JMacMan
New member
CnoEvil said:JMacMan said:Perhaps if they listen to pink noise/electronic music maybe.... as a classical musician, all I can say is that music is the art, and the equipment's role is to reproduce that art - as accurately, faithfully and as naturally as possible. Taste or preferences don't come in to it with HiFi - it's not a musical instrument - rather it's role is to reproduce the music as faithfully as possible, and from all aspects - nothing more and nothing less.
If I chose to make a recording on a Bosendorfer, and a particular instrument at that, because of it's particular sound (there is no such thing as a generic piano sound) and your flavoured HiFi in it's reproduction efforts makes it sound like an 18th century Forte Piano what's the point of an artist going to the trouble they do in their selection of instruments for performance and recording? Why use Stradavarious or Guanerius Violins, if your 'flavoured' Hii makes it sound like a cheap Chinese beginners instrument. I have a friend who is a Luthier, and customers spend weeks assesing stringed instruments, and pay many, many thousands of dollars for the way an individual instrument plays and sounds - such is the dedication to their art.
JMac
In an ideal world, I would completely agree with this sentiment, though I have some provisos:
- Equipment that can fully and accurately reproduce an orchestra, is far from cheap.
- With the budget that the average enthusiast is prepared to spend, there is going to be a compromise, so it's better to make this in a way that makes it enjoyable to the listener. IMO. A composer uses music (via musicians) as a medium to convey passion, so the most important thing a hifi has to do, is relay this as fully as possible.....so this element must not be lost.
- Given the subjective nature of interpretation, how do you lay down "the standard". ie. If 10 people were asked to put together a system to accurately portray a classical concert that they had just been to......you would probably get 10 different interpretations, through 10 different systems.
- There is more than one way to skin a cat..........I think it's a mistake to write off the separates route, unless of course you have personally heard everything available.
- Even if you go the Active route, there are many different flavours. If AVI's promotion is to be believed, there would have been little point in looking past the ADM40s, yet you you ended up with a beautiful pair of B&Os.
I had a "classical music upbringing" (played in an orchestra / Mother a professional singer / Father an amateur conductor), so have a lot of sympathy for your position; but for me, the most important thing is to get people listening in the first place, to the wonderful music that is out there.
Thanks for a thoughtful post...
- Yes, I agree totally that I'm being idealistic.. but if not, and some sort of objective standard doesn't matter, then frankly I'd almost rather give up on HiFi, and either settle with an iPod + Headphones, or maybe buy BOSE.
- No, it's not cheap - but quality seldom is, in anything...and where possible I prefer to buy right and buy once, as against buy wrong, or cheap, and buy twice.
- I would contend that if a system is as accurate and transparent to the source as possible, even given the compromises of budgetary restraints, it will still hold the attention of someone who is listening to the music - and NOT the sound that the HiFi makes - the music is the art, the HiFi the reproducer - cheap HiFi may lose or mask some of the information, but certainly most musicians 'hear' through those omissions, and provided the system is not adding excessive amounts of noise, distortion, or coloration, most will be reasonably happy. As I say, musicians listen to the music; HiFi buffs listen to either the sound of the HiFi per se, or what the HiFi is 'doing' to and with the music.
Certainly whilst my HiFi, or my iPhone + Headphones provides the most accurate/transparent to the source reproduction, I still enjoy the music almost as much in my car, or other portables, notwithstanding that the sense of natural spatial perspectives in conjunction with timbral colour, as heard in real life, is such that the overall listening satisfaction is greatest with either the HiFi or the iPhone + Headphones - otherwise there'd be no point in spending expensive amounts on HiFi systems in particular. However, I'm also one of those lucky sods who can read a score and hear the music in my head - I have no idea how this works physiologically, - but I certainly don't need a HiFi to get the passion of the music, and speaking personally, playing an instrument beats any Hifi I've ever heard, at any price point, for a sense of involvement and connection with the music.
- With respect to the subjective nature of interpretation and resultant standards - I agree - and all the more reason to entrust a fully conceived, developed and voiced system by tertiary trained engineers at the highest possible level, and where the closest approach to the original sound is the goal, to meet my HiFi needs, rather than after market, third party mixing and matching at a retail level to try and achieve a satisfactory result by people who, at the end of the day are well meaning enthusiasts to be sure, but ultimately amateurs.
I'm not an electrical/audio/acoustic engineer, nor would I try and pretend to be one, and nor am I an automotive engineer.
If I may make a car analogy, my Merc is more comfortable, but not quite as sharp handling as my friends BMW. Should I then go to a third party, after market dealer, and start playing around with wheel, tyre, and suspension components, to make it handle more like a BMW? How about I just buy the Merc body-shell when I buy the car, and shop around for a Honda or BMW engine to put into it - reputedly Honda and BMW make the best internal combustion engines going, if you're a petrol head.
Or, instead of enlisting the help of semi-professional third party specialists, perhaps it might just be really prudent and sensible to trust the tertiary trained engineers with the highest qualifications in the business, accompanied by peerless R&D, at Daimler GmbH, to design, develop, test and engineer the whole box and dice, to wit the finished vehicle for me? All the mixing and matching is done by engineers at the highest possible levels of expertise, and I get to choose whether to buy the superbly finished and engineered Mercedes, or the better handling, sharper to drive, but less comfortable BMW.
Either way, it's win-win, because the end goal with the car, is to build the best available, and by the most professional and highly qualified engineers in the business. To my mind, after many years of experience in this industry/hobby (40 +) the mixing and matching system building methodology is well past it's use by date - with respect, it belongs back in the DIY era of the 1950's where it began with the baby boomer generation, and is easily outdone by more modern, integrated, efficient, and slowly becoming more mainstream methods of system building, such as fully active speakers.
- There are definitely more ways than one to skin a cat...ouch... I love cats...lol
I just don't believe that going way up the chain in great expense with separate amps/preamps/power supplies/racks/cables/passive speakers is one of them. And as you say, it's nigh on impossible to hear all the combinations - so why bother?
Yes, if perhaps one has started out with an all in one Home Theatre in a Box for example, a separate amp/processor, plus higher quality speakers is likely to give slightly better results if carefully matched, as well as extra connectivity (probably the main reason for moving 'up' from a HT in Box system, as in my experience some of the HT in a Box systems can be extremely good on both music as well as movies)
Beyond that though, (and been caught up in it over many years), I regard it pretty much as an almost continuous merry-go-round exercise in frustration and likely disappointment. If I want 'flavour' in my sound, then there are numerous active systems available to choose from, including large amounts from the Pro audio scene, which is where I would personally look nowadays before any attempt at mixing and matching at a consumer/retail level.
Beyond that, if you want more flavouring of the sound to 'taste' you can also play around with Digital EQ, so why try to alter the sound balance to 'taste' if that's what one is after, by spending silly amounts on swapping out gear to try and effect the desired result? Just plain silly, and quite unnecessary with todays modern tone shaping methods in DSP IMV. Back in the analogue days, this was done with tone controls and EQ - of course, there was always a penalty to pay with noise and distortion in the analogue world, but this is the 21st century, not the 1950's, and modern tone controls or EQ in the digital domain can tailor the sound any which way you like, with few, if any, deleterious effects.
- I agree that even in the active world, there are going to be different sounds, or I'd like to call it tonalities of speakers. I remember the old saying about a piece of kit back in my parents day, as having a nice 'tone'. So yes, you can have two different active speaker designs, where accuracy, neutrality and transparency is the goal, and yet they will have different tonal signatures. I would put this down to differences in cabinets, driver materials, and the actual sound design of the speaker (crossover points and such) which will all subtly alter the tonal balance of the overall sound of the speaker, notwithstanding that one may be equally satisfied with both as far as transparency to the source is concerned.
I chose B&O Beolab 9's quite recently, as a new speaker/system to carry me through the next decade +, and have zero regrets; indeed I regard them as being astonishing value for money in the context of what else is available in the so called high end audio scene, and easily the best HiFi purchase I have ever made. As Mac users are wont to say, they will need to pry them from my cold, dead hands....lol
And yes, I did consider ADM40's, amongst B&W 803D's (as I already have a good system with Sony ES TA-DA9000ES amp + Sony ES 9000 series sources + Naim SBL's and could have thence used my existing sources and amplification) along with some active/hybrid Nakamichi-Whise, electrostatics. If you'd like to know more of my selection criteria and thoughts, I'm happy to copy and paste a writeup/review I made elsewhere on the subject, bearing in mind it's a long post - I have a habit of writing at length!
- Finally, wonderful to hear that there's another classical music fan here - and I agree - getting newcomers, or if you will Gen Y to listen to music (preferably classical amongst other genres) is a great goal; however, most of them with high quality phones + iPod etc, are already hearing far better reproduction than anything I had when I was starting out with domestic HiFi, and arguably better than anything except possible the most expensive, mix and match separates system.
I believe that active speaker systems, no matter who makes them, are the way forward, and likely to be the only system building methodology likely to seriously interest Gen Y - most have no interest in copying the systems of their Grandfathers, or swallowing all the technobabble put out by baby boomer so called high end specialist assemblers - they're far to smart and tech savvy for that.
Thanks for listening, and for your post - apologies about the length of this one...
JMac