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

LOL Radio...

Ok yes hearing the music through my system is beautiful. Alot better than the random. 

Again, the false dichotomy rears its head. 

Hi-end audio allows you to hear the music the way the artist intended you to hear it. 

That doesn’t mean that you don’t listen to great music that was not optimally recorded. You make do with what you got. 

@mrdecibel

Haha, speak for yourself. Boombox keeps things in perspective.

Consider that many songs are mastered to sound good on a boombox. So I am told.

I'm a bit confused with the point of this thread

There are 100 ways for one person to listen to one piece of music.  

So not only is each person having a different experience based on what they focus on and what it does for them, but each person's listening experience often changes as we go through time (and equipment in many cases) 

Music works when it connects for us and there's no formula for that.  

How one determines what their enjoyment for Live Music encounters and Recorded Music Encounters means, is usually to be discovered, that the meaning is quite a lot of different things, and is more a unique holding to each individual.

Music stimulates, as well as brings forward memories and is also a experience to be encountered, that is looked forward to. How individuals respond to these moments of a musical encounter also makes each unique in how they place a importance on a musical encounter, albeit either Live or Recorded.

As a very basic description about my own interest in music encounters that have been an important part of how I use my spare time. I view my encounters with Music as a form of entertainment. I only recollect experiencing Live Music with the intent to be in an audience as part of a social experience, from that point of being in attendance, I had no further input to how I was to experience the music encounter, it was all pre-arranged in the hands of others .

Listening to recorded music evolved differently, as there is market solely in place for this. Choice for devices as a Source and Supporting Equipment, Brands and Sales Spiel are becoming much more familiar as an information that is needing to be navigated through. 

Radio introduced most to a broad range of music, and I still use a proportion of listening to Radio for this purpose today, there are a few very good slots where new Bands are given there Debut on air, and other unknown Performers always show up during a session. Cell Phone Apps, can make identifying and logging the names of unfamiliar performers very easy to achieve.  

From Radio experiences, the collection of Recorded Music commenced, the size of a collection would become a thing for a period of time, which then evolved into a keen interest on the betterment of the equipment to be used for replaying recorded music.

I will have to admit at this stage, I was one of few in group, who were divided between Vinyl and CD as Source, to which I was Wed to Vinyl for more than 30 Years before CD became a shared Source in the system.

I would also suggest this is around the first time I was to become familiar with term like HiFI and Audiophile.

Today I have the knowledge, the origins of the common usage of High Fidelity extends back close to 100 years, where the term was first seen to be coined for use on the public in general. The term was seemingly used to accompany Film Poster Adverts on Bill Boards to promote the notion the Orchestral Sound Track for the Film was an improved sound, I believe Bell Industries were recording Orchestras for the Film Industry and used the term to promote their recording methods.

The use of Audiophile and Hi-Fi came approx' 20 Years later and are both terms that are to be found used in marketing spiel used in the 50'S.

The use of Audiophile and HiFi have caught on and as they are daily in use, a meaning has been attached to create a common interpretation for the usage.

Accompanying the evolvement of the Term Audiophile and HiFi and the commonly seen description given for the words usage. There has been growing in parallel, the evolvement of the use of Technical Talk. Descriptions commonly seen to be passed around, that is easily identified for being a Technical Talk, whether accurate or not, is today seemingly a addition to the interest in Audio Equipment that gives an individual a credence in what they have purported.

There are a selection of individuals who are attaching to their interest in Audio Equipment a sub-interest, which detracts from where the sole use of the audio equipment is to replay recorded music. A sub-interest which is being seen, is one where it is a necessity to analyze the Technical Side of the equipment to be used. With forums being easily entered into, there is now a large window for the content to be discovered.

I myself see the understanding how to better audio equipment and the listening to recorded music as two different hobbies. Listening to music stirs one type of emotional interaction, where as using intelligence putting ideas into practice, is quitr different.

The average Film Watcher with an intent to be entertained, can end up really enjoy the film, without needing to be the Director, Camera man, Editor, even when the fantasy of the film has taken hold and the watcher is fancying themselves as being an individual playing a role in the movie.

In Audio, the listener can in most occasions become the Air Guitarist, Drummer, Conductor of the Orchestra, and enjoy that moment to its very fullest.

In some cases though, the design for the Volume Control, Capacitor C3 used  in the circuit, or the shape of the Wave in the product reviews analysis let the performance down, to the point it was not able to be enjoyed.        

Its all between the ears!  There is as much difference in people's hearing as there are personalities. What matters is what you like. Like the saying goes, one mans junk, is another man's treasure. One mans dream, is another man's nightmare. One mans audiophile system is another man's Walkman.

Sounds like you think you are alone in putting together a good sounding audio system and realize you can hear all the things important to you with more clarity and detail allowing you to feel the intentions of the artist.

my goals in audio system build out is to hear more detail and nuance of the musicians performance. I have put together such an audio system based on my greater connection with the artists performance.

many folks buy new equipment because it has more watts or a cool light or because its look tickles their fancy. But we need them to keep this market alive  

I think 90% of wine “connoisseurs” are fake and have no idea what good wine is and chase the good review wines from what mags they read. Same thing pretty much in all hobbies  

@desktopguy , I meant to also say that adding music to the equation could turn it into a world I didn’t want to leave. I remember the first time I really truly ’heard" Legend Of A Mind, I was like, ". . . yeah, maaaaan . . . nowww I get it . . .".

Anyway,  I remember a discussion of synesthesia some time ago, and at the time I thought I might have a mild form of it. Letters of the alphabet all do have certain colors for me, and therefore, for me, all words have a color. Also as far as music goes, it does induce colors in my mind; however, not nearly as profoundly as what you described.

"to obtain what you sre describing always took/takes ingesting  chemicals"

You're quite right. Later on, when I was in college, I fully explored those chemicals. Sometimes those experiences were wonderful ... occasionally the opposite.

But in any case, hallucinations from mescaline or LSD seemed a bit familiar to me, in quality if not degree.

I didn’t know it then, but I had quite a case of synesthesia: whenever I heard music and closed my eyes, I hallucinated wild colors and architectural/geometric shapes.

@desktopguy

I can see where this might be a double edged sword. Although on a good evening or afternoon music can move me quite deeply, to obtain what you sre describing always took/takes ingesting  chemicals, and I will say that I enjoy(ed) it immensely.

However, I can also see where this could become problematic:

I experienced music then as a deeply moving rabbit hole I had trouble climbing out of when it was done.

My father had his issues, but one outstandingly good thing he did was to expose my twin brother and me to music from the first days home after we were born. There are some amusing pictures of Michael & I sitting in our twin high chairs, throwing food around (no more than 2-3 yrs old), rocking to Duke Ellington or Count Basie LPs. We also heard all the Beethoven symphonies, some Brahms, Mozart, and lots of Bach.

As soon as we could walk we were instructed in how to safely play LPs, and did so incessantly. I didn’t know it then, but I had quite a case of synesthesia: whenever I heard music and closed my eyes, I hallucinated wild colors and architectural/geometric shapes. I thought everyone did that. I experienced music then as a deeply moving rabbit hole I had trouble climbing out of when it was done. Other than the playback gear and lower incidence of synesthesia, very little has changed.

My wife thinks I don’t listen enough to her- seems a common theme for husbands

Interesting article in PMA magazine titled: "If You’re An Audiophile, Watch Your Back". I believe many who post here experiences much of what is spoken, including me. A good read. Enjoy! MrD.

https://pmamagazine.org/if-youre-an-audiophile-watch-your-back/#:~:text=If%20you%2C%20like%20me%2C%20sometimes,can%20improve%20your%20listening%20experiences!

It is a quick easy read, and I could relate to a lot of what it included.

For example:

"Sound quality is an important part of the music listening experience. A great example of this, in my opinion, is the underappreciation of orchestral music. I firmly believe the reason a lot of people can’t get into this timeless genre is due to the horrible sound quality they’ve heard it in. They may actually like it on a system that reveals more of the intricacies and melodies in the compositions. Simply put, better sound quality allows one to hear more music and less murky garbage. This means that the more complex the musical arrangements—the more that’s going on in this music—the more the listener will benefit from hearing the music played through better—more revealing—sound, which will make better sense of it than bad sound will."

Classical music is not my favorite genre, but last summer when I was auditioning/breaking in a new pair of speakers I did play several CDs I had of orchestral music and I actually did derive a certain level of appreciation from certain aspects of it by paying attention to certain details that I had never noticed before. Jazz is another genre that I only gained an appreciation of as my system evolved.

The author writes this paragraph:

"It’s like audiophiles who obsess with the choice of speakers, but not much else. I’ve heard systems where 90% of the system budget went into buying expensive speakers, only to have them incorrectly placed and connected to inadequate gear that made them underperform. Such a lopsided system never sounds as good as one with more modestly-priced speakers carefully placed and installed, driven by quality electronics."

And I have always thought that the electronics up front dictated the quality of the final sonic result out of the speakers.

Interesting article in PMA magazine titled: "If You’re An Audiophile, Watch Your Back". I believe many who post here experiences much of what is spoken, including me. A good read. Enjoy! MrD.

It's because you had involvement with music.  I, having a background playing guitar, also appreciate the nuances of the performance.  Even in a studio recording I hear those little details like the strings rattling against the forward fret because the action on the neck is wrong or the player just didn't press hard enough

@logistics , do you hear those details on poorly recorded or poorly mixed or poorly  mastered source material?  

Music=Life. Take it as it comes.

It's because you had involvement with music.  I, having a background playing guitar, also appreciate the nuances of the performance.  Even in a studio recording I hear those little details like the strings rattling against the forward fret because the action on the neck is wrong or the player just didn't press hard enough.  

I have always loved music and have been striving for better sound for fifty plus years. Music plays in my home several hours a day and each day I try sit with my eyes closed and listen for an album or two.

Hi fidelity matters because it lets you fully hear what the artist intended. Therefore, your proposition is false: there is no dichotomy, no contradiction, no one way better than the other. They are the same. 

I do a mix of both. There are times I’m listening to how well my stsyem sounds. And  times I’m just listening to music I like. Ideally all the music I grew up with and love would also sound amazing but sadly that’s not the case. Luckily I’ve developed an appreciation of bluesy Jazz, mostly acoustic that also sounds great. But the stuff I grew up with that I have a stronger emotional attachment to tends to be fairly poorly recorded. But sure, I still listen to it often. 

If it doesn't make my toes tap it is no good to me.  In other words if I don't like the song it doesn't matter how good it sounds I still won't like it.  However when I listen to the stuff I enjoy I want all the musical nuance I can find from my system.

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

@ghdprentice, exactly my sentiments.  My system makes everything sound good.  Shitty recordings sound decent, excellent recordings sound excellent.  This works very well for me because despite the money that I have invested, paradoxically I listen now to a lot of bootlegs from the ‘70’s, which sometimes are good and sometimes not so good.  But my system has just the right balance for me.  I am happy.  And I’d like to put in a plug for the Shunyata Everest, my last acquisition that finished off that sound and depth of stage that I have been looking for.

Hopefully last response to this rabbit hole

Once music is recorded/reproduced you leave the world of music and enter the world of music reproduction, which is why we gather in this forum to discuss gear, not performers/performances (unless it is to clarify a point regarding gear).

This is patently false given the topic named Music with over 10,000 threads in it on this forum.  Without having perused them I feel safe in assuming many folks here have gathered to discuss music likely outside the context of their gear.

"None of us are listening to music on our systems". Keep telling yourself that. I am done with this ridiculous commentary of yours, however, I still wish you my best. MrD.

Claiming a recording IS real music is analogous to saying a photograph of my dog IS my dog (without the fur :-). Really not the same thing at all.

No not at all. It comes down to your definition of music and I choose to agree with Wikipedia’s. I don’t know who’s definition you are using.

From Wikipedia:

Music is the arrangement of sound to create some combination of form, harmony, melody, rhythm, or otherwise expressive content.

Music may be performed using a wide variety of musical instruments, including the human voice. It can also be composed, sequenced, or otherwise produced to be indirectly played mechanically or electronically, such as via a music box, barrel organ, or digital audio workstation software on a computer.

There is nothing to say that the sequence of sounds must be produced "on the fly" and this last paragraph would include recorded music which is indirectly played.

Correction. Laptops are now being used instead of boom boxes....I am dating myself.

So, I suppose @inagroove , that what you are spending all of your money on with equipment / gear / room acoustics is to reproduce something (music) that is fake? Why not just have a boom box, which btw, many musicians in some instances use to play back the recordings of themselves playing / singing / performing during a practice. Recorded music is not music? This is a 1st for me, as I never heard this from anyone before. I believe you are the one that is different from the masses...but it is quite ok. Individual thinking makes us unique and different from one another. I like your equipment, but I would have a completely different arrangement of the gear / speakers if that were my room. My best and Enjoy! MrD.

@inagroove music is defined as “vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) combined in such a way as to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion.”  There is no requirement that it be live.  Your dog analogy represents the distinction between a “live” dog and a photograph of a dog.  They are both dogs but different representations of it.  Live music and recorded music are both music just different representations of it.  What happens when live music is amplified and played through speakers?  Does this mean it’s not music since it’s being reproduced by microphones, processed by electronics, and playing back through speakers which may or may not capture exactly the sound produced by an unamplified instrument?

@ toddalin

Your comments are missing the point. 

Once music is recorded/reproduced you leave the world of music and enter the world of music reproduction, which is why we gather in this forum to discuss gear, not performers/performances (unless it is to clarify a point regarding gear).

If you are still scratching your head, perhaps an explicit analogy will help - 

Claiming a recording IS real music is analogous to saying a photograph of my dog IS my dog (without the fur :-).   Really not the same thing at all.

Once this is concept is clear, 'music vs gear' comments (which started this thread) in this forum are inappropriate.  There are more appropriate forums in which to discuss music.

And yes, Loops are processed, not live music.  I thought that was obvious.

No further comments needed.

Agreed "music" does not have to be live to be music.

But even a live performance performed though any sort of public address system is subject to many of the same "flaws" as a recorded track.

What of the music that is performed simultaneously with background recordings?  Is that "live?"

What of a performer who "loops" a sound byte?

How about the guitar player using an Echoplex where the echo is created through the use of a tape loop?

@inagroove there is no requirement on the definition of music that it applies only to live music.  It’s music whether it’s live or recorded.  I do agree that there are differences between the two.  Among them being that the sound of recorded music, that a loudspeaker creates, is a facsimile of the sound created by the actual instrument and is subject to both of the influences you mention and certainly more.

@immatthewj ....! A food means of describing 'the audio experience'......

for example, that is flat and lifeless or harsh and grainy.

...comparisons with various menu marvels....(*sigh* ....I know, I know....

Happens every issue these days.

"This prototype preamp functioned like a stale tuna sandwich....." ;)

@inagroove ...Precisely, much like when film was a series of single images with the sound track added.  One's mind accepted these as smooth moving imagery.

Cut to Now:  In our shared reality, the digital means to 'do' most anything is basically Here.

AV is just one block in a very big and growing; one could conceive of an environment that could simulate an actual situation down to the smell of the space and what it felt like to be 'there'....

....comes down to the same old question...

"What's that worth to you?" *S* ;)

@ 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