Principles

I understand the intention of this thread is to discuss the 'musicianship' of hifi equipment, wich parameters influence it, if they are the same for everybody, or not, what is the problem with this... :newbie:
 
just reading julian's post in the context of what Pete said just above it;would that mean that two people could come out of a live un-amplified concert and disagree about the quality of the performance due to a difference in their hearing?
 
Simple analagy here,
Joe Saturai great player,superb technicition, faultless almost however can be boring predicable and sterile.
Stevie ray played from the heart and soul, amazing musical communication and audience enthraulment, technically not the best.
personally I prefer SRV, other may take the 'Satch'
simple really
 
Last edited by a moderator:
coda,
i'd agree - i'm quite sensitive to high frequencies and find some soprano's to be quite painful - literally. so if we went to an opera (for some reason i agree to go or i'm at gun point) you might comment on the clarity and range of the singer whereas i'd just be bleeding out of my lug holes.
 
brizonbiovizier said:
Audio engineering is a scientific discipline subject to scientific rules. If that is objectivist then so be it. It is the only way to approach the topic. Otherwise it would be like homeopathy ;). Valve lovers love audio voodoo!
Click to expand...
I liked the intention of the opening post and started to read it. I made it to page 2 before you put your usual contamination all over it. This and the generalisation about musicians being poor audio enthisiasts. Personal experience or just another generalisation? Any more valid than a generalisation about Thai fans being the next Gary Glitter?

Come on Nick, one day you will hopefully look back and realise that you have a set of opinions, no more no less than the next person. You have a set of preferences as well. The day you are capable of suppressing them without mention of your choices or your rejections will be the day to take you seriously.

I have two valve systems, I do not consider them voodoo, I am captivated by their strengths to the point of accepting their weaknesses. They are used for music not sound etc. They fit into my lifestyle. At certain times of the year they get used a lot, at others I'm busy with other things. I have no intention of changing them. I use a Sony Walkman MP3 on one for sheer variety of music as well as TV, video and DVD. The other is radio, occasional CD and one of those sh1t-average SME record players...

Personal message over, there's no need to comment wider for everyone else but I don't want to leave my message as a personal rant so for the sake of good order: good valve equipment falls into the scope of what has already been mentioned. Preservation of some things over others.

Sorry to hijack the thread Gents, I've been spending too much time around people with a pulse and don't have the patience one often needs towards certain elite audio folk.
 
Richard,

well done on discovering that hifi forums are for arguing - not for gaining insight or knowledge.

If you do a search, you will find that this converation has been had two hundred times before on this board alone - and inumerable times elsewhere.

You could always read those, unless of course your intention was to have an arguement on your own terms, without the need to indulge in willy waving.

FWIW, traffic shows that childish arguments are what draw in posters and lurkers - kind of like rubber necking an accident.

The problem with hifi is that there is nothing out there that hasn't been discussed before. So it's all repetition, and some will take great delight in pointing that out.

Anyway, what was your argument? If it's not thoroughtly based in science, you don't stand a chance matey - the trolls will have you before you've even got going.
 
julian2002 said:
perhaps they can - i submit that 2 people with different hearing characteristics (i.e. one is sensitive to mid range sound and the other with a dip in the same range - whether due to hearing damage, a perforated ear drum or wax build up) can genuinely express a different opinion of the same system.

i say the only way to build a system you will be satisfied with is to actually listen to the kit in surroundings as close to those at home as possible. if you are lucky enough to have 20/20 hearing (or whatever the phrase is) then you could probably do it by looking at numbers and graphs - if you can then good luck to you but don;t p1ss on others chips just because they can't or want to sample the alternatives.
Click to expand...

I wrote this before.

There was a guy regularly doing the rounds of the Hi-Fi shows in the 1980's who used a hearing aid. He was really fun to be with as you could take him around the rooms and he largely heard and articulated the musical difference you did. He spent a small fortune on his Hi-Fi. So if we are only talking about mechanical / biological structures what is the process going on here, because medical and mechanical explanations have no way of explaining this!

Ears are only one part of the equation, the whole body responds to energetic stimulii and not just a low frequencies. Stick some cotton wool in your ears and do the rounds of some comparitive demonstrations. First you have to get over the fact that everything sounds crap. Soon you will find there are degrees of crap and from what ever base point you come from differences and changes in emotional / energetics responses are still apparent. If that situation is all you know or are used to, that is what you work with, the human body and mind are marvelous adapters to reality.

Do you realise that someone who is totally deaf can get pleasure form a music concert, they *hear* by proxy, they pick up and perceive normal hearers energetic responses subconsciously, and they get off on that!!!

Richard
 
julian2002 said:
coda,
i'd agree - i'm quite sensitive to high frequencies and find some soprano's to be quite painful - literally. so if we went to an opera (for some reason i agree to go or i'm at gun point) you might comment on the clarity and range of the singer whereas i'd just be bleeding out of my lug holes.
Click to expand...

So just to move that point forward, assuming that no one was in pain and that we both enjoyed it as a piece, is it more likely that we would then be discussing the quality of the performance (how well the performers and staging communicated the drama) or the quality of the sound?
 
Richard Dunn said:
Lets start with the premis (dangerous) that hi-fi is for listening to music, and not just feeding your ego or for intellectual rattling and masturbation.

Given this what are the principles involved in creating a system to reproduce music, and is it the same root for those pursuing fidelity in sound to those pursuing fidelity to the music / composer / orchestra / band / singer etc. Are they the same?"
Click to expand...
I assume that listening to music is in a certain way feeding your ego anyway. Who listens at home to muusic who he doesn't like? Who gives a chance to understand the message of the interpreter instead of just criticizing or judging their performance?
Who will just dedicate time at home only for listening to the music without doing at the same time other activities?

What we hear is the result of different factors one of them is the physical waves that hit our ears and body. The rest of the many factors happen in our body. Two different waves can therefore be percepted "exactly" the same way and two identical waves can be percepted by the same person differently depending on what happens to him in his body.
With this the importance of reproducing exactly the perfection can be very much relativated.

A main factor remains the sound-ambition a person wants.
Depending on this ambition and several other factors like listening experience and habits, there are certain limits in which the characteristics of the sound can change without causing a "negative" feeling.
This is purely personal and might change during the life.

So what bother about other people's Hifi unless you are interested in knowing more about the person?
 
coda,
it would depend on the quality of both. for example, i go clubbing a lot and on the journeys home have had discussions about both the sound system used and the dj's performance with fellow clubbers. usually discussion is sparked by either being really good or really bad. either is a valid item for discussion. however even then i sometimes disagree with whoever i'm having the discussion with
pertinent to this discussion i found that the best club system i've ever heard was a funktion one setup at the empire in milton keynes due to it's clarity and lack of distortion even at bowel loosening volume whereas a more mediocre one can be found at one of my local clubs in bedford. the thing is i have a much better time at the one in bedford than i did at the empire when the f1 system was there so make of that what you will.
 
titian said:
...
So what bother about other people's Hifi unless you are interested in knowing more about the person?
Click to expand...

That's true.

I hadn't thought of it like that before.

I've learnt something today.

So forums are worthwhile after all.

Hurrah!
 
I bother to ask about other people's hifi, to learn if it is worth talking to them about hifi or music... ;)

And after a concert, I will discuss the quality of the sound, only if it is bad, or remarkably good...
 
Richard Dunn said:
Do you realise that someone who is totally deaf can get pleasure form a music concert, they *hear* by proxy, they pick up and perceive normal hearers energetic responses subconsciously, and they get off on that!!!

Richard
Click to expand...

So its a bit like the film 'Its all gone Pete Tong' :D
 
Stereo Mic said:
Richard,

well done on discovering that hifi forums are for arguing - not for gaining insight or knowledge.

If you do a search, you will find that this converation has been had two hundred times before on this board alone - and inumerable times elsewhere.

You could always read those, unless of course your intention was to have an arguement on your own terms, without the need to indulge in willy waving.

FWIW, traffic shows that childish arguments are what draw in posters and lurkers - kind of like rubber necking an accident.

The problem with hifi is that there is nothing out there that hasn't been discussed before. So it's all repetition, and some will take great delight in pointing that out.

Anyway, what was your argument? If it's not thoroughtly based in science, you don't stand a chance matey - the trolls will have you before you've even got going.
Click to expand...

So you presume I have nothing to add having spent over 30 years exploring these concepts.

I will try not to argue apart from dismissing the people who want to drag us into the mud to play.

The closed mind is another problem, but people are people.

Richard
 
melorib said:
I like how you ignore my posts, maybe I should start... no, it is not worth it... :SLEEP:
Click to expand...

Who are you refering to, I hope not me!

To agree with an agree-er just completes a circle that becomes never ending. Your points are as valid as mine they need no support.

Richard
 


Write your reply...

Latest posts

Back
Top