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

I like the direct emotional link to the music. One that draws me in and makes me close my eyes and sway. Making most recordings sound great. So, that is the kind of system I put together… it excels balance between all the aspects… detail, bass, tonal balance, imaging, rhythm and pace… etc

@ghdprentice, exactly my sentiments.  My system makes everything sound good.  Shitty recordings sound decent, excellent recordings sound excellent.  This works very well for me because despite the money that I have invested, paradoxically I listen now to a lot of bootlegs from the ‘70’s, which sometimes are good and sometimes not so good.  But my system has just the right balance for me.  I am happy.  And I’d like to put in a plug for the Shunyata Everest, my last acquisition that finished off that sound and depth of stage that I have been looking for.

If it doesn't make my toes tap it is no good to me.  In other words if I don't like the song it doesn't matter how good it sounds I still won't like it.  However when I listen to the stuff I enjoy I want all the musical nuance I can find from my system.

I do a mix of both. There are times I’m listening to how well my stsyem sounds. And  times I’m just listening to music I like. Ideally all the music I grew up with and love would also sound amazing but sadly that’s not the case. Luckily I’ve developed an appreciation of bluesy Jazz, mostly acoustic that also sounds great. But the stuff I grew up with that I have a stronger emotional attachment to tends to be fairly poorly recorded. But sure, I still listen to it often. 

Hi fidelity matters because it lets you fully hear what the artist intended. Therefore, your proposition is false: there is no dichotomy, no contradiction, no one way better than the other. They are the same. 

I have always loved music and have been striving for better sound for fifty plus years. Music plays in my home several hours a day and each day I try sit with my eyes closed and listen for an album or two.