Are linear tracking arms better than pivoted arms?

Interesting thread, all opinions included.

FWIW I concluded some time ago that the 'problem' in our hobby had its seeds in the development of 'stereo' sound including multi channel sound, where the objective became creating/sustaining the fantasy of listening to a live performance in a manner more grand that 'mono' sound allowed.

The focus was on, and I think still remains in great part, the creation of that sonic 'stage' in your home. Not the replication of live music as heard live from an optimum position, although some effect was made and abandoned at various time at recording with a single or two closely spaced mikes.

Refer to all of the terms inherent in describing reproducing recorded sound. Sound stage height, width, depth, specificity, warmth, accuracy, linearity etc. What do any of these terms have to do with a live performance. Not much I suspect, and this may be why, were it otherwise possible, that we will never hear a reasonable reproduction of live sound that isn't at odds with the formats we are given to live with.

We will always be at the mercy of the recording engineer's and the industry's pursuit of a format that injects an artifice that is not consonant with the experience of hearing music live. Small wonder that many folks, myself included, who have graduated to a POV that allows them to set up their environment so that the music they play sounds good to their ear. I'm now at a stage that all that is important to me is that the equipment, software and hardware, not get in the way of the performance that I'm listening to. That alone is a tough enough task and its full of compromises but its easier in the long run than pursuing a Dulcinea.

Thanks for the chance to rant! :-)

Raul: So what would you like to see us/them do? The playback hardware is better than the recordings/media available to the consumer (at least 99% of the time).
Software on both the recording and playback ends are the bottleneck. Atmosphere is a fine fellow, but but he (and us) are minnows in the ocean.

on a related subject to 'the Absolute Sound'; having high quality RTR 15ips 1/4" master dubs and good RTR decks does allow one to 'calibrate' other sources. it will not calibrate the down stream signal path, but it's easy to hear how close an Lp/tt/cart/phono stage/digital player is to the actual recording. yes; not all master dubs are created equal....but it's the best one can hope to do.....and certainly better than not having it.

i have enough of these along with vinyl and digital masterings that the truth quickly is heard on what source/media is closest.

We as audiophiles can only control what we can reproduce in what is captured, that is, we didn't record the damn sound. Since we have no control over the recording, the absolute sound is unobtainable. However, it is possible to get close to what the source is, that is, master-tape quality. What good is absolute sound when we cannot feed the reproduction chain with absolute sound? Besides, a lot of recordings are far from absolute and very often terrible sounding. I rather listen to a crude recording of Charlie Parker than a pristine recording of a Sheffield Lab record. How many times do I have to suffer through the recording of bats flying out of a cave?! Sometimes it's not a question of "does it sound like you are there" but "do you want to be there." Some audiophile recordings have music so bad that I wouldn't want to be there even if you pay me. Unless someone who can control every step of the chain from the microphone to the speaker end, the absolute sound is not possible. You can, however, get the absolutely toe tapping sound.

______

Atmasphere, I understand your confusion with how I seemingly arrived at a different conclusion. I did not do a very good job of explaining that I agreed with Syntax as concerns audiophiles, NOT manufacturers, as a group.

Mepearson, from my vantage point, you prove my point. I don't believe I have the subjectivist argument reversed at all. My argument encourages listeners to listen and arrive at their own conclusions, NOT based on what others say. It has been demonstrated time and time again that numbers actually tell us very little about how something sounds. Remember "Perfect Sound Forever"?

Cjfrbw, where to begin? All I can say is that, with all due respect, you could not be more mistaken. Reference to the "absolute sound" as you call it, is exactly what most musicians use, and prefer. The fact that they are seldom satisfied with reproduced sound makes my point. They listen to music in very different ways than most audiophiles do. They are accustomed to listening for subtleties available in live sound that are simply obliterated by the recording process. That is at the root of their disatisfaction. And BTW, musicians, as a percentage of the overall population, have far more audiophiles in their ranks than not; to debunk a popular myth. And they most certainly are sensitive to the true sound of instruments other than their own.

Look, no one is suggesting that the pursuit of the absolute is the only way to enjoy music in the home. If it sounds good to any given person, great! As has been pointed out, why judge? But to deny that there exists, in fact, a true reference, is being closeminded, and to refer to the pursuit of such as "smug delusional" is a kind of aural equivalency that only serves to dumb-down excellence.