There can be a certain melancholy when you get what you always wanted. To quote Don Draper -- happiness is that moment before you want more happiness. Cue up Frank singing "It Was A Very Good Year".
Hi-Fi and the Folly of Perfection
I wonder whether at a certain point the pursuit of absolute hi-fi is in danger of blending into a folly of perfection. As I sit listening to my--frankly madly expensive-- set up, my enjoyment of the music I should be listening to becomes plagued with doubts - should I shift my chair a few inches left or right to get a better focus on the stereo image? Should I toe the speakers in a little more? Should I move my wife closer to the corner of the room to improve bass response?
I sometimes philosophize that the audiophile bug is a special--pleasantly harmless--form of nostalgia; a thankfully less embarrassing analogue of the hankering certain middle-aged men have for absurdly inappropriate sports cars, motorbikes, or even second wives. . . .
I would illustrate what I mean with a personal story. The summer before I went off to university in 1982, I bought my first "system," an Amstrad 8080 stereo tuner and cassette player with detachable speakers that cost me about £30 from my local Woolworth:
This was the system I discovered music on; discovered my own musical tastes, and I suppose it's what set me on the path to where I am today with a set-up whose speaker wires could buy me fifteen or more Amstrads.
I know that, without question, the sound I hear coming from my speakers today is "better" in all sorts of ways than what I heard back in the 80's. But I do, in my more self-analytic moments, wonder if "better" is, well, better. How much is one's endless quest for audio perfection (a quest I adore and wouldn't give up for anything) actually a quest to listen again with the ears of that young man diligently respooling mangles cassettes with a pencil and a lot of patience?
I wonder if anyone else indulges in such lugubrious ruminations?
- ...
- 25 posts total
I know that, without question, the sound I hear coming from my speakers today is "better" in all sorts of ways than what I heard back in the 80's. But I do, in my more self-analytic moments, wonder if "better" is, well, better. How much is one's endless quest for audio perfection (a quest I adore and wouldn't give up for anything) actually a quest to listen again with the ears of that young man diligently respooling mangles cassettes with a pencil and a lot of patience? I wonder if anyone else indulges in such lugubrious ruminations?
That reminded me of a Stephen Fry anecdote my friend Mike told me he had read. Apparently in Fry's autobiography (the fry chronicles) he recalls the time he was able to finally afford a top notch separates system after achieving success on British TV and was surprised to find he had similar feelings to yours, a strange sense of disappointment. He also 'knew' his Arcam based system was 'far better' than the one he had in sixth form at school and yet... something essential was obviously lacking. In my own case I had a similar feeling for many years too. It was only when I got my Tannoy Berkeley's, about 10 years ago, that this feeling finally lessened somewhat, but not entirely. Of course we were all younger then and everything was brand new but there might be something else here too. Something to do with audio systems and their ambitions? My first system was not ambitious at all. It featured a basic BSR turntable, a 10 Watt amp and a pair of simple 2 way speakers, and yet, within it's limited constraints (it was almost all midrange based) it hardly put a foot wrong. Most importantly, it was tonally right. Subsequent systems all grew successively more ambitious in image size, scale and bandwidth, but none quite recaptured that near perfect midrange. I also remember reading a review of Siegfried Linkwitz's LX521s where a friend of his remarked that, despite the grandiosity of its ambitions, it took 3/4 iterations of this renowned design before it was finally able to equal the coherence of his tabletop radio. Perhaps one reason for dissatisfaction is because it's simply far easier to design a good sounding but modest system that's far less ambitious in scope than one which seeks to a achieve 'audio perfection'? Perhaps the first casualty in the quest for audio perfection is all too often this sense of coherence?
As you said, 'But I do, in my more self-analytic moments, wonder if "better" is, well, better.'
Well, I don't think you're the only one to question what exactly 'better' really means when it comes to audio playback. Perhaps there should be a Danger Ahead! warning as we prepare to embark on our audiophile journey? |
@whart Thanks for the book recommendation. I know Austin, well. That's where I did my doctorate. Bought my Adcom stuff at Audio Systems on Koenig. |
@grauerbar good post! Probably the desire to go back to these golden moments of the past gets transformed into some people‘s audiophile journey. Covering the inability to get back there with an ongoing quest to improve, which is naturally futile. There was a New Yorker cartoon with a guy reaching a mountaintop. The guru sitting there says something like „What? No, I‘m just here for the view.“ I like that a lot. There is only now. And striving for complete bliss is as pointless as time travel to a former self. Both are possible to a certain degree only and we have to deal with it. And for me the best way of dealing with it is to accept that this is ok, that desire does not fulfill me and to keep away from distractions. |
- 25 posts total