Ultra high resolution

hi dave:

you have misinterpreted my position:

reality is based upon distance between musician and listener, including the perspective of another musician and/or someone sitting in the audience. i respect your desire to hear the breath and note the source of the vocalization of an opera singer. that's fine for you and it is indeed part of reality.

i prefer tnot hear breath, turning of pages or be close to an instrument. it is to jarring and intense. i like music to sound like it is floating. i prefer distance.

having performed with other musicians in the past, i can understand why you prefer that perspective. i have a musician friend who also prefers a "forward" perspective.

live and let live. if i presented myself as dogmatic and a generalist, i apologize. my perspective is very liberal. reality encompasses many experiences. enjoy your stereo system. if you have panel speakers, i would enjoy your stereo system as well.

Nicely said, Mrtennis. That's what I thought you might mean.

I don't have panel speakers, BUT I bet you a bottle of fine wine that you'd enjoy my system, with the right recordings and at the right distance. ;-)

Dave

Actually, Mrtennis, if the recording hall and playback system are up to snuff then wouldn't you expect the opera singer to fill the entire soundstage whether live or during reproduction with minimal localization?

As for hearing an entertainer breath, that is almost entirely up to the artist(s) and sound engineer (and quality of the playback system's ability to accurately reproduce).

You seem to be well aware some music is not intended to be closely miked. But you also must know some music is intended for intimate settings.

There's certainly nothing wrong with preferring rear hall seating or not wanting to hear an artist breath, etc. but if these are indeed some of your preferences then it seems illogical to blame a potentially highly resolving playback system by stripping away what little hope of magic it may provide when in fact the system is nothing more than a reproducer (good or bad) of the recording microphones' perspectives (good or bad) of the live performance.

Isn't that kinda' like blaming your ice-maker for poor tasting ice when your water supply is coming from a sewage treatment plant 2 miles down the road?

-IMO

hi stehno:

you make a good point at distinguishing the message from the messenger. consistent with my last post, i don't blame a "relatively" or "virtually" neutral stereo systenm for reproducing what is on the recording. i may not enjoy listening to a recording or do not want to suffer through it. in that case, i will attempt to alter what comes out of the speakers by voicing the other components to minimize the effects of recordings whose sound i don't like. hopefully, i can do this in such a manner so as to restore a "neutral" character when recordings represent the sound of instruments in a natural manner. thus i would have a "chameleon-like" stereo system.

ideally, one might have a way to alter the sound of the stereo system or not alter it, to suit one's taste and/or respond to the nature of recordings.

MrT, it seems to me that you would be a fan of the Westminster label. They had a distant mic perspective. Am I right?