If a lot of music sounds bad, then some dubious choices of equipment have been made.
Each piece of equipment, cables, power cords, amps, dacs, cartridges, all of it, to some degree..each item will degrade the sonic quality, in some way.
the trick is to chose components that degrade it the least, and are neutral or balanced in their areas of degradation..and then chain them together.
Where each individual device’s dynamic range of clarity is similar to the last, and neutral, centered -as it should be.
To get to the least compromised delivery that you can.
In such a system, everything played should sound ok. That each recording should sound as it actually is.... and the equipment should neither embellish, nor detract -in any area, way, or the whole.
There is no such thing as an increase in sound quality with a single piece of gear available anywhere on the planet. That would be an added distortion. Which decreases dynamic range and introduces massive problems. Ie, that each piece of gear is a cleaned window and perfectly aligned with the ones ahead of it and behind it. As you look/hear through the stack only, not though any single pane at a time. It’s like building a camera lens where the distortions of any given element are cumulative and exaggerated in some way by the next element.
There is only ’the least damaging piece of equipment’ (cleanest window) The ones with the widest cleanest dynamics and micro/macro detail etc.
It’s a subtle distinction but a critical one.
You are essentially, taking a photo, then printing it...and then taking a photo of that photo..and printing it..then taking a photo of that photo..and printing it..and taking a photo of that photo..and printing it...
Imagine the cumulative degradation in contrast, dynamic range, color purity, edge definition in the details, pixel matrix, all so on. Do that 4-5 times (standard audio system) with 5 different cameras and 5 different printers..using 5 different software packages (in each camera, computer, and printer) and I can guarantee the final image...is going to look like junk. A recognizable image, yes, no problem there, but... correctness? No. Not happening.
That, in a nutshell, is an audio system.
So never try to fix things by adding an advertised artificially created skew of some sort (leaner, darker, faster, slower, etc). Neutral and perfect with extreme dynamics that are spot on... is all you want. Anything else..well.. that just shortens up the possible dynamic quality range, even more.
In each stage, the range of quality possible for each photo imaging and reproduction device has to be better than the one before, as degradation will happen, in the images..there is no escaping it. Half million dollar audio system, it will be there, at any price, inescapably so. Intelligent application minimizes the losses and that’s the best anyone can get to.
Overall..what..maybe 6-12db of visual quality will go away (in the visual comparative). With the faults of each imaging and printing aspect of the given individual ’device’ intruding dramatically as a sum total at the given end point. That a cheap piece of audio gear is equivalent, in that visual chain, to a junk camera form the dollar store. Get rid of it. I don't care it is a favorite. It's making a mess. Quit trying to fix things around it--wrong move entirely.. Get rid of it.
Audio - same same. On paper the distortions may seem minimal, but in reality they are, to the eye and the ear..gross or notable.
Each piece of equipment, cables, power cords, amps, dacs, cartridges, all of it, to some degree..each item will degrade the sonic quality, in some way.
the trick is to chose components that degrade it the least, and are neutral or balanced in their areas of degradation..and then chain them together.
Where each individual device’s dynamic range of clarity is similar to the last, and neutral, centered -as it should be.
To get to the least compromised delivery that you can.
In such a system, everything played should sound ok. That each recording should sound as it actually is.... and the equipment should neither embellish, nor detract -in any area, way, or the whole.
There is no such thing as an increase in sound quality with a single piece of gear available anywhere on the planet. That would be an added distortion. Which decreases dynamic range and introduces massive problems. Ie, that each piece of gear is a cleaned window and perfectly aligned with the ones ahead of it and behind it. As you look/hear through the stack only, not though any single pane at a time. It’s like building a camera lens where the distortions of any given element are cumulative and exaggerated in some way by the next element.
There is only ’the least damaging piece of equipment’ (cleanest window) The ones with the widest cleanest dynamics and micro/macro detail etc.
It’s a subtle distinction but a critical one.
You are essentially, taking a photo, then printing it...and then taking a photo of that photo..and printing it..then taking a photo of that photo..and printing it..and taking a photo of that photo..and printing it...
Imagine the cumulative degradation in contrast, dynamic range, color purity, edge definition in the details, pixel matrix, all so on. Do that 4-5 times (standard audio system) with 5 different cameras and 5 different printers..using 5 different software packages (in each camera, computer, and printer) and I can guarantee the final image...is going to look like junk. A recognizable image, yes, no problem there, but... correctness? No. Not happening.
That, in a nutshell, is an audio system.
So never try to fix things by adding an advertised artificially created skew of some sort (leaner, darker, faster, slower, etc). Neutral and perfect with extreme dynamics that are spot on... is all you want. Anything else..well.. that just shortens up the possible dynamic quality range, even more.
In each stage, the range of quality possible for each photo imaging and reproduction device has to be better than the one before, as degradation will happen, in the images..there is no escaping it. Half million dollar audio system, it will be there, at any price, inescapably so. Intelligent application minimizes the losses and that’s the best anyone can get to.
Overall..what..maybe 6-12db of visual quality will go away (in the visual comparative). With the faults of each imaging and printing aspect of the given individual ’device’ intruding dramatically as a sum total at the given end point. That a cheap piece of audio gear is equivalent, in that visual chain, to a junk camera form the dollar store. Get rid of it. I don't care it is a favorite. It's making a mess. Quit trying to fix things around it--wrong move entirely.. Get rid of it.
Audio - same same. On paper the distortions may seem minimal, but in reality they are, to the eye and the ear..gross or notable.