How much “suspension of disbelief do you need?”


We (or most of us) believe that it’s very difficult if not impossible to hear an exact representation of the the sound of a live performance on a recording.
The question is how much do you have to delude yourself into thinking it’s the real thing your listening to, to satisfy yourself.
To some it has to to be as close as possible. But others can make allowances for defects in the sound in order to enjoy the presentation.

‘How much do you need?

 

128x128rvpiano

For some, the goal is to get as close to realism as possible… for others, it’s not that important. To each his own… it’s about enjoying the sound, unless you enjoy obsessing about continuous  tweaking. 

Learning acoustic terminated two plagues:

Useless upgrading chasing tail...

And tweaking without end.....

 

Acoustic science is the cure against consumerism  and the cure of sound obsession against true musical experience...

 

     "So...I certainly get the attitude "I don’t bother looking for realism, it’s an impossible goal and I just want to hear whatever the recording sounds like and I’m happy."

     But those of us who still use real life sound as a sort of north star or barometer haven’t plunged ourselves in to perpetual dissatisfaction or are doing so in some unrealistic goal. Approached sensibly with realistic expectations, our systems can be deeply satisfying, having been somewhat guided by what we like in real life sounds."

                                                      An emphatic +1

Suspension of belief, how bout truly believing literal presence in room with you. Being fooled into actual belief means one is working less hard at suspending belief.

 

Having live performers in room has always been my goal. The more one's system conforms to optimal parameters of sound quality, the more one's system will reproduce flesh and blood performers in room.