If you were serious about sound you would...

Many newer smart tvs apply very sophisticated digital image processing  in order to get the most out of their devices and in a/b comparison I have observed the results can be more eye catching than the real thing.  
 

Apply some effective digital image processing and most any picture can be made to do certain things better than real life.  
 

Same true with modern digital audio.  Anything is possible.   Merely reproducing the source accurately leaves a lot of possibilities on the table.  

 

@donavabdear , I don’t think you understood my post correctly.

Perhaps my fault.

Look, the premise of a $5k preamp with $100k speakers (add whatever multiplier here you’d like) is ridiculous.

My experiences in a recording studio were many, many moons ago. Think early ’90’s. I’m sure things have changed, but the premise stands.

 

I looked up Flood Studios and they’re using Focal Studio Monitors w/ Be tweeters for mixing tracks. Not cheap, sure, but surely nothing like what you have listed.

It seems Abbey Roads now uses Bryston as well as some older Classe amps. They do seem to have a lot of B&W home speakers in some of the rooms, but they’re also using studio monitors in the booths as well. Certainly nothing in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, though.

I dunno, not a recording studio engineer.

I DO know that the recording/mixing is done on monitors because they are analytical and unforgiving. They’re not designed to sound pleasing, they’re designed to be accurate.

I do think there’s an art in there somewhere. Something professional engineers know and can do, that makes the sound on the a$$ end of the recording sound excellent. It doesn’t sound that way in the studio, though, or when you’re mixing it down. That’s why they get the big bucks.

I would argue that the end result most certainly CAN be better than the original equipment it was recorded on.

It’s why some people prefer tube pre’s, amps, and warm speakers in their house.

Depeche Mode sounds great on a tube setup. One of my favorites.

Also why upscaling, digital filtering, etc...on many modern players is so desirable on older copies of recordings.

DSOTM sounds excellent on SACD.

JM2CW. You do you, man. Enjoy the journey! Happy Listening.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lalitk- you don’t know what you are talking about. I would take ps audio equipment over most of what you own.

If you want the true sound, get it at the source, before the recording. The amps that rock/blues/jazz groups use for example are fairly cheap, like the Fender tube amps or Marshall amps.

If you ever wish to recreate the sound of a rock/blies/jazz concert, it would cost much to get the exact amps and speakers that the band uses. 

@coralkong The producers job in the recording studio is to help the musician get the most out of his own talent, the engineer puts the technology together to facilitate that vision. Often the producer doesn't want some instruments to sound their best as far as what the instrument maker wanted when he made the instrument, distortion, overdriving, tape saturation all kinds of "mistakes" that were used to create art. I'm not talking about that I'm talking about what should be the the heart of any good playback system. For me I have some tube amps a tube preamp and I love the way they sound but they are not accurate because I have a mixing studio in the same room as my audiophile system. If you love the music then you sorta are committed to the way the musician and producer wanted the recording to sound the day they mixed and mastered the song. Accuracy not your preference is what I mean.

So If you take 2 channels of high end studio preamps SSL, and run it through studio standard processing Avid Pro Tools, then play them back on a speaker system at least as revealing as the studio monitors (that is easy for good audiophile speakers in general) you have a limit of quality. When we buy every expensive audiophile equipment to playback these songs we are not revealing what the musicians and producers envisioned to the point that our equipment is better than the studios we are in no-mans-land because the engineer and the producer haven't heard the things in the original recording that we have and that is also inaccurate.

Also Abby Road Studios uses lots of audiophile equipment because they make a lot of money from it, product placement is the name for it in the industry. Speakers are the things that can be the most problematic I only mentioned the Bluehorn speakers because they use newest tech. 

If you were serious about sound you would build a dedicated audio room as a starting point.