I’ve the same issue but find I’ve an entire collection of great sounding music I can now listen to! The trick may be to find some current recordings with a similar rock content to that which we grew up with. Evanescence has some decent studio recordings (there are certainly better) and a high rock quality! Also try TOOL’s Pneuma and Ployphia “playing god” those are favorites for me when I want to Rock!
Passion, or ..... Precision?
Hi Guys,
In the last 2 years I have finally built what I consider to be a fairly decent System. Namely, DCS Bartok, BHK 300 mono's and KEF Ref 5 Speakers. With the introduction of Qobuz, which is all I listen to now, I find myself searching out artists or tracks that sound amazing on my rig. Occasionally, I hit the jackpot and find something I really like that also sounds amazing. Streaming is brilliant for this. However, when I revert back to the music that evokes the passion in me I find that it tends to be of poorer recording quality. I'm 58 now and grew up with the 70's/80's Heavy Rock scene with bands like Sabbath, Ozzy, Rainbow, Lizzy and my beloved Status Quo etc. Their early material just doesn't 'cut it' on a high end system (IMO) and I find it more fatiguing to listen to. Modern technology and attention to detail in the recording studio has really dated some of my favourite bands to the point I find it harder to listen to them.
Does anybody else share this experience?
cheers, Mark
- ...
- 42 posts total
@kingbr - agree about Steve Harris, and a wonderful songwriter as well. Those early Maiden albums sounded awful on CD when they first came out in the 80's (though I still enjoyed the music), but the redone ones are great! 👍 As for somebody quoting somebody saying 'audiophiles use their music to listen to their systems', well, in some cases, sure, as they say, but it's sure never been true for me. Anybody can say anything. |
The idea of having a second set of speakers does make sense. I really enjoy Chicago Blues Music and there is no better encounter that when I hear the sound produced from a Cheap Tannoy Speaker. On the ESL Speakers it sounds great, but does not have the perception of the atmosphere, that adds to the attraction. When I extend the experience using the Tannoy Speakers to Live Rock, the same levels of enjoyment are created. Would I demonstrate using the Tannoy, no, that is for the likes of the ESL. The Tannoy just delivers a flavour that evokes embedded memories of past experiences. |
I too have found many rock recordings to be grating and fatiguing. It all depends upon the recording quality. Re. the DCS Bartok comment: After owning a DCS Rossini, I’m sure that the Bartok isn't a problem, except for someone who prefers something else. Most stacked Marshall rock concerts were too loud and distorted to sound good. But man -- including the audience and the experience -- did they ROCK!! I've found that a symphonic orchestra is more difficult to reproduce than most any other music. The soft to loud dynamic ranges provide the difficulty. Undestorted/uncongested crescendos with instrument separation and differentiation, divide the wannabes from the capable. As far as recording age is concerned, there obviously is a correlation, but there doesn’t necessarily need to be. For example, of the several 1812 Overture recordings I own, this late 1950’s one is the best: Tchaikovsky: 1812 Festival Overture; Capriccio Italien; Beethoven: Wellington's Victory Antal Doráti / Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra Also, many Jazz recordings from the 50’s and 60’s still hold up well. As far as rock and hard rock go, non-fatiguing listenability all has to do with the recording quality. Off the top of my head, a few rock recordings I find well done are Emerson Lake and Palmer’s: Lucky Man and In the Beginning; Sabbath's Iron Man; YES: Roundabout; Pink Floyd: DSOM et al.; Chicago; Blood Sweet and Tears; America’s: Sandman; Edgar Winter’s: Frankenstein; some of The Who’s tracks, especially those recorded at the New York Plant Sessions etc… |
- 42 posts total