How close to the real thing?


Recently a friend of mine heard a Chopin concert in a Baptist church. I had told him that I had gone out to RMAF this year and heard some of the latest gear. His comment was that he thinks the best audio systems are only about 5% close to the real thing, especially the sound of a piano, though he admitted he hasn't heard the best of the latest equipment.

That got me thinking as I have been going to the BSO a lot this fall and comparing the sound of my system to live orchestral music. It's hard to put a hard percentage on this kind of thing, but I think the best systems capture a lot more than just 5% of the sound of live music.

What do you think? Are we making progress and how close are we?
peterayer
Regarding sound, at least the frequencies that humans can hear, anything is possible today with enough knowledge, focus and a budget.
Regarding live sound, the hardest part to reproduce at home is the venue. No two venues are exactly the same, public or at home. So you are always working with that handicap. Otherwise, it is not so hard to get very lifelike sound out of recordings designed to sound that way.

Getting the exact perfect sound that you like all the time is not possible unless you are also making your own recordings.

Its like Hanna Davis and Kate Upton. Or ever see Ronda Rousey out on a photo shoot versus prepping for a fight? WHich is the most perfect?
I believe a Very Large Part Of It has to do with the Frontal Horizontal Directivity Measurements of the speakers! The better the measurements, the closer your get to... LIVE MUSIC IN YOUR HOME!!

http://www.princeton.edu/3D3A/Directivity.html
I think a Very Large Part of It (VLPoI) has to do with a Very Large Number of Things (VLNoT).
Impulse Response tells it all in an ideal amplifier. See "Linear Time Invariant Systems."
In a room, controlled dispersion is very important.
Then, there is my mood! Who can tell?
As for all of the Super Models and Prize Fighters, I've never had one in my lap, though my wife sure is real!
With the same speakers and electronics, I have heard great differences in realism with the same recordings. Of late I am hearing greatly more ambiance and note decay with double DSD versus 44.1 PCM on many different recordings. All this means, of course is that the filters have been moved upward to nearly 100k Hz. Also, I've heard the benefits of having linear power supplies rather than the cheap switching supplies so common in our electronics.

I have also heard greater realism using the Tripoint Troy with the new Thor SE grounding cables that keep RFI and EMI out of the signal. Subtleties in the music and background are revealed once the garbage is removed.

I've also heard the importance of what my components sit on. Two different technologies dominate the field, IMHO. Stillpoints converts vertical vibrations into heat and Star Sound takes the vibrations to ground rapidly with the use of a mix of brass and steel. I hear brass and high hat as well as drums sounding better with the Star Sound and more of a sense of ease with the Stillpoints.

Finally, there are magnets in cabling. High Fidelity Cables has shown me that the more the better using magnets. These cables have dramatically revealed realism for me that I once thought was impossible. Each and every version of these cables have increased the number of magnets used, the price, and the realism.

Would Iever go back to what I was listening to just three years ago? Not unless I was very curious as to how bad it was then.