Rock and Roll Snobbery

Seems perfectly logical to me that systems would not be for all music types. Look at musical instruments themselves. Some violins are better for classical, some as fiddles for country music, some for Irish folk music. There are all kinds of guitars for different kinds of music. And so on and so forth.

A system put together with low distortion, wide dynamic and flat frequency response components should be able to handle all types of music. However, such a system is by necessity somewhat expensive (say, $8k plus). It's usually below this price point (and the exact breakpoint is open to argument) that compromises start to set in that may favor one type of music over another. Classical/acoustic oriented system below the breakpoint will most likely favor tonal accuracy over deep bass and maximum SPL capabilities. Pop/rock systems will favor systems that go loud, have a mid-bass punch (80Hz to 120Hz) and a forward midrange. Bluntly put, pop/rock music does not demand as accurate a tonal reproduction as classical/acoustic based music. Whereas, a cello should always sound like a cello, an electric guitar can sound like alot of things. Prior to the guitar signal even reaching tape, the musician has usually added harmonic distortion, digital reverb/delay, massive EQ and dynamic compression. The guitar sound is then usually processed further as part of the mix down. Hence, it's hard to say exactly what is fidelity in pop/rock recordings. Furthermore, most pop/rock recordings are not mixed to be played on high resolution systems. The producers, engineers and the musicians make assumptions about how their music is most likely to be heard (MTV, car radio, boombox, etc.) and they tailor the sound accordingly.

Also, some speakers sound their best at moderate to high sound levels and do not do well at low listening levels and visa versa (amps also effect this nature). Unless you have a great deal of money to invest it is probably best to try and balance your system to your musical taste. I listen to most types of music, but do not listen at super high SPL's and am very happy with Reynaud Twin speakers. They do not have low bass and do not play extremely loud, but on the other hand they have an almost electostatic quality at very low listening levels (but with dynamics at higher levels). This was my goal. Most people think of a "rock" system as being a headbanger system. It does not always have to be that way as my system sounds very good with rock, I just can't blast it to a concert level. My old speakers were great on classical and small group pieces but were not enjoyable with R & R. I opted for new speakers that were more middle of the road.

onhwy61 sez: "...Furthermore, most pop/rock recordings are not mixed to be played on high resolution systems. The producers, engineers and the musicians make assumptions about how their music is most likely to be heard (MTV, car radio, boombox, etc.) and they tailor the sound accordingly....", & he's absolutely right - *compression*, big-time. that's why i have an ol' dbx-3bx which resides in a tape-loop of my preamp, to be used as necessary to help out some poor recordings & radio, as needed. otherwise, it's completely outta the signal path....

Onhwy61: good post! there are some rock/pop groups that do care about sound and produce their cd's/lp's accordingly. 2 that come readily to mind are phish and rusted root. as others have pointed out in other threads: c&w tends to be well-recorded, too, as do some notable blues artists. BTW, i always take some good rock cd's to ces. if the folks displaying don't let me play 'em, i leave.