It's tempting to judge a hi-fi system solely by its ability to recreate the emotional intensity or, if you prefer, musicality of a live performance. After all, that is why we listen to music and buy hi-fi systems. However, my experience tends to suggest that musicality and listenability, although usually correlated, are somewhat distinct. For me, at least, the listenability of a system seems at least as dependent on its sonic performance as its musical performance.
Example (1) For many years I owned a slowly evolving Linn/Naim system. On a good day its emotional effect was comparable with that of a live performance but much if not most of the time its sonic failings drove me nuts. Being familiar with top quality Linn/Naim systems I knew that my system would eventually reach a point where I could mostly enjoy the music and forget about the hi-fi but I never imagined how far I would have to upgrade before I reached that point, which I eventually did.
I should emphasise that the moral of the story is not that you should keep spending until you get a good enough system, as I hope will become clear from my second example.
Example (2) My present system is a very modest one, whose performance is compromised by the fact that the speakers are temporarily boxed into a small space that doesn't suit them. Unsurprisingly, this system never induces the emotional highs that my old Linn/Naim system did. In fact, I'm so unenthusiastic about it that I'd have to go downstairs to check two of the model numbers. [I have an Onkyo DVD/CD/SACD/DVD-A player, a bottom of the range Marantz amp and a pair of Tannoy F1 Custom speakers]. Nevertheless, I can listen to it, at any time, without worrying about the sound. I think the reason for this is not, as some might argue that my expectations are lower, but that its sonic (as opposed to musical) performance is in some ways better than that of my old system.
I'm not familiar with much present day hi-fi but what little I've heard - including some more recent Naim equipment - all seems to have solid sonic performance. Therefore, if anything, I wonder if your system has the opposite problem - i.e. is it possible that your new system is sonically better than your old one without being musically/emotionally better? If so then that might explain your focussing on the sound rather than the music.
Even if I am right, which I hope I'm not, it doesn't mean that a wholesale system change is necessary. In a difficult room set-up can be all important. Failing that, one mis-chosen component can do more damage than a dem-room investigation can reveal. E.g. the last upgrade of my Linn/Naim system was from a bottom-of-the-range NAP90 to a NAP140 power amplifier. In the dem room the NAP90 hadn't seemed particularly bad: it was no match for a 140 but its sins had seemed to be ones of omission. In my difficult listening room, however, upgrading to the NAP140 revealed that the NAP90 had been responsible for my system's boomy, untuneful bass (which hitherto I had wrongly attributed to an unavoidable problem of speaker/room interaction) and its "uncommitted" timing (for want of a better phrase).
I hope this has been of some interest, even if it hasn't necessarily been relevant to you, and I hope you solve your problem.
Example (1) For many years I owned a slowly evolving Linn/Naim system. On a good day its emotional effect was comparable with that of a live performance but much if not most of the time its sonic failings drove me nuts. Being familiar with top quality Linn/Naim systems I knew that my system would eventually reach a point where I could mostly enjoy the music and forget about the hi-fi but I never imagined how far I would have to upgrade before I reached that point, which I eventually did.
I should emphasise that the moral of the story is not that you should keep spending until you get a good enough system, as I hope will become clear from my second example.
Example (2) My present system is a very modest one, whose performance is compromised by the fact that the speakers are temporarily boxed into a small space that doesn't suit them. Unsurprisingly, this system never induces the emotional highs that my old Linn/Naim system did. In fact, I'm so unenthusiastic about it that I'd have to go downstairs to check two of the model numbers. [I have an Onkyo DVD/CD/SACD/DVD-A player, a bottom of the range Marantz amp and a pair of Tannoy F1 Custom speakers]. Nevertheless, I can listen to it, at any time, without worrying about the sound. I think the reason for this is not, as some might argue that my expectations are lower, but that its sonic (as opposed to musical) performance is in some ways better than that of my old system.
I'm not familiar with much present day hi-fi but what little I've heard - including some more recent Naim equipment - all seems to have solid sonic performance. Therefore, if anything, I wonder if your system has the opposite problem - i.e. is it possible that your new system is sonically better than your old one without being musically/emotionally better? If so then that might explain your focussing on the sound rather than the music.
Even if I am right, which I hope I'm not, it doesn't mean that a wholesale system change is necessary. In a difficult room set-up can be all important. Failing that, one mis-chosen component can do more damage than a dem-room investigation can reveal. E.g. the last upgrade of my Linn/Naim system was from a bottom-of-the-range NAP90 to a NAP140 power amplifier. In the dem room the NAP90 hadn't seemed particularly bad: it was no match for a 140 but its sins had seemed to be ones of omission. In my difficult listening room, however, upgrading to the NAP140 revealed that the NAP90 had been responsible for my system's boomy, untuneful bass (which hitherto I had wrongly attributed to an unavoidable problem of speaker/room interaction) and its "uncommitted" timing (for want of a better phrase).
I hope this has been of some interest, even if it hasn't necessarily been relevant to you, and I hope you solve your problem.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram