2. digital
  3. 1281290472

Imaging and Detail.

I am curious as to what everyone feels is the best sound they can achieve from there cd players.
Do you prefer a highly detailed sound with exceptional imaging or do you prefere a more warm sound( some would call it muddled) that subdues the detail and give a more overall smooth listening experence but still retains most of the imaging?

I listen to alot of 70's rock.Led Zepplin, AC-DC,Pink Floyd,Allman Brothers,ect....
This music just does not sound right to me on a very detailed system.The music just does not flow for me with all the detail.Why does everyone put such emphises on all this detail?

With smooth jazz it is superb but with the stlye of music I prefere it is crap.
shaunp
has2be's avatar
has2be
555 posts
 
Thanks for going to the trouble Tvad of listing all the equipment. However I wasn,t trying to question your knowledge,the gear or set up itself you had/have. I should of been more clear by stating my general thinking/opinion that an audiophile system in my humble opinion with a slightly less focus on "detail" than one that does, doesn't make it less of an audiophile system.For the purist your staement is probably more accurate for what audiophiles goals are. Cheers
Post removed 
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,702 posts
 
I will agree that these recordings often sound bad even on some really good setups, but I can't agree that that is necessarily always the case. My current system disproves that.

Before my last upgrade adding the Bel Canto ref100m amps, I might have agreed, but no longer.

I played Bad Company 10 from 6 the other day. It was the first time ever this CD sounded good and not bad to me (I've always regarded it as one of the worst recordings) and I have heard this material on many systems over the years.

Don't give up hope people. Its possible to get this stuff to sound pretty good along with everything else if you like it enough to put in the extra effort needed.

I would never go back to a vintage system for this.

BTW, it sounds acceptable as well to me on my second system using a vintage receiver with more modern music server, DAC, and speakers, but not in th e same league as my main rig.

On the other hand, I think my OHM speakers are a big part of the equation for getting the most out of these recordings. The OHMs have modern drivers but are in essence a vintage design. So maybe Tvad is right!
Post removed 
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,702 posts
 
If forgiving equates to non-fatiguing, I would agree.

OHM walsh speakers are more etched these days with the newer drivers though than their vintage ancestors. There may be more etched systems out there but I have not heard any that are more so these days than mine without also becoming fatiguing at the same time. Who is to blame then, the recording or the system or both? If a recording sounds right on one system and not on another, I would tend to blame the system, but its a hard call to make definitively because there are so many different factors that come into play from one rig to another and even one version of a recording to another. After all, recordings do not make any sound until you play them on something.
More to discover