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
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
the dichotomy is not illusory. there are two ways to judge the merits of a stereo system, namely, equipment-based and listener-based.

a stereo system has an affect upon the listener. the stereo system can also be evaluated as to the usual criteria of neutrality, accuracy, transparency, resolution, etc. .

i believe both metods, the sound of the stereo system, independent of its affect upon the listener, or the affect upon the listener are valid.

many audiophiles feel that a listener's emotional response to sound is irrelevant as to the sound quality of a stereo system. such an approach places the stereo system as the point of reference.

i have yet to read a reasoned definitive argument rejecting one or the other position.
Post removed 
Fatparrot - Yeah, I know, I was playin' off your quote...ya'know; dejavu...didn't someone already say that, or was I dreamin'?...sometimes the ol' elevator doors don't open all the way and you got'ta squeeze out or spend the afternoon with the sweaty fat man in close quarters.

Newbee - you're lucky you didn't let Good Sound in when it came a knockin'. You've probably heard this story, but some of our younger members may not be familiar with the legend: Back in the early 70's Good Sound did a disappearing act and skipped town. Feds said they wanted him to ask some questions about a little boy gone missin' in Culver City. They sent a whole posse of men after Good Sound when someone reported a sighting in the foothills around Reno. 26 men went out, only 2 came back. Of those two, one can be found to this day muttering incoherently over an empty glass at Mr. O's in Reno. The other one was committed, and shortly after hung himself from a Joshua Tree. Good Sound showed up again in the 90's somewhere on the East Coast. Nobody said anything and the law's kept its distance. Good Sound was never prosecuted. Nothing could be proved. Speaking of incoherent mutterings (while making a few of my own)... Illusory dichotomy?!? I think someone's got his raquet strung too tight. I can't afford words like that (OK, I guess I could probably swing a used one), much less use them in a sentence! You know you can probably get better performance from those words if you get a better power cord for them. Better yet, daisy chain a Hydra to a PS Audio and you'll be cookin' with gas my friend!

Marco