nonoise ...
I have a "friend" like that too. The last time he heard my system, I had to endure two hours of him telling me how crappy my system sounded. Some folks just have no social filter, I guess. Funny thing is, we both have the same model of speakers. We both use tube electronics throughout our systems. My electronics are the modern variety (ARC) and his consists of Bob Hovland's modified classic stuff (Marantz).
In listening to my "friend's" system, he gets no sound stage to speak of. Everything is presented in a straight plane between his speakers. I hear no depth, nothing on either side of his speakers and no 3-D imaging to speak of at all. I will say though, he gets good clarity and tonal balance.
When he was listening to my system, his main "gripe" was that it was too holographic, and that the holographic part wasn't on the recording at all. He claimed that the deep sound stage, the instruments playing to either side of the speakers and the 3-D imagining were nothing but distortions being caused by my system ... mainly by the ARC electronics.
I kept telling him that what he was hearing was an accurate reproduction of the event. On one of my reference stereo jazz recordings for example, the piano was to the left and behind the sax player. The bass player was to the right and behind the trumpet player. The drum set was slightly to the right and behind the piano player. The musicians were spread out with each one a different distance from each other ... and that's the way the microphones picked up the sound. I even showed him the cover of the album that had a picture of the group in the exact positions replicated to a "tee" by my system. He remained pat in his opinion.
So, here's a guy who's system sounds really good, with excellent clarity ... but kind of uninteresting, telling another guy whose system is amazing (to my ear of course), that his system sucks. Why the difference? I don't get it at all. I guess that's why they make Fords and why they make Chevies.
Frank
I have a "friend" like that too. The last time he heard my system, I had to endure two hours of him telling me how crappy my system sounded. Some folks just have no social filter, I guess. Funny thing is, we both have the same model of speakers. We both use tube electronics throughout our systems. My electronics are the modern variety (ARC) and his consists of Bob Hovland's modified classic stuff (Marantz).
In listening to my "friend's" system, he gets no sound stage to speak of. Everything is presented in a straight plane between his speakers. I hear no depth, nothing on either side of his speakers and no 3-D imaging to speak of at all. I will say though, he gets good clarity and tonal balance.
When he was listening to my system, his main "gripe" was that it was too holographic, and that the holographic part wasn't on the recording at all. He claimed that the deep sound stage, the instruments playing to either side of the speakers and the 3-D imagining were nothing but distortions being caused by my system ... mainly by the ARC electronics.
I kept telling him that what he was hearing was an accurate reproduction of the event. On one of my reference stereo jazz recordings for example, the piano was to the left and behind the sax player. The bass player was to the right and behind the trumpet player. The drum set was slightly to the right and behind the piano player. The musicians were spread out with each one a different distance from each other ... and that's the way the microphones picked up the sound. I even showed him the cover of the album that had a picture of the group in the exact positions replicated to a "tee" by my system. He remained pat in his opinion.
So, here's a guy who's system sounds really good, with excellent clarity ... but kind of uninteresting, telling another guy whose system is amazing (to my ear of course), that his system sucks. Why the difference? I don't get it at all. I guess that's why they make Fords and why they make Chevies.
Frank