So, a reviewer just said something I need to talk about.


I will not mention the reviewer, nor the specific equipment being reviewed, but this statement was made, talking about sax and strings: "the strings had real body, and it sounded like real strings being played". The tonality of the instruments was what he/she was talking about. I get this. The tone, the spatiality of the instruments, the stage that was presented. All well and good. What about the engagement between the listener and the musician. I have stated so many times here, ad nauseam, that the most important aspect of music listening, for me (and not enough with other listeners) is the "playing of the instruments". The artistry of the musician behind those strings. I just don’t get it. When I listen to Jeff Beck (RIP), using him as an example, what I am attracted to, FIRST & FOREMOST, is his PLAYING. Reviewers talk about "sound". Most people here talk about "sound". I spend more time now on other sites, that speak about the music playing and, the compositions. For whatever reasons, I seem to be realizing, that A’gon members, as so many reviewers, talk about sound. They very rarely mention MY most important aspect of listening. The musicianship and the compositions. Another rant from me. What are your thoughts on this? How do you listen? What do you listen for/to? What does your system convey to you? I know I am out of line again, but........My best to everyone. Always, MrD.

mrdecibel

I have spent many years conducting research to understand how people perceive products of various kinds. The aim of this research has been to provide designers and engineers with feedback regarding how particular product features influence consumers' perception.

Differences in source material may well be factors in the perception of audio system quality. The way to resolve that is with a standardized set of source material that spans the range of potentially relevant audio system qualities. Whether you personally like the source music (or any other acoustic material) is not the issue. Professional taste testers face the same issue. However, they are trained to focus on the physical qualities of products rather than their own personal likes or dislikes. Musicianship might be an important quality of audio reproduction, but, if so, it can simply be included as a factor in the standardized sample of source material. In fact, a formal study to test this would be interesting to do.

So much is written about recreating the experience of having the music performers standing in front of you in your listening room. Perhaps this is possible for un-amplified voice and stringed instruments, but from my experiences in rock bands, this would be deafening. Not just amplified music... having a horn section in front of you in an enclosed space could exceed the threshold of pain. I always played with ear plugs in order to protect my ears. An audio rig that faithfully reproduces a live band in an enclosed space should be able to have enough bass slam to turn your chest cavity into a passive radiator.

Wow, this a true thinkpiece.  Of course the musicianship is important, along with the musician's emotion traveling through the instrument, recorded excellently with precision gear and reproduced by your Hi-Fi.  Everything is important.

I still use early Rod Stewart and Van Morrison recordings to judge my system changes for this very reason…those records convey both a high quality of sonic representation, AND a joy of musical spontaneity that engages and excites me.  “Cut Across Shorty” with its driving drums and 12 string, “Domino” with its Stax/Volt vibe and rhythmic drive, for example. I also need to play “Kucano Oro” from MA Recordings ‘Old Country’ for its ultra-audiophile recording of Howard Levy, Mark Nauseff, and Miroslav Tadic performing unbelievable musical feats.  All these groups can be enjoyed at “loud enough” but not actual live music levels in one’s living room.

_dalek_ wrote:

'So much is written about recreating the experience of having the music performers standing in front of you in your listening room."

Yes, but I think it's important to distinguish between "illusion" and "reality."  It would take a system of exceptional power and resolution to truly recreate a live (or studio) performance.  But even a modest system should give you "the whole picture" as much as possible.  I've heard modest systems that can do that.  I particularly recall a pair of Nestorovich speakers in a well-tuned room that did a very good job of projecting the performers in real space, though certainly not with real-world dynamics.