Three recent, key learnings


I have had more than a normal amount of time on my hands, and I have made a number of "cost-neutral" changes to my system. I have had a great time, and I have had a couple of minor revelations:

1: There really is a thing such as system synergy. I have tried to carefully change the make up of my system. Right now I think it is working pretty good. I have an AR-XB table with a mid-range Grado cartridge, a Cambridge Audio Azur 540p Phone stage, a Sonic Frontiers SFL-1 Sig. preamp, a McCormack DNA-1 amp, Vandersteen 2CE Sig. speakers and an M&K subwoofer.. I am currently using an OPPO 980H universal player for digital. I use various lower end Cardas, Kimber, Tara and Morrow cables. Right now the system just sings...I recently replaced a more expensive amp and speakers with these, and they just seem to work right together. I am thrilled with the sound

2: Decent anlog is superior to decent digital as a source. I realize my OPPO plyer is probably a weak link, but I am total surprised by how much better this old AR table sounds over the OPPO player or the Rotel/MSB combo I had earlier. The best way I can explain it is that I can turn the music up much louder and thoroughly enjoy it when when using the turntable, and it sounds like music. With digital it has this edge to it and it drives me crazy, and just wears on me.

3: A good system can't make a poor recording sound good. So often I get frustrated when the music doesn't sound the way I want it to. I wonder what I can do to my system to change it, but what I am realizing is that it is often the shortcomings of the recording that I am hearing.....analog or digital. For example I can play the first side of "Eye in the Sky" vinyl by Alan Parsons Project and just love the sound. Then I play another album and it just sounds blah. The same happens with digital. I can play a Mary Black disc and it sounds great, and then someone else and it is hard and lifeless.

Anyway, these are some of the things I am learning, probvably elementary for most, if not all of you, but I am having a blast navigating through this hobby, and finding great deals on used equipment.

Finally I am hoping to improve my digital front end. If anyone has a recommendation for a cost effective "analog sounding" player that can play multiple formats I would like your input.
stuartbmw3
Most recordings are, well, average! No surprise there, assuming a Normal Distribution!

Then there are a small % of really good ones and a small % of really bad ones. No surprise there either.

However you achieve it, that is the best you can hope for. If sound quality on average appears to skew one way or the other, there is likely still some tweaking that might be done to make things overall sound the way they should.

Also, IMHO, most average sounding recordings are still quite enjoyable to me,at least these days having done a reasonable job of achieving my desired sound, ie the recording very seldom prevents me from enjoying the music/performance. I think that is a very achievable and practical goal for most! Its often when unrealistic expectations to make average recordings sound great or poor recordings sound average in a pure technical sense that the audio merry go round comes into play and chances are that one will not be able to get off as they continuous seek an unrealistic goal.

I wonder sometimes how often "audiphiles" shoot themselves in the foot in the interest of achieving the ultimate sound with recordings that are inherently inferior to start with? I know I have been prone to that in the past but I think I have learned my lessons. Only great recordings can sound great. But I find most recordings good enough to enjoy on their own terms, even if often this might not measure up to high standards.
While a little off topic, I think it is interesting to note that what often makes a recording outstanding or poor is nothing more, or less, than the source component. For example with my system I find both Telarc and Reference lables generally sound better with SS sources than tubed sources. If you do not have both component designs you might never notice and just write off/or rave about the same disc without realizing the issue. FWIW.
"Mapman, did you check and confirm all the math?"

Hang on......

The biggest challenge would be quantifying recording quality accurately. That's a largely subjective thing.

But in my gut estimation, FWIW, I think its true that most recordings tend towards the average with fewer towards the extreme good or bad. For sure only a small % could be considered technical reference recordings, though a fairly large % may still turn out be be quite nice and enjoyable nonetheless.
Hi Stuart - I have to say I would generally agree with every one of those three premises, especially the second one. I would, however, also generally agree with Newbee's first post as well.