Are You Happy?


On another currently running post a number of people have commented that the majority of their digital music collection is unlistenable. One person said 90% falls into this category. I don't get it! Have these people purposely assembled systems to make their favorite albums sound bad? Do they sit and audition equipment while thinking to themselves "hey, this is great, I won't be able to listen any of my Rolling Stones, but wow does it sound good." Why would someone do this to themselves?

As audiophile we are all a little crazy, but these people, IMHO, have gone one step beyond. Please help me to understand what's going on?
128x128onhwy61
To repeat '61s question in another way, 'why would anyone buy 2000-3000 CDs most of whose sound/music they can't stand'? I only have 1000-1200 CDs and 90% or more sound good or better (I cull the junk, BTW). I have a lot more money in gear than music-- maybe that's needed to achieve good digital sound? But money alone won't solve digital woes-- it takes a lot of listening and looking for synergy. If analog is your "bliss" why not stay with it and enjoy? Craig
Don't get me wrong folks, i definitely DO think that digital red book CAN sound pretty darn good. Whether or not MOST digital based systems sound that way is another matter. I wouldn't have known the difference if i hadn't experienced the difference.

I do agree that tubes and / or upsampling can make a WORLD of difference compared to the standard "sterile" sounding digital reproduction that we have all experienced.

Personally, i gained a LOT of insight as to what a "musical" digital system could do when i went to a tube based DAC. I then learned that a system could be both musical AND detailed when i switched over to an upsampling SS DAC. It gave me what i consider to be the best of both worlds. G & W will be releasing an upsampling tube based DAC shortly, so that may be something that is REALLY worth checking out. Sean
>
Sean is right, I think. Though I also find about 80% of my CD collection "unlistenable", "dry", "lifeless" or "dead", especially big orchestral music, upsampling has helped considerably and has brought some of that elusive quality called musicality back into my tinned music. Cheers,
Maybe it's musical genres that make the difference too - I went to see Tool in concert a couple months ago and it was awesome. I play Tool on my home system (their CDs are exceptionally well recorded) and it raises (almost) the same level of goosebump (nothing's like the wall of sound when you're actually there). I'm sure many wouldn't consider Tool "musical" at all, but call it what you like, played over my system from a CD source, I love it.

I listen to plenty of other styles as well, though little to no classical. I find Tori Amos, Patricia Barber, Mighty Sam McClain, Luther Allison all to be very compelling played from CD. Possibly I'm just not as particular as some, which I'm saying neither as a compliment or a put-down to either point of view.

I know my daughter (16) listens to everything from hard rock to classical on her $100 boom box system and is an avid (and budding) cellist. She has more music appreciation in her than I will ever have, so there must be something in the music itself that represents "soul" regardless of format or source. -Kirk