Should We Prioritize Detail In Our Assessment Of Audio Quality?
So many times I’ve read posts, measuring the audio quality of components and recordings, by how much detail they offer. Especially where it pertains to DAC’s and streaming devices. Whenever there’s a thread comparing Qobuz with Tidal, etc… I find multiple posts attempting to win an argument, based on the claim that one streaming service offers more detail than the other.
I like detail but to me, it’s just one characteristic among many. If I sit in different parts of a concert hall, I may hear more detail in one place over another but it doesn’t make or break my desire to sit in one location over another. So many Audiogoners have stated their preference of analogue over digital but in my experience, digital playback usually reveals the most detail. How do others interpret the emphasis of detail when evaluating the level of audio quality in their listening experiences?
Absolutely true and well stated. This is the good live venue effect where you immediately/spontaneously "fall into the music".
Charles
|
@charles1dad Yes digital has come a long way but has equally taken an interesting turn back to the R2R designs for good reason. The R2R designs in general are more musical, some not as detailed but they underpin the music better. |
To answer the OP question: we should prioritize whatever we like. And if you don’t know what you like, sorry, you have to figure it out for yourself. It’s not an overnight process. You know when you know. There is no “formula”, no magic number, regardless of what the “measurmentalists” preach. We are human beings, and cannot possibly ALL like the same thing, the same “measurement”.
Best regards, Captain Obvious |
