What is good sound? Well, how about this?
"i like a dull, veiled, laid,back, boring sound capable of putting me to sleep. i hate treble and i don't like detail. i like subtractive coloration to such an extent that all recordings sound the same. you can talk about detail, neutrality all day long. if you don't tap your foot, it doesn't matter.
"i want to relax, not bothered by detail or dynamics. veil the sound and cut off the highs. darkness and dullsville is my motto, by choice. thick caramel syrup makes me happy."
Mrtennis (Threads | Answers)
04-10-06
I think you've described the sound we all seek. Or perhaps not. |
|
Mrtennis: To quote from a true classic, "Surrender Dorothy." Your contention, simply stated, is that if it sounds good to you, that's all that matters. That may be fine, but it's not what high-end audio is all about. There is indeed such a thing as a reference, and the closer a system can get to that sound the better. Accuracy isn't subjective. Your stated preferences clearly disqualify you from any discussion concerning reference-quality sound. Some people -- like you -- simply don't have the ability to determine whether a system is accurate, partly because you'd rather spend your time subjecting Audiogoners to your pseudo-intellectual babble than acquiring better listening skills. Now go listen to your system. Nighty-night. |
Mrtennis: Who's angry? You already have a forum for your nonsensical notions -- audiophilia, right? -- so why pollute Audiogon? Take the hint and go away. |
Actually, Roy Harris, you're the reason some of us may need to see a shrink -- to figure out your twisted thought process. You would be a great case study -- only you are not that complex. You post moronic "questions" for which there is no answer, then argue with anyone who tries to respond. Give us all a break already. Go back to writing your sophomoric "reviews" for Audiophilia (I hope no one is foolish enough to pay you -- or trust anything you write) and the system that puts you to sleep. Isn't it about your nap time by now? |
Well, actually, people do say something about her being a saint. I never have figured out what they're getting at . . . |
Marco: Accuracy isn't subjective. Personal preference, obviously, is subjective, but many of us don't care what someone else thinks "sounds good." That person may like exaggerated bass or treble, which is not at all true to the source. Or that person may simply not be qualified to judge a system because he or she has no idea what an unamplified instrument sounds like. As John Dunlavy noted, much of this actually can be measured. Good -- meaning accurate -- sound really isn't such a big mystery. |
Newbee: Compare it to a reference: live unamplified vocals or instruments. In addition to possessing the obviously necessary hearing acuity, a person has to have reference points. He or she has to know how instruments really sound. Then find albums or CDs that have minimal processing and see how it compares. Nothing I've heard matches the live event, but the best systems can recreate a decent illusion. Sometimes it takes an adjustment period to appreciate a more accurate system. |
Newbee: Mrtennis has one solution, but it really isn't so complicated. You either know what a cello sounds like or you don't. Forget whether you're two feet away or two miles away. If you've been around live acoustic music and have paid attention you can tell if a system is coming remotely close to reproducing the sounds/textures/dynamics/nuances and invoking even a trace of the emotions you feel when you listen to a live event. The system is doing this or it isn't and no amount of rationalizing is going to change that fact. |
Newbee: It's no intrusion at all. Of course there are varying degrees of accuracy. It's nothing like being unique -- it's either unique or it isn't. You're right about that. Take two pairs of speakers that are identical in every way -- waterfall plots, frequency and transient response, etc. -- only one pair is down 3 decibels at 40 hertz and the second pair is down 6 decibels at 40 hertz. The first pair is more accurate than the second pair. And so it goes. |
Newbee: I never said anything about having the cellist come to my house. Again, you either know how a live piano, cello, flute, bassoon etc. sounds or you don't. You don't necessarily have to do a rapid A-B comparison to know whether a system is doing a decent job of recreating the illusion. You know it when you hear it. Of course, in many cases, the recording is a big source of the problem. That's why you have to find a few recordings that you trust. Enjoy your systems. |
Jax2: Accuracy isn't subjective. It's either accurate or it isn't, at least to varying degrees, and perhaps few people are able to make that determination. You have to know what an instrument is supposed to sound like before you can know if a reproduction provides a reasonable illusion. You are, however, right when you say that one person cannot judge for another person what sounds "good." That person may hate the sound of an accurate system. |
