When I listen to my system.......

@ jastralfu

My statement clarifies that recordings are sonic derivatives of music, and NOT music.   The key is that recordings are influenced by the recording/playback process.  Real (i.e. live) music does not suffer from these issues. Consequently, ALL of us care about the efficacy of our systems, not just the "musicianship and the composition" that the OP favors.

I was not not implying that recordings are unemotional, those are your thoughts alone... 

As soon as we turn on our equipment, we are NOT listening to music - we are listening to reproductions of music on our equipment.
 

I listen to music on my system. It’s a recording of artists playing instruments.  Whether it’s a recording or live it’s still music.  Not sure how this would take any enjoyment out of the hobby.  Seems like an irrelevant distinction within the context of how people listen or how they build their systems. 

@immatthewj ....for yours unruly, it only made me worse and more demanding of being ’closer to the edge’....

That’s interesting, @asvjerry . Back in those days (and two or three years ago I practically quit drinking, so I guess I’ll include drinking while listening as "those days") I found it easier to relax and let my imagination roam free when I was listening, and therefore I was more forgiving of masterings and recordings than I am now.

Which is not to say that all I listen to now is source material that I, personally, consider to be "audiophile grade," but I do find it difficult to listen to something, for example, that is flat and lifeless or harsh and grainy.

As soon as we turn on our equipment, we are NOT listening to music - we are listening to reproductions of music on our equipment.

This is a FULL STOP moment. None of us are listening to music on our systems, which truly invalidates the performance vs. sound conundrum that is discussed above!

This strikes me as absurd. Even if we were all in the original venue or recording studio, what we would hear would differ for each of us due to differences in our hearing!

Mozart, Ellington or Hendrix heard on a transistor radio is still Mozart, Ellington or Hendrix...

At least to those of us who play, music is not defined by sonics.

Following your line of reasoning, every one who enjoys visual art should stop kidding themselves that what they see and enjoy at home in the form of photographic reproductions of paintings is not art.

Why do we listen to music?

Dancing, Sex, Communicate with the Gods 

Influence Nature, Communal bonding, Eliminate Stress

Honor the Gods, Enlightenment, Impress the neighbors

Politics, Religion, Hedonism, Sophistication, Economic

Protest, Frenzy, Reduce fear. Catharsis, Competition 

Insecurity, Boastfulness, Fad, Being cool, relive the past

Experience musical genius. 

That's it...Mozart and dancing.

mrdecibal are you related to mrtennis? What was the question again? My attention span is not what it used to be to digest such a lengthy post..

@immatthewj ....for yours unruly, it only made me worse and more demanding of being 'closer to the edge'....

But, such as it is......

Back when I was drinking and/or indulging in the recreational use of illicit and licit drugs while I was listening, my standards were different.  

I have read most of these posted here today and I see many experiences are similar to mine. This is my first tweet. I'm retired now and have spent more time on the hobby than most people I know. Since my first pocket radio or the 8 track player I bolted under my Mustang dash with 6×9 speakers, I have upgraded to the home stereo I have today. The type of music I tend to enjoy is a good melody with comprehensible lyrics. Strings, drums and vocals move me most. Even now I'm finding little tweeks to my system that improve sound reproduction to my ears. It really is a personal experience which will not matter to others. I've used room correction for years which was a selling feature of my controller. Lately I prefer it to be switched off. Go figure...tweeks. 

@immatthewj ....*wry Grin*  Oh...damn....and here I thought it was just another off-the-scruff absurdism from yours unruly..... ;)

One can only thumb wrestle over cables, connectors, and the plethora of products that flow off keys around here that after awhile the only subject on the last page of the mise-en-scene is each others' obviously flawed perception of how another is getting It Wrong.....?!

Hendrix was right.... "...gotta gotta gotta get away...." *LOL*phew* ;)

@inagroove I regularly listen to mediocre recordings with excellent musicianship and composition, so I am not quite sure what you mean, other than to guess, you might be the type of audiophile who listens differently than I do. As long as you are happy. Someone above mentioned they could not listen to SRV, and I am guessing their taste in music is different than mine. The reality is, our recordings "are of music", chosen by the musicians and producers as being good enough (musical performance and composition) to mass produce for us, the listeners. Don't get me wrong, as I do appreciate excellent recording quality. My system is startling in it's delivery, but I am all about the music, first. There has not been a hifi / audio system that I have heard playing recordings that approaches live unamplified music, even systems using 30 IPS mastering machines / tapes, which has been the best source of recorded music that I have heard. I believe I found my answers to my questions, thank you, and I am not surprised by some of the responses. Enjoy! My best, MrD.

@ mfili35

Mr. Parson was correct, and perhaps not for the reason some folks think.

You stated: "Alan Parsons puts a lot of time into their mixes and mastering once said people don't buy equipment to listen to our music they buy our music to listen to their equipment"

As soon as we turn on our equipment, we are NOT listening to music - we are listening to reproductions of music on our equipment.

This is a FULL STOP moment.  None of us are listening to music on our systems, which truly invalidates the performance vs. sound conundrum that is discussed above!

To give this idea some perspective, I was recently listening to several recordings from the true Analog Days - 1910 to 1915 to be exact...

Back then, the compression waves produced by voices and instruments were directed into a large horn that had a diaphragm at the horn's apex.  This diaphragm was connected to a stylus (think cutter-head) that carved lines into wax that was adhered to a spinning cylinder.  This process created an ANALOG of the music...

To listen to MUSIC, go to a concert (or play some yourself).

Well, it gives us all something to troll each over....;)

I think you are on to something, @asvjerry .

@ mrdecibel, you stated "How is it that anyone can put tone, sound staging, or anything else with the "sound" before the performance."

I understand your position, but I think your premise is flawed. 

The issue is not performance/composition VERSUS sonic reproduction .  The issue at hand is - what is the result of the performance/composition AND sound (sonic character of the recording/playback processes).  These elements are synergistic (or at least additive).

Viewed another way, better performances/compositions are necessary, but not sufficient... AND  better sounding recordings/gear improve the experience of ALL recordings. You need BOTH.

IMO - You can not truly appreciate musicianship and composition when listening to poorly engineered recordings (I just gave away ~600 LPs of this type).  Conversely, great recordings of mediocre performances are equally unsatisfying (I also gave away ~100 LPs of this type).

Give it some thought... I hope you find your answers satisfying.

Great comments above. I was not stating my way of listening was the best or right way of listening, although for me, it certainly is. I gave up my career as an audio consultant a bit earlier than I had anticipated, because many customers were more into the equipment and gear (just like a guy on yt who deals with the most expensive available) rather than the music. The music leads me to better gear, not the other way around. I understand all views, and I promise I am not judging....just questioning. When sitting by the pool, the pair of wall hanging Polk Atrium speakers still bring me the joy of music, and there is no problem following the tunes. When in my vehicle, the same. The hobby is wonderful, for whatever the personal goal is. To each his/her own might be....ymmv etc. I appreciate the comments and camaraderie shown here and wish my best to you all. Always, MrD.

Most of the modern age speakers tend to be more clinical and revealing with all kinds of detail and somehow people really like this, at least in the show room it’s impressive.

But then when they take it back home and say wow this is very fatiguing and where is the enjoyment. My older speakers from 20 years ago can be arguably more enjoyable even though they have less detail qualities. But they certainly have a really nice soundstage and fill the room.

So I take to heart with what thread originator is saying in his massive paragraph

@8th-note Good analogy and one I often use.

@ozzy62  + 1 more.

@ OP

There is much information on our recordings, and generally, many of these recordings are just so so with the fidelity.

I've often heard about the bad recordings.   and how the stereo which pointed out these bad recordings were accurate. Those which make them sound better are supposedly "colored". I remember starting down this audiophile trail and having albums & CD's that were unlistenable. But as my system has become better and better I have found that these unlistenables became more listenable until I'm not sure I have any vinyl left that doesn't sound pretty good. Of course, I haven't played "Layla" in a long time which may be 6the final test subject. Being a musician also, I also value the musicianship. So it is a balance of ALL the music attributes and a good system brings more music to my liking because of its ability to sound somewhat live instead of a recording

@ezwind

Understanding is the key to stop sociopathy.

I am bringing this up again, because I do not understand the mentality of folks who listen differently than I.

I'm glad that you remember your Dad like that.  Mine was an EE and skeptical (to say the least) about unmeasurable sonic nuances. Still, it made me smile when he got a look at my stuff and marveled that I had equipment with "bottles"!  When he passed I found myself building a 2A3 amp almost reflexively.

@immatthewj

I do not understand the mentality of folks who listen differently than I

"My way is the right way so therefore yours is wrong."

I'm not sure how you get to that interpretation of the OP's statement. He said he didn't understand why some people listen differently than he does. He never said anything about whether he or those people were right or wrong.

I'm going to use a couple of car analogies.

If I am taking a scenic drive it is much more enjoyable in a clean Lexus than a rusty Yugo with dirty windows. It's the same scenery but the experience of driving a nice car is, for me, much better. I can enjoy the drive in both cars but give me the Lexus any day.

Decades ago, in the age of AM car radios, a guy I met at a conference turned out to be an audiophile and we were discussing our hobby. I mentioned the "goose bump test" for audio systems and he said, "Yeah, but I can get goose bumps listening to the car radio." I thought for a second and agreed.

Bottom line, I like listening to music whether it's high fidelity or not. The only exception is a few rock concerts I've attended where the sound was painfully loud and distorted. But give me good music with a poor recording and I can get plenty of goose bumps.

@larsman

YMMV but I’ve experienced a big (!) difference in the foot tapping factor when changing integrateds. My current Hegel H390 really moves the music along. Its predecessors by contrast were downright sluggish by comparison. And it is not dependent upon the music being played. BTW, I didn’t know what I’d been missing in this regard until I experienced it for myself.

Its funny when I think of equipment churner homes I've been to and see literally hundreds of thousands dollars worth of equipment stacked up in boxes or sitting unused on component racks. And then I listen to their 'reference' system which has  a mixture of some very nice equipment alongside lesser components, and this carelessly set up in just an ordinary room. Sound quality serious lacking for me, yet they hear it as state of the art. In my mind I'm thinking about how I could make their system sing with a more sympathetic partnering of equipment they already have in house, alongside some work on room and AC quality. Don't have the heart or lack of grace to criticize when they appear this content so I keep my mouth shut.

Used to attend audio shows quite frequently, often amazed at what passed as good sound, same with audio dealers. And the music played same issue.

Over time I've come to accept that people are into this audiophile thing for all sorts of reasons. Same thing with perceptions of good sound. While I may be curious about what makes people tick, simply not in my purview to judge them, I do my thing, they do theirs.

How can you have your pudding if you don't eat your meat?

Every "performance" is different.

For instance, there is a big difference between watching a 3 man folk piece in a small venue and a full blown Hans Zimmer concert with a full orchestra and all kinds of electronic elements fused together....Or go to a metal concert or maybe you’re watching some North African or Asian musicians who are singing in a language you may not know or playings instruments you don’t know about....How a listener may get into such different performances (accommodates it in his physical/mental space) is its own phenomenon.

You may want to use familiar pieces to tune/tweak your rig, of course. But, if it is a constant thing, it could imply that one’s playlist is a bit restricted, i.e., isn’t too big or eclectic enough. There’s a saying, "familiarity breeds contempt"....i.e., if someone’s listening to the same familiar piece over and over, he may not appreciate the performance all that much anymore and get too focused on nitpicking the audiophile parameters.

Is it because I was a singer / vocalist in my youth? Is it because I was around musicians who shared the joy of "music"? Is it because at a very early age, I was introduced to big band music ....

I’ve been playing a violin since i was single digits old, i am an instrument enthusiast, but, not a pro, i.e., it isn’t my livelihood. But, I hang out with a couple of pro musicians (it is their livelihood). We may get together out of nowhere and be in a creative space together. But, if i were to record some of it and try to listen to it, it typically is a let down...because it rarely captures that creative moment. But, if it was some random recording from an unknown artist, i.e., i wasn’t there when it was recorded, I can accept it as is and enjoy it for what it is... unless there are glaring errors with how it was mastered or something. Musicians need to get paid and i can live without nitpicking someone else’s music.

I've always wondered about people saying a sound system 'got their foot tapping' or something like that. To me, it was music and a beat that got my foot tapping, whatever it was played on. In the 60's, it was often a hand-held transistor radio. Foot had no problem tapping when Beatles, Stones, etc etc came on. My big audiophile system will not get my foot tapping if it's not playing a song conducive to it. 

 I am blessed. Not only am I content with my current mostly vintage system, I'll be way more than content with my pop's system when I can set it up. It'll be like Christmas. So why am I blessed? Simple: I can step off the upgrade treadmill. Sure I'll continue to look at tweaks like maybe a new cartridge occasionally or room treatments once I get a new room in our next home. I recently upgraded my headphones. But I need not suffer the "wonderful anguish" of which new speakers or amplifier to $pending kilobucks on. I just don't need to. LPs? New jazz is always welcome but classical? Pop left me 2,300 LPs If I can't find something to enjoy in there something is wrong with me! I think I'm set.

All of this to say that now I can focus on enjoying the music a bit more. Am I gloating? Well, maybe a little... 

Happy listening.

I would probably NOT listen to neither SRV nor Simon-Garfunkel nor to most of the RR Hall of Fame or other pop. Too trivial and too boring even if my system can shine on these artists that I don't care much about.

I consider myself tune-holic and I mostly hunt for new stuff and new talents that I'm interested listening. There's some of collector left in me when I also hunt for forgotten rare releases that to me sounds like a newly discovered music/band or artist.

I forgot when I last time Pink Floyd was sounding from my system and I'm sure it was that original and underrated Syd Barret's Pink Floyd. 

Guys, we a different brains.  We put different values on different things.  I have a get-together once a month with about 8-10 friends at anybodys house.  Some guys have mediocre stereos at best. Bose, 70's receivers etc. One out of ten is interested in my stereo and asks any questions about it. Most are indifferent or don't care.  We all get along great but everyone has a different approach to music and how well it is produced.  But what music we play is THE most important thing.

“We see what is behind our eyes, not what is in front of them”. I cannot recall who said that but it informs in so many ways. We all bring our own experiences, preferences, history and attitudes to the listening of music. I don’t see any right or wrong as was mentioned by others here. In the end, listening to music on a stereo is not that important in the large scope of life. I don’t take it too seriously.

I subscribe to a couple of audio publications and assume that most people here do as well. When I get the magazines the very first thing I read are the music reviews even though I am anxious to rip into one of the mega buck component articles that will lusciously describe an item I will never be able to own or afford. I have never understood why those music reviews are in the back of the magazine instead of the front because like I said they are the first thing I read.

Alan Parsons puts a lot of time into their mixes and mastering once said people don't buy equipment to listen to our music they buy our music to listen to their equipment

There is no right or wrong way to do this. 

 Thanks @ozzy62     One would hope, transiting these forums, that conclusion would have become obvious by now..*sigh*

Well, it gives us all something to troll each over....;)

(...kidding...mabbe...😏...)

Good gravy, the either-or conundrum again. The Internet gives us infinite choices. We can have it all if you are willing to explore the glorious choices.

I love listening to music. I am not particularly interested in the performers. I know a number of folks that play an instrument and they are fascinated with the performers and how they are getting the sounds, or the composition. They listen very differently than I do. I love The Art of Noise as well as symphonies. I get great joy from well reproduced music. For me that is the gestalt… the full spectrum of what music is… rhythm and pace as well as detail and imaging.

I have been led astray in the past by getting too fascinated by being able to hear more minor details and let the music suffer and my system began only sounding great with perfect recordings. So, pursuing high end sound can influence what and how you listen.

There are folks that constantly swap equipment, perhaps enjoying the evaluation process more than actually sitting and listening to music. Some folks own two or more high end systems with vastly different sounds (like solid state and tube) enjoying the sound quality to match their mood.

I like the direct emotional link to the music. One that draws me in and makes me close my eyes and sway. Making most recordings sound great. So, that is the kind of system I put together… it excels balance between all the aspects… detail, bass, tonal balance, imaging, rhythm and pace… etc.

@mrdecibel

I’ve always regarded myself first and foremost as a music lover but if I didn’t care about sonics I wouldn’t be typing this!

Stiil, I want to be carried away by the emotional/physical/aesthetic aspects when listening. Carried away from what? From thinking!  I don’t want to be in left brain mode, analyzing resolution or sound-staging or whatever. That’s simply not why I listen, or look at art, or read poetry, for that matter. But I recognize this is just one approach.

@toddalin 

Good post!

As I listen to SRV, just as an example, there are three musicians working together to create a "performance". How is it that anyone can put tone, sound staging, or anything else with the "sound" before the performance.

Because the engineer worked so hard that allows you to really believe that there are "three" musicians working together "in space" rather than just listening to two speakers placed in a room.

There is much information on our recordings,

And without the right gear set up the right way, you will never realize it all.   And even then, that last bit is the real challenge.

and generally, many of these recordings are just so so with the fidelity.

Unfortunate though it may be.  But I still listen to them.

In fact, why do many listeners only listen to top notch recordings of higher fidelity, of the "sound", rather than appreciate those qualities I look and listen for. Is it because I was a singer / vocalist in my youth? Is it because I was around musicians who shared the joy of "music"? Is it because at a very early age, I was introduced to big band music and eclectic performances by so many, via my dad (he would have been 100 today; happy birthday dad).

Hardly.  I played clarinet in the school band from 5th through 12th grade, backed up the vocal group on organ, and was a piano major my first year of college.  And I played keyboards in rock bands in the lates 60s and early 70s.

From an early age mom listened to "show tunes" and we had a big Magnavox console.

Yes, I consider myself an audiophile, because I spend money on gear and am careful with my dedicated room....my system allows me to hear more of the performance.

As do I, but I don't spend tons of money on gear.  I spend my time making and refining my own speakers and crossovers as well as accessories to make other's products work better.  My speakers were designed and voiced in the room in which they are used, to my taste. I know of no manufacturer that specifically does this.

I went to the Home Entertainment Show and listened to systems of well over 6 figures, and none could image like mine nor did they present as much "realism" of a rock band playing there in the room.

But, it is the "music", the "performance", that matters most to me.

I on the other hand will listen to music where I don't really care for the genre/artist, but listen to how the engineer put it all together.

I especially love finding "Easter Eggs."

I want the world and I want it now. 🧐

There is no right or wrong way to do this. For some it’s the journey and not the destination, so trying new gear can be the most important part of this hobby for some. Others, such as yourself, approach it from a different place.

Some car enthusiasts like to drag race, some like the twisty stuff, and others still just like to customize, wax and polish. But all of them have that one thing in common.

I like to listen to the equipment more than the performance. Some exceptions,  but I enjoy picking out new details in a recording I've heard hundreds of times. 

I do not understand the mentality of folks who listen differently than I

"My way is the right way so therefore yours is wrong."

I like listening to music whether it's live at a concert or in a bar.But I listen whether it makes me happy or sad.It can be on a car radio or a high end audio equipment. I like the performance, hearing a singer doing a fantastic job on a song is what ,I really like to hear.I find that alot on you tube.