what is good sound ?


when evaluating stereo systems, should the performance of the stereo system itself be the reference point, or should the listener be the basis for the evaluation ?

if the instrinsic quality of sound is the basis for judgment, then such concepts as transparency, neutrality or accuracy might be the standard for evaluation.

otherwise, the listener would be the sole judge and whatever criterion, be it based upon sonic considerations or physiological/psychological states, would be the deciding factor.

whatever approach is selected, what is the justification for either one ?
mrtennis
Jax2, regarding your first post. You freak me out, that was exactly, word for word, what I was gonna say.

there were two parts to this thread. the first part has been answered. the second part has not.

no one has attempted to provide a rationale, justification or reason for a position.

i have been battling with certain individuals about this for the last two months.

my perception is there is a lot of dogmatism and intolerance of opinions which differ from the conventional wisdom.

there has been argumentum ad hominem--heat but not light.

how about some defense ?

i realize that some of you don't see the necessity to defend yourself (9w ??).

however it is very easy to criticize and insult but somewhat unfair not to defend what seems to be in some cases arbitrary positions.
Mrtennis,

I think you present an illusory dichotomy. The perception of transparency, neutrality, and accuracy is a physiological/psychological process. I agree with Audiokinesis that you use critical listening to select and setup an audio system that will be satisfying and not distracting when enjoying music.

Maybe my preference for recordings of chamber and jazz music stems from my experinece with live performances of such music.

db