What is it I'm failing to grasp?


I come across statements here and elsewhere by guys who say 1) their systems come very close to duplicating the experience of hearing live music and 2) that they can listen for hours and hours due to the "effortless" presentation.  

I don't understand how these two claims add up. In tandem, they are profoundly inconsistent with my experiences of listening to live music. 

If I think about concerts I consider the best I've witnessed (Oregon, Solas, Richard Thompson, SRV, Dave Holland Quintet, '77 G. Dead, David Murray, Paul Winter Consort), I would not have wanted any of those performances to have extended much beyond their actual duration.

It's like eating-- no matter how wonderfully prepared the food, I can only eat so much-- a point of satiation is reached and I find this to be true (for me) when it comes to music listening as well. Ditto for sex, looking at visual art, reading poetry or playing guitar. All of these activities require energy and while they may feel "effortless" in the moment, I eventually reach a point where I must withdraw from aesthetic simulation.

Furthermore, the live music I've heard is not always "smoothly" undemanding. I love Winifred Horan's classically influenced Celtic fiddling but the tone she gets is not uniformly sweet; the melodies do not always resemble lullabies. The violin can sound quite strident at times. Oregon can be very melodious but also,(at least in their younger days) quite chaotic and atonal. These are examples on the mellower side of my listening spectrum and I can't listen to them for more than a couple hours, either live or at home. 

Bottom line: I don't find listening to live music "effortless" so I don't understand how a system that renders this activity "effortless" can also be said to be accurate.   

What is it that I'm failing to grasp, here?  


 

stuartk

Showing 2 responses by rocray

 Now when folks speak about live music,what kind of music?  Orchestral? Jazz? Rock? I guess what I’m trying to say is,if you are listening to un amplified music,isn’t that the true sound that one would be trying to reproduce? Because anything amplified,  now the guitar amp,mic choices,and PA system plays such a big part of what you would hear live.  Or am I totally missing the point?  Me personally,I can listen to all sorts of music for 12-14 hours a day with no listener fatigue what so ever. However ,I’ve listened to live music that makes my ears bleed after 10 minutes. 

 

Sure. But to play devil's advocate, even if a performance solely utilizes acoustic instruments with no amplification, each venue sounds different, acoustically. Furthermore, the sound in any venue will vary according to where each audience member is sitting and regardless of location, each member will perceive sound uniquely. Which person is hearing the "true sound"? 


 

That’s the point I was getting at. There are so many variables in trying to achieve live sound. Who’s variation are we trying to duplicate?  
 

  Me,I’m happy with the sound I get from my systems.  I am chasing what ties me to the music. You may listen,and say it sounds good,but it doesn’t touch you. That’s fine. That’s the whole thing. There are SO many different ideas of LIVE.