When I listen to my system.......


As I have stated many times, I listen to the musicianship and the composition. As I listen to SRV, just as an example, there are three musicians working together to create a "performance". How is it that anyone can put tone, sound staging, or anything else with the "sound" before the performance. There is much information on our recordings, and generally, many of these recordings are just so so with the fidelity. In fact, why do many listeners only listen to top notch recordings of higher fidelity, of the "sound", rather than appreciate those qualities I look and listen for. Is it because I was a singer / vocalist in my youth? Is it because I was around musicians who shared the joy of "music"? Is it because at a very early age, I was introduced to big band music and eclectic performances by so many, via my dad (he would have been 100 today; happy birthday dad). Yes, I consider myself an audiophile, because I spend money on gear and am careful with my dedicated room....my system allows me to hear more of the performance. But, it is the "music", the "performance", that matters most to me. I suppose I am feeling a bit nostalgic today, because of my pops. I am bringing this up again, because I do not understand the mentality of folks who listen differently than I. I know this subject might be ad nauseum to many, but some of the folks I used to design systems for, became less interested in the music, and more about the sound, placing the music and performance secondary, or not at all. I am just venting. If you would like to add to this post, I welcome all thoughts. No judgement from me. I wish everyone well. Enjoy! MrD.

mrdecibel

Most of the modern age speakers tend to be more clinical and revealing with all kinds of detail and somehow people really like this, at least in the show room it’s impressive.

But then when they take it back home and say wow this is very fatiguing and where is the enjoyment. My older speakers from 20 years ago can be arguably more enjoyable even though they have less detail qualities. But they certainly have a really nice soundstage and fill the room.

So I take to heart with what thread originator is saying in his massive paragraph

Great comments above. I was not stating my way of listening was the best or right way of listening, although for me, it certainly is. I gave up my career as an audio consultant a bit earlier than I had anticipated, because many customers were more into the equipment and gear (just like a guy on yt who deals with the most expensive available) rather than the music. The music leads me to better gear, not the other way around. I understand all views, and I promise I am not judging....just questioning. When sitting by the pool, the pair of wall hanging Polk Atrium speakers still bring me the joy of music, and there is no problem following the tunes. When in my vehicle, the same. The hobby is wonderful, for whatever the personal goal is. To each his/her own might be....ymmv etc. I appreciate the comments and camaraderie shown here and wish my best to you all. Always, MrD.

@ mrdecibel, you stated "How is it that anyone can put tone, sound staging, or anything else with the "sound" before the performance."

I understand your position, but I think your premise is flawed. 

The issue is not performance/composition VERSUS sonic reproduction .  The issue at hand is - what is the result of the performance/composition AND sound (sonic character of the recording/playback processes).  These elements are synergistic (or at least additive).

Viewed another way, better performances/compositions are necessary, but not sufficient... AND  better sounding recordings/gear improve the experience of ALL recordings. You need BOTH.

IMO - You can not truly appreciate musicianship and composition when listening to poorly engineered recordings (I just gave away ~600 LPs of this type).  Conversely, great recordings of mediocre performances are equally unsatisfying (I also gave away ~100 LPs of this type).

Give it some thought... I hope you find your answers satisfying.

 

 

 

Well, it gives us all something to troll each over....;)

I think you are on to something, @asvjerry .

@ mfili35

Mr. Parson was correct, and perhaps not for the reason some folks think.

You stated: "Alan Parsons puts a lot of time into their mixes and mastering once said people don't buy equipment to listen to our music they buy our music to listen to their equipment"

As soon as we turn on our equipment, we are NOT listening to music - we are listening to reproductions of music on our equipment.

This is a FULL STOP moment.  None of us are listening to music on our systems, which truly invalidates the performance vs. sound conundrum that is discussed above!

To give this idea some perspective, I was recently listening to several recordings from the true Analog Days - 1910 to 1915 to be exact...

Back then, the compression waves produced by voices and instruments were directed into a large horn that had a diaphragm at the horn's apex.  This diaphragm was connected to a stylus (think cutter-head) that carved lines into wax that was adhered to a spinning cylinder.  This process created an ANALOG of the music...

To listen to MUSIC, go to a concert (or play some yourself).