I mean if you listen for them the details are there, just not in your face. In the same way that if you listen in a quiet symphony hall you can hear the echo all around from venue, but you must direct your attention to it in order to hear it. Btw, my systems are shown under my UserID in virtual systems.

So, unless a CD or LP is actively bad, my system does not draw attention to it and it sounds pretty good. Very few albums sound really bad… having said that, there are some real stinkers out there… early Yardbirds (I think) and some Russian symphony orchestra recording. I have more than once bought a great Shostakovich by the USSR Symphony Orchestra and choir with great anticipation, only to hear the most horrible tinny recording. oh well.

ghdprentice
7,539 posts
 

You bring up a good question. For me the answer lies in what kind of system have you built and are you listening to the system or the performance. For much of my history I was driven by my ability to analyze and hear more detail and nuance… in the sounds, images, soundstage, etc. The result was that it emphasized details and the venue and lost the gestalt and musicality which drew me in to the performance.

So, as I pointed out in other posts, with season ticket to the symphony for a decade I compared my system to the real thing and changed my system over time to be natural and musical. The music draws me in now instead of sticking out in my face. Different performances stand out, not by how they were recorded, but how they were performed. Much of today equipment is designed around detail and slam, making a sonic spectacular to wow the listener but failing to reproduce the musical experience.

To me a truly high end (audiophile) system reproduces the musical experience and sucks you in to the performance. It doesn’t make background instruments into solo performances and tell you all about the venue and mastering unless there was something very wrong with them. There are a number of companies working to produce equipment to do this like Sonus Faber, Conrad Johnson, Audio Research and VAC. 

More to discover