Ok this will be a good thread.

Oh, Paulup, did I really say that? Hmmm. Yea, I do jam away on the car radio, and we know that's no good as a component, ie, presumably your "bad". But then again, are we really talking about being that "bad" in componentry? I start out with a hybrid amp with volume control above because I think less than that would be a waste for someone going down our road (my girlfriend is not going down our road, so something more "bad" would be OK; its context dependant, our context being our path).

I said that something may SOUND great on a great system, but if you don't have a will towards the musical meaning - and hence, presumably, a music collection that is reflective of that will and not just great components - then you are kinda wasting what you built.

On the other hand, isn't this a moot question as far as experience? In other words, do you actually know someone who has a great system - defined as one that involves you deeply in the meaning of the music - that doesn't also have a nice collection of music that can help get you there? What person possesess the will to build "great" in a system and then not build "great" in the medium? I don't know anybody like that, and I think where that problem arises, and why people site it, is from the circumstance where a system is built in an accurate way with accuracy of sound prominent as a will - objectifying sound, even if done well - rather than a system that balances accuracy, provides it sufficiently to enable the mind to go deeper, but doesn't become attached to that accuracy at the expense of the deepening receptive musical experience. In those types of systems, many times we see Stereophile-approved components strung together but no "great" music collection. Again, this is a symptom of the mind focused on things - stereo component things, sound as things - and not a will to let go of the mind that wants to control things and, thereby, deepen into the meaning. The mind like that goes for the more impressive things first and predominantly - the components rather than the music - because such minds orientation is towards the exterior; as in, producing covet-ing in the exterior other person. This is also why you can see a correlation between system character, and egocentricity and materialism in the mind that built the system/musci collection. Or, in the case you cite, an imbalance between system and collection.

Just something to think about...

I said, "great music is still great music even on bad systems". The emotional content inherent in better quality music is not derived from its sound.

Asa, all you said was "you're right, ohn," right after Onhwy61 said what he just said. I don't think I disagree with either of you at all. I just said that there are speakers that can make even great music unlistenable, just absolutely destroy it. But, I've never heard an electronic component that could do such damage, which I think is relevant to the subject of this thread.

I enjoy music in cars too. Those little cheap speakers arent trying to do anything creative to the music, just pass it along as faithfully as they can within their limits, obviously FR restricted and dynamically compressed. That's ok, not really damaging.

Paul

Paulup, really didn't think you disagreed either, just yapping and trolling. Sorry, should have not yapped so much and did more trolling. :)

I think your point is a very good one. How can we enjoy musical meaning on a car radio, and then can't sit down to listen to the same song on our stereos, because it doesn't "sound" good enough?

Context again? In other words, do my expectations of the component effect my ability to "let go" and get into the music? Or, another way, does my thinking mind's attachment to thinking about the gear sometimes get in the way of me enjoying myself? Isn't that a focus on form (component) and not meaning (music)?

Audiophilicus Neuroticus?

On the other hand, yea, some speakers make me scream from the room!! But then again, so do some car stereos. My car stereo, although not sophisticated/accurate in terms of "sound", is effective through ommission of too much distortion (causing my thinking mind to take notice to the incongruency), and gets harmonics pretty good. I agree, some speakers don't do these things even; in search of accuracy and only accuracy they may get distortions reduced but leave a sterile void space and carved images that only the analyzing, visually-orientated part of my mind would be drawn to. These types od speakers don't cause me to run for the door, but, in my disinterest, I do start walking there.

Hey look guys. I did the TT test a couple hundred times at the store. I sold analog gear. Do you really think I'm not aware of a cartridge mismatch?

We did the demonstration to show the differences sources can make in a system. So that people could get the straight info, instead of the "buy better speakers" mantra from all the mid-fi salesmen. I could just as easily have sold them a $4000 pair of Isobariks, instead of a $1200 TT. But I actually thought enough of these people to show them the true facts, and demonstrate it, so they could hear it for themselves. They made the buying decisions.

These were standard TTs, using standard cartridges and such, that we commonly sold with these products. This was not some kind of trick to fool these people into thinking something that wasn't true.

I swear sometimes I think it's useless to try to bring any form of sanity to discussions like these.

If we used the same cartridge, you'd suspect cable mismatch. No matter what we used, you'd suspect anything except what you want to believe.

I've given you some accurate information. If you want to ignore it, go right ahead. Sometimes I just have to throw my hands up, and say,"Sheesh!" If I said the sky is blue, somebody on here would argue about that, too.