Real or Surreal. Do you throw accuracy out the window for "better" sound?


I visited a friend recently who has an estimated $150,000 system. At first listen it sounded wonderful, airy, hyper detailed, with an excellent well delineated image, an audiophile's dream. Then we put on a jazz quartet album I am extremely familiar with, an excellent recording from the analog days. There was something wrong. On closing my eyes it stood out immediately. The cymbals were way out in front of everything. The drummer would have needed at least 10 foot arms to get to them. I had him put on a female vocalist I know and sure enough there was sibilance with her voice, same with violins. These are all signs that the systems frequency response is sloped upwards as the frequency rises resulting in more air and detail.  This is a system that sounds right at low volumes except my friend listens with gusto. This is like someone who watches TV with the color controls all the way up. 

I have always tried to recreate the live performance. Admittedly, this might not result in the most attractive sound. Most systems are seriously compromised in terms of bass power and output. Maybe this is a way of compensating. 

There is no right or wrong. This is purely a matter of preference accuracy be damn.  What would you rather, real or surreal?

128x128mijostyn

 

I've ran sound for hundreds of thousands of people live, recorded albums, and won Oscars for sound and in every project or concert there were always a lot of concessions and compromises to what I would have liked to do. That golden no compromises project in any field doesn't really exist. I've recorded horrible sound and not fought the producers when I should have to keep my job even on huge projects. 

Get a system that sounds most accurate. I just bought a new Boulder preamp and it changed everything I realized it is wrong to listen to extra chocolaty chocolate just because you like how that chocolate tastes. We all know the difference between sounding buttery and sounding accurate if you listen long enough. Accuracy is most important and it is what audiophiles should demand not subjective flavored sound. 
There are many reasons why engineers record projects that aren't like live acoustic performances, there is ALWAYS the annoying tendency to -add energy -to sell more music and sound different than the next studio down the hall. 
 

@mapman 
I agree with your points in many ways but I think music isn't subjective. The recorded music that comes through your system should be the same signal that comes out of everyone's system and has been molded into a very particular product. Perhaps you like or dislike aspects of that product but if you were in the room with the mastering engineer and producer when they finished the recording you would know exactly what the product was. There is no interpretation or subjective data that your consciousness defines, the info in the signal doesn't change your perception of it does. This is why accuracy is the most important part of music it doesn't matter if you enjoy it that is not the point often in art you want to make the end user uncomfortable. Movies are emotional and they are enjoyed differently by the end user mostly depending on their understanding. If the original music or movie is played back inaccurately all the craftsmanship is lost to subjective unknowns. 

So all the craftsmanship of Fleetwood Mac has been lost to the millions of people who have bought their albums, CDs, and streamed their music playing it back on less than stellar equipment?  Is that what the surviving members of Fleetwood Mac think?

@brev 

No brev, the craftsmanship of Fleetwood Mac is not lost at all (at least until Peter Green left). It is the craftsmanship of the recording engineers that is lost and the vast majority of people do not care about that at all, only people like me and donavabdear care about it. 

@donavabdear 

Don't you think that at some level what the engineers do is affected by the system they are listening to? If their systems are not accurate how can the work be accurate?  

@mijostyn 
Do I think the equipment that recording engineers use affects the recordings? That is a surprising subject and I think the answer is not really, I've listened to what great  actors sound like with my system so I instantly know how they should sound, but someone may say how do you actually know, well the answer to that is if you have lunch with that actor and really hear what their voice sounds like in real life you really know what they sound like. Also if you are used to the system that you use to record with then you hear it on movies, TV, or streaming you know if your system is preforming properly. The equipment mixers use is fairly standard in movies and varies a little more in music but generally the mixer uses the same equipment for years. 

If you record Anthony Hopkins or Tom Cruse or a famous singer that everyone is acquainted with you better believe that the producer who paid 20M$ for this talent better sound great and more importantly sound as they expected. This is another reason why accuracy is so much more important than surreal. 

Also engineers aren't robots they can mix in different sounding studios or stadiums to make an artist sound more like they are expected to, this happens if they are using equipment they are familiar with.