2. misc-audio
  3. 1363488219

The Engineer's Shoes..

We Audiogoneers share a love of audio and music. Discussions can be impassioned; feelings frequently run high, and sometimes debate will descend into pitched battle.
But why? Consider the Chain.

1. The choice of music.
2. Is the music electronic, amplified, or acoustic?
3. The choice of musicians.
4. The choice of recording venue.
5. The choice, and positioning of microphone(s)
6. The choice of equipment to record.
7. The choice of transducer to listen to the recording
8. The choice and tastes of the engineer.
9. The choice and tastes of the final mixer.
10 The transducers used by the mixer.
11.The final transfer medium.
12.The listener's playback device.
13.The listener's speakers.
14.The listener's mood.
14.The listener's room.
15.Everyone's ears and hearing.
16.Etc, etc, etc

And we debate the merits of cables?
In this veritable sea of arbitrariness where every variable there could be is loud and clear I wonder how it's possible to debate anything but the music itself - and that of course is nothing but taste defined! A properly conducted debate would have clearly defined goals, and in an ideal situation where there are multiple variables then these would be eliminated in advance. But we allow (and maybe enjoy) the reviewers to use words like "liquid" to describe a midrange - and how can we not! To reduce everything to a set of graphs and numbers is an approach doomed to failure -because the recordings themselves have absolutely no Absolutes.
And what if the engineer's shoes were pinching on the day of the recording? Wouldn't that make a difference too?. I'd like to think of him or her as a person, not a machine.
As most of us do, I love this hobby: I love most things about it. I especially love the fact that ultimately it's just about the music. I even enjoy some of the fringier debates. But I do wonder how any debate could be successfully prosecuted. My speakers, your speakers, my amp, your amp? Ultimately they're all pretty marvelous: perhaps even cables are cool.
But I can't help thinking about that chain, and maybe those shoes....
57s4me
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 
Onhwy61,
I see the point you're making but as human beings how else to communicate without a common language? For example I've been asked more than a few times by interested people to describe the differences in sound between my SET 300b and my 100 watt class AB push pull amplifiers. It's only possible to do if I use very descriptive words and phrases to construct a mental image that would be understood. If I said one has more bass weight and authority yet the other has superior texture, ,articulation and is more tactile, I believe most would correctly get my meaning. I can't think of a better way to communicate my impression to another person.
Regards,
csontos
1,311 posts
 
There seems to be a contradiction in terms in your post, Charles. Not much authority in bass without definition imo. Instead of reinventing the English language, it's probably more useful to use one key word in a phrase. Hence a 'common' language. Wordiness is what leads to confusion and therefore lack of communication. I think it's for the sake of brevity that too much information gets presented all at once in an internet forum conversation.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,590 posts
 
Wouldn't be boring if audiophile Nirvana actually happened and everything sounded uniformly perfect?

Music is an art!!!!! You need the gear to experience the art, but its the art in the end that matters. Variety is the lifeblood of art and makes the world go round.

The gear: that is a function of engineering and applied science, much more cut and dry though variety still abounds.

Put it all together and you got a big jumble of applied science, technology and art. Something for everyone there! I guess that whats makes it all so fascinating and worthy of the time and money we invest.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,272 posts
 
Charles1dad, I think we agree more than we disagree, since I do understand your description of the 300b based amp, however, I've come to the conclusion that the audiophile language ultimately obscures more than it enlightens. I think a truer statement on your part would be that "for some types of music and in certain situation I much prefer the the sound of the 300b amp". That's a fairly opaque and limited statement, but it is precise, a quality that is lacking in the more descriptive language. If somebody insists upon knowing why you have a preference, tell them "it's an tube thing, you wouldn't understand".

...it's like dancing about architecture.
csontos
1,311 posts
 
With me it's a continual quest so always 'Nirvanic". Is that a word? Oh well, you get my drift.
More to discover