Jump to content

Are we approaching a stage where the art of sound reproduction is too good?


Recommended Posts

I ponder over this because recordings use mics, often close to instruments and the sound of most instruments is more mellow and pleasing buffeted by distance.  e.g. a violin can sound harsh very close up but sweet at a distance.

 

So that inspires the question about digital sound being too good and hence it reproduces some of the inherent sharpness of closely miked instruments.  Note that I'm not excusing bad digital to audio conversion that is evident in many DACs and is the cause of most harshness associated with digital.  A well engineered recording reproduced in a top audio chain with a top DAC  will not sound harsh but might still yield AQ  uncomfortably real for some ears.  This could explain why many prefer vinyl (as I did for decades) or using tubes or ......

 

All items in the audio chain alter the sound to some extent with the best of them minimising that change.  The fact there are sound alterations keeps the hi-end industry thriving because audiophiles can detect those differences, often claimed to be an upgrade improvement when in fact there has not been any progression ahead, merely a move sideways.  The previous sound the ears have become accustomed to has been altered by the new toy but that does not mean the sound is actually any better, it is just different!

 

So where does that leave the serious audiophile, anxious to achieve audio Nirvana?

 

It obviously depletes the bank account but it all points to the fact we are chasing moonbeams as there is no absolute sound and achieving a reproduction chain with minimal distortion might not end up with a sound which is musically appealing.. And that opens another Pandora Box because what is appealing to A might not be to B.  We all have unique hearing the result of genetics and individual conditioning over the years so differences in what is acceptable sound, whether item X sounds better than item Y will remain as futile to debate.  What is better for one person might not be better for another although I guess most of you are like me and hope that anything which is impressive to a lot of people will be OK for me.

 

I'm not suggesting no one should attempt to improve the sound they hear by changing items.  It IS fun to experiment and, if you can afford it, are sideways moves bad if it all gives you pleasure and your psyche tells you the  sound is better?  Bottom line is to maximise the pleasure you get from listening to recorded music but be aware that it is a bottomless pit!  I'll append a schematic of the latest audio madness here which has resulted in yet another DAC and headphone cable.  They are yet to arrive so I do not know whether I've again only moved sideways!  I'll let you know.

Headphone systems 2021.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have highlighted the above bits just to illustrate, what to me, is indicative of us having reached a later stage.  The stage I refer to is one where we have passed on from having great sound reprodu

We just love buying new toys. 

Great Thread btw.... . I do agree with the OP that sound reproduction has reached a high level .... especially as regards to hi-fi equipment. I do find the "newer" technologies too compressed/whether

OK--I'll bite!

 

As an audiophile music instrumentalist I think when you use the terms "too good" for digital recording and "uncomfortably real" for the sound I just have to smile. That is just not my general experience.

 

I do refer to the sound of real acoustic instruments in real space--as do many speaker designers (e.g. Alon Wolf of Magico; David Wilson). This is not the same as musical taste; my taste runs to valve distortions and lush harmonics. I listen to electronica sometimes as well but it's not a reference.

 

Of course there are diminishing returns on the primrose path of acquiring gear. But, the 'simplest' gear, if it is 'married' well with other components, and well-made, can give the happy illusion that there is mainly the music to enjoy. Here I mention Thorens, Clearaudio; Giesler, Chord; Magnepan and Quad; Pass Labs, Line Magnetic and Elekit (for example).

 

Your signature implies that you have "failed to learn" but I intuit (from your extensive music collection and age) that you have never relinquished your love of actual music. Isn't that the aim?

 

Just my 2c worth

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Tassie Devil said:

All items in the audio chain alter the sound to some extent with the best of them minimising that change.  The fact there are sound alterations keeps the hi-end industry thriving because audiophiles can detect those differences, often claimed to be an upgrade improvement when in fact there has not been any progression ahead, merely a move sideways.  The previous sound the ears have become accustomed to has been altered by the new toy but that does not mean the sound is actually any better, it is just different!

 

So where does that leave the serious audiophile, anxious to achieve audio Nirvana?

 

It obviously depletes the bank account but it all points to the fact we are chasing moonbeams as there is no absolute sound and achieving a reproduction chain with minimal distortion might not end up with a sound which is musically appealing.. And that opens another Pandora Box because what is appealing to A might not be to B.  We all have unique hearing the result of genetics and individual conditioning over the years so differences in what is acceptable sound, whether item X sounds better than item Y will remain as futile to debate.   What is better for one person might not be better for another although I guess most of you are like me and hope that anything which is impressive to a lot of people will be OK for me.

 

 

 

I have highlighted the above bits just to illustrate, what to me, is indicative of us having reached a later stage.  The stage I refer to is one where we have passed on from having great sound reproduction tech to a new area, where we are a market that is cultivated almost to mysticism, but certainly enough vagueness about reality and distrust of well established benchmarks.  To a point where we indeed get anxious and are spinning our wheels trying to "improve" something, that may not not be sufficiently wrong to begin with.

 

I say 'we' in the above, because I believe I can succumb to the jumping on the bus on the merry-go-round just like anyone, BUT  I am making a conscious effort to be very discerning about that which feeds audiophilia.   Some see the result as cynicism,  or want to put me in the same camp as some over in Audio Science Review.  But a visit over there can also be quite frustrating.  :) 

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

A excellent reference book for explaining the philosophical approaches to audio reproduction equipment choice , is Robert Persig's  "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle maintenance"    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_and_the_Art_of_Motorcycle_Maintenance

 

If we take the harder path ( IMO the better approach ) we begin finding detail within detail, and as the audio engineer Ben Duncan,  once said

" as one door is opened, a thousand more are flung open below it "

 

If we bother,  rather than outright reject the detail of how audio reproduction occurs, we can begin to identify shortcuts manufacturers are dazzled by, that usually result in fitting more unnecessary audio depleting parts , with the result what we end up hearing is actually much less, than was, often quite easily possible.   

 

It becomes necessary if we are to get as close as we possibly can to audio nirvana, to have some  knowledge of circuits, and their many parts. We can then much better reject what is not so good, for what is usually much better.  The opposite approach identified as the other two motorcyclists in the referenced book, would see as you say depletion of bank accounts and chasing moonbeams 

 

Anyone on the forum who has heard a amplifcation device with jfet parts fitted,  is already in the know, that understanding parts makes the biggest difference toward achieving  the elusive - but not impossible term audio nirvana

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


9 hours ago, Tassie Devil said:

We all have unique hearing the result of genetics and individual conditioning over the years so differences in what is acceptable sound, whether item X sounds better than item Y will remain as futile to debate. 

Genetics to some extent as for hearing ability but assuming your audiology hearing test shows you are normal for your age, with no significant frequency dips and bumps or lopsided hearing, we should all mostly be hearing about the same. Where it starts to unravel is the brain connected to that along with its learning, experiences, reference points, biases and denials.

 

I don’t think it’s futile to debate X better than Y, it’s not that hard. We can at least generally agree to want good all round full range sound - good detail, voice, imaging, balanced clean sound, bass depth/punch and texture, sufficient loudness without stressing the system to noticeable distortion etc.

 

With the exception of your AV processor which should be OK but not really approaching a hi end preamp, your whole system is capable of a good result.

 

I recently helped someone acquire a used $37k rrp hybrid ESL and solid state amp with accessories system that I can say that it doesn’t tick all of the above mentioned criteria, so too other $500k rrp hybrid ribbon and Magico speaker systems that I have heard. In those systems the $500k one lacked deep bass and it was tubby, the two $50k & $100k rrp Magico speaker amp systems had quite noticeable resonance in the lower bass and sounded detached from the midrange. The main advantage of those systems were they could play very loud and stay relatively composed compared to other systems, which was more important to the owners. 

 

The other issue is that audiophiles place too much trust and pride in their ability to hear well consistently, throughout their lives when the reality is less experienced ones are learning to listen early on in the journey, audio memory changes and wavers and is very fickle, with age although we get better at listening, physically your hearing ability degrades and your tastes change over time. Also if one stops the hobby and gets back into it you loose practice with it to some extent, two steps forward one/two/three back.

 

It is often difficult having other people listen to your system and they don’t hear the same things you are hearing as they are not accustomed to your system and vice versa they can hear things or faults that the owner denies, chooses to ignore or is yet to realise.

 

And let nobody say mental hearing acuity with age compensates for reduced hearing ability because there is no scientific proof of it. However, having said that most people with normal reduced hearing until late age can still hear well enough to enjoy and discern good music quality as most music content frequency is below 10khz where such people are still capable.

 

 

Edited by Al.M
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tassie Devil said:

art of sound recording

 

Art is subjective.

 

If someone wants to place the microphone close to the instrument.... inside the instrument..... 30 meters away from the instrument..... then this is an artistic choice.     It's difficult to say "good", "bad", "too good" whatever.    It's simply about what the recording artist was trying to achieve. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


16 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

 

Art is subjective.

 

If someone wants to place the microphone close to the instrument.... inside the instrument..... 30 meters away from the instrument..... then this is an artistic choice.     It's difficult to say "good", "bad", "too good" whatever.    It's simply about what the recording artist was trying to achieve. 

 

 

When I read that about the close mic on a violin,  I was put in mind of what it sounds like to sit right next to a string ensemble.   I love the lively sound of the strings up close, not smothered in room reverb.  Especially outdoors - like a quartet at a lawn wedding - beautiful.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A very thoughtful and insightful read. Going to get some real interesting replies. Mods will have to step in... again?

 

My reasoning, simplistic to the extreme is thus (otherwise l would go freaking mad...getting there anyway and broke).

 

I don't think, necessarily, that systems sound better. They just sound different. Or am l just being naive, to bend it to my narative, my ownworld view?

Problem is...don't we all do that?

 

For mine (and again simplistic...perhaps).

Just buy the best sounding system, to your ears, that you can afford. Trust me you will enjoy the sound.

 

There is no logical answer to this question. Never has been. Never will be.

 

But may l be so bold as to also suggest: 

It should be more about the music and not what it is played upon.

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Live vs Memorex: Two weeks ago I had the good fortune to listen to the TAS String Quartet at the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery. (Good fortune as my neighbour planned to go with a friend down the street, but he had a family matter to attend to and It was offered to me on the day - and would I like to drive her new car. Yes Indeed! 

 

The Venue was an internal room approximately 14 x 28 mtr, wooden floor, high ceilings, not many people (120?) as we were spaced apart in 2s and 3s for Covid Rules. In a word - acoustic nightmare stuff. Program was Beethoven String Quartet, Barber Adagio, and Montgomery Strum, and the music was divine! SQ was not superb. But the power and emotion from the strings vibrated throughout the room and through my body, not just my ears. Violin highs never made it completely to the rear of the rear where we sat, but it did not matter one bit. I could still elicit every note from the violins, viola and cello. Vibrations!!! Beatiful soulfull music from musicians.......The room illicited much less reverb as I thought would be present, at least at our seats, and possibly the Large Paintings on the walls absorbed more errant soundwaves. Not ideal from an audiophile point of reference, but a completely enjoyable and powerful musical experience. 

 

At home I want my system, or any system for that matter, to have a more flat frequency response, more details, etc., so that I can enjoy the music. For me the music is most important, relative to audiophilia (the hobby or disease). And as the OP, Tassie Devil (John) stated, in a way we are all chasing moonbeams. Carry On!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, needlerunner said:

 

But may l be so bold as to also suggest: 

It should be more about the music and not what it is played upon.

 

 

An excellent idea but I am not sure that everybody here would hand-over-heart agree (including myself).

 

 

If this were true the forum would be music discussion only and hardware would be 5% of what is  actually posted.

 

It's a little bit like the hackneyed phrase "just as the artist intended"  used by manufacturers when glorifying the latest product release. What the artist intended was that is would be highly likely that people would buy and enjoy their music and find a convenient means to do so.

Edited by rantan
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites


8 hours ago, Tassie Devil said:

So that inspires the question about digital sound being too good

It’s an interesting observation supported by the return of many consumers to vinyl, tube and low power class a amps. 

Good on us, maybe the collective we, are “into” the music

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we live in a time where the art of sound reproduction is too good?  I think not.  We live in a time when enough of the challenges for accurate reproduction have been overcome, and the hardware can create stunning reproduction of music.  Not many are fortunate to be able to own such equipment.  And I would have hoped that with miniaturisation, digitialization, mass productionization, etc. that entry and average-level audio reproduction would be much higher than it is now. 

 

However, this hardware potential can only be realised by the software going into it.  And that has always been subjective and subject to fashion.  Orchestral music used to be recorded at a distance, giving an "in the audience" feel.  When close-mic techniques were developed, the feeling of immediacy appealed to many, the "in the front row" or "beside the conductor" feel.  Which was better? - they have different ambience.  The answer is subjective.  And now the hardware is being compromised by other subjective decisions which degrade the sound but is considered by some to be improvements - compression, noise reduction, etc. 

 

So as far as I'm concerned, reproduction can't be too good when it captures the emotion and timbre of the moment the music was created.  It can be degraded by poor recording (eg. ultra-close microphones) and poor mastering.  And at times I'm feeling that I'm living a stage where - in general - the art of sound reproduction is too compromised.  Thank goodness there are exceptions.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting replies thanks guys.

 

Yes, of course it should all be about the music BUT I'm afraid I rarely enjoy very old or poorly recorded albums no matter how brilliant the artistic quality.  There are a few exceptions like those with Callas singing but poor recording is a distraction for me.  And I'll add another bit of fuel to the fire in saying that I find well recorded CD quality as enjoyable as hi-rez.  And I've been surprised at how good some CDS in the collection sound when with earlier toys they were judged to be very borderline.  My mantra is that if SACD & hi-rez usually (not always) does sound better it is because more TLC has been devoted to the engineering.  And I have not changed my mind about the importance of the DAC although now concede it should be followed by the best possible amplification to hear the best results.  Before the Audio-gd amp I was a rather skeptical about how important the amplifier was, a rather silly attitude as the chain is only as strong as its weakest link and so the amp IS important.

 

And the other factor which affects hearing is age.  At 85 the high frequencies escape me which can be a bonus in recordings from tape with hiss as it is not heard.  But audio only on speakers is no longer so enjoyable - hence my devotion to headphones.  A/V is a different matter because the concentration is not focussed on sound only.  And I much prefer music via a PC controlled with an iPad and have not listened to an SACD or CD for ages.  Playing with CDP toys and wasting heaps on them is now well into the past.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tassie Devil said:

A/V is a different matter because the concentration is not focussed on sound only.

There are a few past posts on enjoying audio with age hearing loss of higher frequencies.

 

I spend 80% of my time in the family room with the AV/HT 2.1 system watching various YouTube, Netflix etc, movies and video music than I do in the dedicated 2 channel audio room.

Edited by Al.M
Link to post
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Tassie Devil said:

...Yes, of course it should all be about the music BUT I'm afraid I rarely enjoy very old or poorly recorded albums no matter how brilliant the artistic quality.  There are a few exceptions like those with Callas singing but poor recording is a distraction for me.  And I'll add another bit of fuel to the fire in saying that I find well recorded CD quality as enjoyable as hi-rez.  And I've been surprised at how good some CDS in the collection sound when with earlier toys they were judged to be very borderline.  My mantra is that if SACD & hi-rez usually (not always) does sound better it is because more TLC has been devoted to the engineering...

Sorry to hear that the recording quality can overshadow the music for you.  There's plenty of incredible music that's only survived on noisy 78's.  I've been able to filter out the noise and get to the music (but will admit that it can take some effort to do so).

 

No arguments about the ability of CD to sound good.  When a CD's been mastered from the original recoded tapes with minimal and tasteful interventions it makes me wonder if we really need hi-res. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, audiofeline said:

Sorry to hear that the recording quality can overshadow the music for you.  There's plenty of incredible music that's only survived on noisy 78's.  I've been able to filter out the noise and get to the music (but will admit that it can take some effort to do so).

 

No arguments about the ability of CD to sound good.  When a CD's been mastered from the original recoded tapes with minimal and tasteful interventions it makes me wonder if we really need hi-res. 

 

 

Against what I said before, some remastered 65 year old recordings can sound impressive and they are good enough to make imperfections no longer a distraction.'  And on the hi-rez topic I'm guilty, as I suspect many others are, of being seduced by numbers.  So, fully aware at the back of my mind that I'll most likely not hear any difference, I still choose to pay a couple of dollars more for as hi-rez download.  It is this sort of illogical thinking that is keeping the hi-end industry thriving!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Without reading all the above I do feel that what I’m hearing in some systems wouldn’t be what I would hear if I was in the room with the performers. My biggest concern is super airy treble. Not sure cymbals  really get that super fine sisal which some tweeters produce.  Or even the sibilance on voice. Seams over cooked and accentuated. Not natural. Back to the bad old days of HIFI - too much treble and bass and not much in between. 
 

Probably why I like two way systems without tweeters. A smaller driver carrying upper bass register, mids  and treble rather than a tweeter as well. You may think it strange but I’m up for super tweeters which I believe or feel naturally fill out the mid range more than treble. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you stand next to the drums, it's rarely what they sound like on the recording.

They are often compressed as real drums are very dynamic.

That sizzle is there but the initial crash is very loud and naturally tapers off and only captured of they are isolated or close miked.

Otherwise the extended tails are lost if everyone is in the same room. (rock)

Even though we would play very loud on stage, I would only wear one ear plug on whatever side was near the cymbals, else they would almost make me cower!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LogicprObe said:

Even though we would play very loud on stage, I would only wear one ear plug on whatever side was near the cymbals, else they would almost make me cower!

 

 

Also, ever notice how finicky drummers are about their cymbals.   There's a particular sound/sizzle/crash/etc they want to have and are not happy without it.  Even if a back-line drumkit was supplied, our drummer always brought his own and swapped them for the supplied cymbals.   

 

I remember a craze where they used to put loose pop-rivets in old cymbals to make a particular sound.  :) 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, audiofeline said:

Do we live in a time where the art of sound reproduction is too good?  I think not.  We live in a time when enough of the challenges for accurate reproduction have been overcome, and the hardware can create stunning reproduction of music.  Not many are fortunate to be able to own such equipment.  And I would have hoped that with miniaturisation, digitialization, mass productionization, etc. that entry and average-level audio reproduction would be much higher than it is now. 

 

However, this hardware potential can only be realised by the software going into it.  And that has always been subjective and subject to fashion.  Orchestral music used to be recorded at a distance, giving an "in the audience" feel.  When close-mic techniques were developed, the feeling of immediacy appealed to many, the "in the front row" or "beside the conductor" feel.  Which was better? - they have different ambience.  The answer is subjective.  And now the hardware is being compromised by other subjective decisions which degrade the sound but is considered by some to be improvements - compression, noise reduction, etc. 

 

So as far as I'm concerned, reproduction can't be too good when it captures the emotion and timbre of the moment the music was created.  It can be degraded by poor recording (eg. ultra-close microphones) and poor mastering.  And at times I'm feeling that I'm living a stage where - in general - the art of sound reproduction is too compromised.  Thank goodness there are exceptions.

 

The Mercury label Living Presence ,  being an example of recordings recorded at a distance with absolute minimum microphones usually one to three microphones for an entire orchestra. https://www.stereophile.com/content/fine-art-mercury-living-presence-recordings

 

Mercury also pioneering the use of 35mm camera film for recording, along with many other innovations.     https://www.speakerscornerrecords.com/news/details/4/mercury-living-presence-the-history

 

 

712mercury.albumcover.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember reading a short article where a pro drummer of a rock band said they use to use three mics on drums. He says now we have nine and it sounds no better.

 

My main system is not extensive and my other two are even more cut back. Lately I have been stripping it back even further to Pi server, DAC  and directly into either a two stage tube amp or a 100W Class D. It’s definitely different and extremely enjoyable. I have found myself sitting there with a huge smile on my face. I did find one tube amp sounded better with a tube preamp but I could go either way.

 

Maybe putting less between yourself and the recorded music brings you closer to the performance. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aussievintage said:

 

 

Also, ever notice how finicky drummers are about their cymbals.   There's a particular sound/sizzle/crash/etc they want to have and are not happy without it.  Even if a back-line drumkit was supplied, our drummer always brought his own and swapped them for the supplied cymbals.   

 

I remember a craze where they used to put loose pop-rivets in old cymbals to make a particular sound.  :) 

I know I had sizzle spelt wrong but couldn’t workout how to spell it. I remember the rivets to create more sizzle. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stereo coffee said:

The Mercury label Living Presence ,  being an example of recordings recorded at a distance with absolute minimum microphones usually one to three microphones for an entire orchestra. https://www.stereophile.com/content/fine-art-mercury-living-presence-recordings

...

 

712mercury.albumcover.jpg

Yes, this was one of the examples I was thinking of.  The "Living Stereo" series is another.  I find it hard to reconcile how they got it so right so long ago, and so many have got it so wrong since. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in the hunt for many years after 'fine detail' and being able to 'hear everything'. I thought that was my audio nirvana. Now that I think I'm close, it's not what I want at all. I think some gear is just too detailed in a sense that it doesn't let you relax. Maybe the gear is 'trying too hard', which is taking it away from a more natural sound.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LogicprObe said:

 

If you stand next to the drums, it's rarely what they sound like on the recording.

They are often compressed as real drums are very dynamic.

That sizzle is there but the initial crash is very loud and naturally tapers off and only captured of they are isolated or close miked.

Otherwise the extended tails are lost if everyone is in the same room. (rock)

Even though we would play very loud on stage, I would only wear one ear plug on whatever side was near the cymbals, else they would almost make me cower!

I was at Cranbourne music once when I respectable drummer was really getting into a kit they had setup. It was a big area and I was well back but you could feel the full force of the kit in the room. We will never hear that on recorded music no matter the playback gear involved. But it shouldn’t stop us from trying. Not sure mics could ever react to the full force regardless. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, blakey72 said:

I was in the hunt for many years after 'fine detail' and being able to 'hear everything'. I thought that was my audio nirvana. Now that I think I'm close, it's not what I want at all. I think some gear is just too detailed in a sense that it doesn't let you relax. Maybe the gear is 'trying too hard', which is taking it away from a more natural sound.

I swing both ways, tube and SS and my general system is tube preamp SS power amp. But for weeks at a time I swap in my 2W 6L6 SE UL DIY wine box amp. It brings the music back. No super low bass no ultra-fine detail no super sizzling highs just romantic, emotional music. I only know what I’m missing when back on the SS power amp. Doesn’t stop my swinging back to the all tube setup though a few weeks later. All my gear is DIY. 

37CDDFA4-23C7-406A-B9E9-F0773DDF0C5C.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mwhouston said:

I swing both ways, tube and SS and my general system is tube preamp SS power amp. But for weeks at a time I swap in my 2W 6L6 SE UL DIY wine box amp. It brings the music back. No super low bass no ultra-fine detail no super sizzling highs just romantic, emotional music. I only know what I’m missing when back on the SS power amp. Doesn’t stop my swinging back to the all tube setup though a few weeks later. All my gear is DIY. 

37CDDFA4-23C7-406A-B9E9-F0773DDF0C5C.jpeg

That has made me think. Maybe I should re-phrase what I have said from "that's not what I want at all", to 'that's not the only thing I want'. I'm like you, I swing from system to system depending on the type of music I'm listening to and my mood ;) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When sound reproduction is too good it help to offset   my aging ears which are not too good.?

Stump

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, rantan said:

 

 

If this were true the forum would be music discussion only and hardware would be 5% of what is  actually posted.

 

 

I think that is true in my case. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, blakey72 said:

That has made me think. Maybe I should re-phrase what I have said from "that's not what I want at all", to 'that's not the only thing I want'. I'm like you, I swing from system to system depending on the type of music I'm listening to and my mood ;) 

It’s nice to have choice and for me I have a few low power tubers I can swing in and it only takes a few minutes to make the change. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great Thread btw.... . I do agree with the OP that sound reproduction has reached a high level .... especially as regards to hi-fi equipment. I do find the "newer" technologies too compressed/whether recording techniques or post production and of course playback. With "newer" music the detail is often hyper-present, black background yes, but a loss of musicalness and sweetness or lushness of a song can be noticed. As @blakey72 stated above "that's not the only thing I want (from my system)". Compromises can be made with regards to many aspects in the chain (from musician to streaming or cd or vinyl etc.), but even if we have a supreme system, we may obsess on the weakness of a recording and flummox ourselves because we overspent in the home stereo front. (Luckily that is not a current issue of mine!)

 

I was a gigging drummer in my teens and 20's, and no way-no how will a home-fi system reproduce the drumkit as in a club or outdoor venue. Power and punch, sizzle from the cymbals (with the annoying harmonic-to the drummer's ear- interplay with the guitar and bass and the room. We all had fun, band and patrons' alike : folks drank and danced into the wee hours.  I do not expect the system to reproduce a band or symphony "as it was". But I get enough out of the system to enjoy the music. ? And sometimes lose myself in the music. 

 

As the Stone's song goes... "Can't always get what you want, but if you try.... sometimes, You get what you need".

  • Like 5
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I haven't tried to find out what mic set up was used in this recording but the drums do sound like they do if you are in the room with them but down the other end.

I suspect they may have just used a couple of room mics.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice drum mixing/mic set up. Definitely puts you in the middle of the kit. ? (Listening at low volume on headphones). 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just something to remember, most multi-microphone setups are not designed with the intention of providing realism.  They are meant to allow the guy on the mixing desk to make it sound the way HE wants it to sound.  The two are not the same thing at all.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, aussievintage said:

Just something to remember, most multi-microphone setups are not designed with the intention of providing realism.  They are meant to allow the guy on the mixing desk to make it sound the way HE wants it to sound.  The two are not the same thing at all.

 

Of course..............but I played this to a mate of mine (producer/mixer) and he was flabbergasted!............'That's not how drums are supposed to sound on a record!'

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if anybody reading this thread went and had a full hearing test they would be surprised [perhaps mortified ] at what state their hearing was actually at.

I think it cost me $140 for the test.

 

They sit you in a room with a pair of headphones facing a wall, so you can't see the person running the test [so your not influenced by thinking the tester has changed anything] and then slowly test each ear individually.

They playback frequencies at various volume levels across the frequency range, and in turn you press a button every time you hear something.

 

I was surprised with the results of my listening tests [had one last Oct] as my high frequency hearing was good for both ears, it was in the lower midrange and mid bass areas that the dips from flat started to occur, and bass frequencies in my left ear was reduced the most.

 

Now knowing the results, it explains why I was finding the sound on my DSP room adjusted active speakers thin and over bright.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tweaky said:

I think if anybody reading this thread went and had a full hearing test they would be surprised [perhaps mortified ] at what state their hearing was actually at.

I think it cost me $140 for the test.

 

They sit you in a room with a pair of headphones facing a wall, so you can't see the person running the test [so your not influenced by thinking the tester has changed anything] and then slowly test each ear individually.

They playback frequencies at various volume levels across the frequency range, and in turn you press a button every time you hear something.

 

I was surprised with the results of my listening tests [had one last Oct] as my high frequency hearing was good for both ears, it was in the lower midrange and mid bass areas that the dips from flat started to occur, and bass frequencies in my left ear was reduced the most.

 

Now knowing the results, it explains why I was finding the sound on my DSP room adjusted active speakers thin and over bright.

I know in the low bass our hearing rolls off heavily. Regardless of age. I can remember many years ago I ran an sig gen through my system. My sixteen year old could hear 18K while I could just hear 12K. At least it proved my tweeters were working. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...