Is live reproduction the goal of audio?

Everyone

Jax2....let me give you some 100%. You really nice guy you. You, I wish I was there to share my passion . Take that buddy and watch your smile ...

Ok ...100% fact that we are just talking about the subject was my point.

Truth does exist 100% . I bet you can find me a 100% lie. It is relative only because out of the 100 people in a room only 1-2 will look through the lies to uncover the truth. The rest believe that what is .."is" They are happy to take someone elses truth and make thier own. It takes somebody really different to search and search to constantly keep uncovering more truth through the maze of lies.
Fear will keep you from moving on.

The reason one cannot handle the truth is a fairly simple one . He is just not aware of it. In order to confront anything you have to know something about it . A very few lead the rest follow. The followers make the most noise I'm afraid...

Nice to read posts like yours

Perception is not reality, and reality cannot be subjective. People too often confuse opinion for fact.

Perhaps not, but 'perception' is all any of us have. It is how we experience 'reality'. Absolutely agreed, people frequently confuse their own opinions, but I'm not sure about "fact"...I think they confuse their opinions with opinions that they think everyone should have, or would have given the same experience.

Just because 20 people in a room describe an event differently does not change the event.

No, as above, it shows how strongly we rely on our perception, and how each individuals percetion of an event is entirely subjective. The audio industry is producing this stuff because human beings buy it to reproduce music in their homes...not in order to recreate perfect sine waves. Human beings are the target market, not computers and machines.

As far as there being some objective "Truth" or "Reality", Rene Descartes makes a pretty formidable argument that the concept is not so cut and dry. Since I can only view the world through my own experience, I cannot fathom why I should try to force myself into accepting some other "truth" to be my own, or worse yet, become a machine (impossible anyway, of course - where would the wax clown lips go?) that had no such subjective perceptions as I do as a human.

It simply points out the amount of error taking place in peoples minds, and their inability to explain their perceptions. Most of the people in that room will be wrong when they relate their experience. That does not take anything away from the event, it simply proves human fallability.

And again, my entire point. NONE of those people are WRONG, they presumably relayed the event exactly (or as closely as possible) as they perceived it. It does not even have to be about "fallabilty" or mistakes. From one vantage point in a room even an objective recording machine will record the event differently (it may sound different and appear different) than another machine positioned somewhere else in the room. Mike the event at the source, mike it a few feet out, mike it at the back, or the side of the room, and you have many different sounding recordings. Same thing if a person stands in those places. Ditto they will see the event differently from a different angle.

C5150 - Thank you, I enjoyed your posts as well. My point is there is no 100% truth and 100% lie - it is all entirely relative to the one perceiving it. If there is some "objective truth", I'm not sure why it matters as each of us will have our own version of it anyway...we cannot help it, we are human. How can you say one or the other of us is "wrong" in conveying their experience of something...that's how they perceived it! Then in turn you are saying it is "wrong" to experience the world as a human being, and that we should be more like machines. I do not find that an admirable quality. Good to hear you're out - stay out of the box my friend!

Marco

Furthermore; in the case of music it is the vibrations that we are responding
to. It is precisely because we are human that we have any response to this
stuff at all. We ascribe some meaning to those responses...good, bad, warm,
cold, green, blue, mother-in-law, pumpkin. We are reacting to the vibrations
of the music and making meaning from that reaction. Each of us responds
entirely uniquely to the same set of vibrations/sounds. A machine may react
to the music by recording data, or performing some other programed
response, but it cannot and will not experience any feelings, or ascribe any
meaning to the experience of the music. It will have no desire for more bass.
It will not prefer Bach over Greenday. Are audio manufacturers designing for
machines or for people? I think the latter as their the ones with the wallets.
It's like asking a computer to taste test some wine...I'm sure some geek is
working on that angle as well if it hasn't been done already, but really, what
real use is it? Perhaps that it may help sell more bottles of some wines
because some zombies need to have someone else tell them what they
should enjoy, and what they should not.

Marco

Perceptions are reality. Without sight ,smell,touch ......you would not be able to perceive the physical universe which you are supposed to confront. The problem with humans are they don't intrepret thier perceptions right. A computor is said to be smart. Well if i look at it I'm convinced that if I give it a problem that it will give me the right answer. If I ask a human he will probably error.

A human built the computor. A human has a problem and needs a calculator to solve the humans problem . No it's a tool that adds. The human punches up the keys and waits for an answer ...which then human will evaluate and use it. Put in the wrong info you will get the wrong answer. Nothing wrong with human or machine. Human nature is perfect . The guys with the wrong view point are perpetuating errors. In order to fix the problem we must apply and do. We have instead , thought of a better way. Blame the other guy and that relieves us of the responsibilty of putting in ethics to fix our problems. You see everyone is eager to push his reality on the other but won't fix up his own inorder to present it without confusion.

I feel better already....LOL

The big issue arises when people who were not in the room try to explain as authorities what took place there because they heard a recording of the event.

Let me give you an example. If real chef looks at a receipe and then watches a tape of beginners he could see the ones that understood the fundemental points of putting a dish together. If you do not preheat the oven ...you will not get the results starting off with a hot oven.

I do not need to be in the room with you. Rambling on about tubes and ss and tt ...is like beef vs veal . Show me how your going to handle and apply the technique. You guys are stuck on canadien vs usa prime vs french. I need to see who will apply the tech of the roasting method.

When I see the set up of some hi-fi then ...how do you know my sound will suck. I apply the tech my friends. Your pictures tell a thousand realities.