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

Interesting article in PMA magazine titled: "If You’re An Audiophile, Watch Your Back". I believe many who post here experiences much of what is spoken, including me. A good read. Enjoy! MrD.

https://pmamagazine.org/if-youre-an-audiophile-watch-your-back/#:~:text=If%20you%2C%20like%20me%2C%20sometimes,can%20improve%20your%20listening%20experiences!

It is a quick easy read, and I could relate to a lot of what it included.

For example:

"Sound quality is an important part of the music listening experience. A great example of this, in my opinion, is the underappreciation of orchestral music. I firmly believe the reason a lot of people can’t get into this timeless genre is due to the horrible sound quality they’ve heard it in. They may actually like it on a system that reveals more of the intricacies and melodies in the compositions. Simply put, better sound quality allows one to hear more music and less murky garbage. This means that the more complex the musical arrangements—the more that’s going on in this music—the more the listener will benefit from hearing the music played through better—more revealing—sound, which will make better sense of it than bad sound will."

Classical music is not my favorite genre, but last summer when I was auditioning/breaking in a new pair of speakers I did play several CDs I had of orchestral music and I actually did derive a certain level of appreciation from certain aspects of it by paying attention to certain details that I had never noticed before. Jazz is another genre that I only gained an appreciation of as my system evolved.

The author writes this paragraph:

"It’s like audiophiles who obsess with the choice of speakers, but not much else. I’ve heard systems where 90% of the system budget went into buying expensive speakers, only to have them incorrectly placed and connected to inadequate gear that made them underperform. Such a lopsided system never sounds as good as one with more modestly-priced speakers carefully placed and installed, driven by quality electronics."

And I have always thought that the electronics up front dictated the quality of the final sonic result out of the speakers.

 

 

 

My wife thinks I don’t listen enough to her- seems a common theme for husbands

My father had his issues, but one outstandingly good thing he did was to expose my twin brother and me to music from the first days home after we were born. There are some amusing pictures of Michael & I sitting in our twin high chairs, throwing food around (no more than 2-3 yrs old), rocking to Duke Ellington or Count Basie LPs. We also heard all the Beethoven symphonies, some Brahms, Mozart, and lots of Bach.

As soon as we could walk we were instructed in how to safely play LPs, and did so incessantly. I didn’t know it then, but I had quite a case of synesthesia: whenever I heard music and closed my eyes, I hallucinated wild colors and architectural/geometric shapes. I thought everyone did that. I experienced music then as a deeply moving rabbit hole I had trouble climbing out of when it was done. Other than the playback gear and lower incidence of synesthesia, very little has changed.

I didn’t know it then, but I had quite a case of synesthesia: whenever I heard music and closed my eyes, I hallucinated wild colors and architectural/geometric shapes.

@desktopguy

I can see where this might be a double edged sword. Although on a good evening or afternoon music can move me quite deeply, to obtain what you sre describing always took/takes ingesting  chemicals, and I will say that I enjoy(ed) it immensely.

However, I can also see where this could become problematic:

I experienced music then as a deeply moving rabbit hole I had trouble climbing out of when it was done.

 

"to obtain what you sre describing always took/takes ingesting  chemicals"

You're quite right. Later on, when I was in college, I fully explored those chemicals. Sometimes those experiences were wonderful ... occasionally the opposite.

But in any case, hallucinations from mescaline or LSD seemed a bit familiar to me, in quality if not degree.