What about "Pro" vs. Audiophile ?????


In all my years as an "audiophile" I've often wondered why spend all the time/money, researching/buying gear that MUST be far superior to anything in any recording studio? Is this pursuit really worth it or should we all be trying to recreate what the studio engineer was listening to when doing the final mix ?
lps2cd
I have been in many recording studios on the west coast, the best one I have ever been to was at Skywalker Ranch. I concure, several small studios I have been in mostly in peoples houses don't have very good playback systems, there recordings often reflect this. It is to bad that there isn't a standard for recording studios similar to the THX standard used in movies. I remember several years back working at a small studio, one thing they did for suplimental income was by doing small recordings and personal projects, Im glad there are inexpensive studios out there. The playback system in my house revialed the one at the studio but you could still do a reasonable recording. I am always looking for the best recordings I can get, I know that no matter what system I have its sound quality will never excede the recording. So my answere to your question is ( my opinion) that my playback system in my house should and does reveal more than what is installed in most small studios. One of the cons to this is a bad CD or LP sounds really bad and you can hear the limitations of the recording but when you get a good recording it is magic.
Do not discard pro audio products from your choices. I have owned and currently own pro audio equipment in my system. You get more value for your money vs audiophile products.

Regarding the above post rgarding musical reproduction, I agree. Create a system that will enable you to reproduce the musical performance of your likes w/out falling into the analytical. You'll be much happier...
There is a lot the audiophile community could learn from "pro" gear. However, the goals of the two are not the same at all. Take the design of a studio control room vs a listening room. The studio control room is designed to give the engineer exactly what is coming from the mics with no coloration due to the room, and usually in a small environment. This is not the goal of the audiophile's listening room. The room is part of the equation and provides the "spaciousness" to re-create the experience. That being said, it becomes easy to understand why some mastering sounds much better than others. Some engineers understand more about the playback than others. And, in some cases, the engineering is done for optimized playback in a $500 stereo in a car (not your audiophile CD I can assure you). Well, I'm a bit off track, but the point is there are two goals that are distinctly different. However, much of the means and knowledge in achieving these two goals are similar. Interestingly enough, all of the products from our company are engineered by those in the "pro" audio business (but they are all audiophiles as well).
I think most of the previous posts address the actual equipment used by the recording engineer. But the mics, amps, cabling, etc. of the musicians are also part of the "weakest link" question that lps2cd is raising.

Three observations to add to those above. 1) Sometimes, in great recordings, the weakest link is actually pretty strong and requires great equipment to do it justice, 2) All equipment adds some sort of coloration and some types are more pleasing to each listener than others -- it's a matter of trade-offs in an imperfect world, and 3) While not an expert, I wonder if psycho-acoustics comes into play -- do the ears fill in or compensate for the weakest link and will some equipment aid in that? My three cents.

Thought provoking question! I look forward to other responses since it does seem odd that equipment differences at the end of the chain are so meaningful.
As speakers and rooms are interactive devices the needs may differ. Some recordings are monitored with this in mind. If you listen to a lot of these recordings, it may well be a good idea to listen to some pro gear. Ironicaly, when this is the case it seems as though the recording monitors were actually audiophile gear. Another thing about pro vs. audiophile gear is the emphasis put on durability. Pro gear may be treated quite less gently than the way audiophiles baby their gear. Some very good pro ideas see limited use in audiophile gear for reasons I don't understand. Balanced wiring makes sense to me (at least at the upper end of the price spectum). Putting cross-overs before amps seems like a good idea to me. Putting musicians in plexiglass boxes with a multitude of microphones doesn't.