High fidelity

[GSB]

i like to view owners set-ups,especialy HT,it gives me a different perspective of my own.

perhaps adding a total budget to the title may be a good idea.

 

[CnoEvil]

In your case, if you've got an impressive willy that you've been talking about for ages and loads of people want to see, then waggle away. Or something.

You do say the sweetest things, and know just how to make a bloke feel good about himself!

....Well, here's another nice mess you've gotten me into!

 

[proffski]

I saw somewhere on this forum a post which suggested that a hi-fi system didn’t need to reproduce something that sounded like the original performance. Now the “fi” part of hi-fi is short for “fidelity” which means truthfulness so hi-fi means something like “highly truthful to the original”. I seriously wonder whether posters to this forum are actually interested in “hi-fi” or in something which simply sounds good. Now there is nothing wrong with having a great sounding system but if it can’t reproduce original performances it ain’t hi-fi! Now there’s nothing wrong with that but we shouldn’t deceive ourselves! Similarly there are highly favourable reviews of speakers on this site which I know from listening to them can’t actually reproduce the sound of a piano! I know what pianos sound like, I live less than 1 mile from Symphony Hall in Birmingham and have been going to concerts for 50 years! I am willing to suggest that the reviewers on this site don't really know whay they are talking about. How can they justify giving a high rating to a speaker which can't reproduce accurate sound? They either can't hear properly or ... So, whilst I hate to be controversial, is this site simply a sham? Discuss!!! Chris

Ah, and I always thought that here I was a lone voice in the "Hi-Fi" wilderness!

Your observation is absolutely correct, the rest is wasted breath!

 

[mahlerous]

HiFi is obviously a subjective term, but for me I'm happy when I'm listening to the Music, not the gear reproducing it.

One of the curious aspects of 'HiFi' is how someone can be very happy with their System, read a review, and suddenly they start finding fault with the sound of their system - amazing!

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Is there a popularity contest......where?

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I read this "The point I was making about “fidelity” was that unless you have heard live performances you wouldn’t know what was or wasn’t accurate. " and had to laugh to myself, what you need is a reciever with a decent DSP - if you want that 'real sound' then you can go through the jazz, concert hall, stadium, etc modes till you get your accurate sound.......funny.

As a youth I worked in a leisure centre, which held concerts in the main sports hall, I heard Black Sabbath (minus Ozzy) , The Alarm, Transvision Vamp early 90's bands. Rock and pop bands, the hall was accousticly treated with large curtains, wooden boards and the like.

Now, placing some earbuds or toilet paper in your ears I swear made these concerts sound superb, as if it was on your hi fi, seperated and detailed - without the earbuds it was just harsh noise it could get painful.

I have heard artist sing live...hitting some duff notes and or sounding nazzle, running out of voice......Live performances imo are way overrated.

 

[Anonymous]

could the same critism be levaled at PA's.....?

an accoustic drum kit sounds completley different over a PA imho.

Absolutely - the 'musical instrument' in highly-amplified music in a venue is the whole chain out to the speakers. If you want that effect at home from a studio recording, stick your expensive hifi loudspeakers in a large bucket sitting on a tin tea tray, turn the bass up to 11, and run a recording of 2000 people talking, singing and jumping up and down.

Still, the question of how well hifi reproduces well-recorded instrumental and vocal sounds is relevant. I chose my speakers against recordings of pianos, orchestras and voices, and pretty much all the ones I tried struggled more or less - I ended up with MA Silver RX-2's, which I am very happy with, and I would agree that BX-5's sounded odd with pianos.

I am not surprised by that difficulty, though. Next to my hifi I have a grand piano - it is 6'2" long, has a soundboard of approximately 15 square foot, and costs £20,000. The pianos in many recordings are 9ft, £130,000 instruments. My decent-enough hifi isn't going to get close.

 

[BenLaw]

could the same critism be levaled at PA's.....?

an accoustic drum kit sounds completley different over a PA imho.

Absolutely - the 'musical instrument' in highly-amplified music in a venue is the whole chain out to the speakers. If you want that effect at home from a studio recording, stick your expensive hifi loudspeakers in a large bucket sitting on a tin tea tray, turn the bass up to 11, and run a recording of 2000 people talking, singing and jumping up and down.

Still, the question of how well hifi reproduces well-recorded instrumental and vocal sounds is relevant. I chose my speakers against recordings of pianos, orchestras and voices, and pretty much all the ones I tried struggled more or less - I ended up with MA Silver RX-2's, which I am very happy with, and I would agree that BX-5's sounded odd with pianos.

I am not surprised by that difficulty, though. Next to my hifi I have a grand piano - it is 6'2" long, has a soundboard of approximately 15 square foot, and costs £20,000. The pianos in many recordings are 9ft, £130,000 instruments. My decent-enough hifi isn't going to get close.

Good post.

 

[Covenanter]

I read this "The point I was making about “fidelity” was that unless you have heard live performances you wouldn’t know what was or wasn’t accurate. " and had to laugh to myself, what you need is a reciever with a decent DSP - if you want that 'real sound' then you can go through the jazz, concert hall, stadium, etc modes till you get your accurate sound.......funny.

As a youth I worked in a leisure centre, which held concerts in the main sports hall, I heard Black Sabbath (minus Ozzy) , The Alarm, Transvision Vamp early 90's bands. Rock and pop bands, the hall was accousticly treated with large curtains, wooden boards and the like.

Now, placing some earbuds or toilet paper in your ears I swear made these concerts sound superb, as if it was on your hi fi, seperated and detailed - without the earbuds it was just harsh noise it could get painful.

I have heard artist sing live...hitting some duff notes and or sounding nazzle, running out of voice......Live performances imo are way overrated.

I guess this partly depends what type of music you listen to live. I saw lots of bands live in my youth, Who, Kinks, Troggs, etc and yes they were often so loud you had to dig a trench to preserve your ears. It isn't always the case as I was at the Cream farewell concert at the Albert Hall in 19xx and whilst I might be deceiving myself I think I remember what it sounded like and therefore know what the CD should sound like. Similarly if you go to a classical concert this isn't the case, ok different halls give you a different sound, but many classical recordings are live so they reflect a real environment rather than a studio. The Argerich recording I referred to is a live performance. And of course people make mistakes in live performances but the ear "rides over" those. In recordings that isn't generally acceptable because hearing the same mistake over and over again is wearing. However you do hear the instruments at a live performance and you get an aural memory of what they sound like. All I'm suggesting is that your hi-fi system should try to reproduce a sound that comes close to that aural memory. if it doesn't then I'm suggesting that while it might sound good, or even great, it ain't hi-fi!

As for the "decent DSP" bit, surely you must accept that every technical step between the sound source and your ears will detract from the original sound. Every bit of kit distorts the signal a little, it can't do otherwise, so what you get is a distorted version of the original. That distortion may be very small but it is real and is unavoidable.

Chris

PS I'd never heard of Transvision Vamp before, which shows my age, and the lead singer certainly comes in the "I would" category. Can't sustain a note sadly but I was mainly looking rather than listening so perhaps it doesn't matter.

PPS I shouldn't do this really but I can't resist. It's "separate" not "seperate". It's from the Latin "separatus", something I learnt in the days when this country had an education system. I'm sure that will get me into trouble!

 

[Hi-FiOutlaw]

I read this "The point I was making about “fidelity” was that unless you have heard live performances you wouldn’t know what was or wasn’t accurate. " and had to laugh to myself, what you need is a reciever with a decent DSP - if you want that 'real sound' then you can go through the jazz, concert hall, stadium, etc modes till you get your accurate sound.......funny.

As a youth I worked in a leisure centre, which held concerts in the main sports hall, I heard Black Sabbath (minus Ozzy) , The Alarm, Transvision Vamp early 90's bands. Rock and pop bands, the hall was accousticly treated with large curtains, wooden boards and the like.

Now, placing some earbuds or toilet paper in your ears I swear made these concerts sound superb, as if it was on your hi fi, seperated and detailed - without the earbuds it was just harsh noise it could get painful.

I have heard artist sing live...hitting some duff notes and or sounding nazzle, running out of voice......Live performances imo are way overrated.

Huuum... Transvision Vamp... " I don't want your money honey, i want your love"

I use to have a big, big ( 7 foot) poster of her in a white litle dress in my room...

For me thats Hi-Fi...

The closest to the real thing I could get...

 

[Al ears]

Yum!

But I think 1800 dollars to see her is a bit steep!

 

[busb]

Leaving aside the rather predatory remarks, Wendy James is still performing (music). Just listened to Sex Kick - more than passable recording quality.

 

[Native_bon]

Well i have been saying this for some time now. Most systems reviewed do not sound like the real thing, Instruments!! I agree, cause am a music producer myself & i hear live instruments all the time. Again most HIFI systems theses days sound clinical to piont of vioding the music of soul & body. Very few systems have true instrument richness. Hence cannot really reproduce the sound of a paino note.

Most systems are disguised by warmth around instruments to make them sound fuller. This leads me back to the true reproduction of instrument sounds with active speakers. Active speakers are the closes you will get to real insruments!!. Expect u have loads & loads of money to reproduce the same sound with passive speakers.

 

[Andrew Everard]

I agree, cause am a music producer myself & i hear live instruments all the time. Again most HIFI systems theses days sound clinical to piont of vioding the music of soul & body. Very few systems have true instrument richness. Hence cannot really reproduce the sound of a paino note.

Most systems are disguised by warmth around instruments to make them sound fuller. This leads me back to the true reproduction of instrument sounds with active speakers. Active speakers are the closes you will get to real insruments!!. Expect u have loads & loads of money to reproduce the same sound with passive speakers.

Thanks for giving us your slant on the subject.

 

[Anonymous]

'scuse my ignorance. Aside from a shorter signal path between amps and speakers, what difference does it have if your speakers are active or not - I don't suppse they use active xovers too?

 

[Andrew Everard]

'scuse my ignorance. Aside from a shorter signal path between amps and speakers, what difference does it have if your speakers are active or not - I don't suppse they use active xovers too?

Yes, truly active speakers use crossovers upstream of the power amps, with dedicated amplification for each driver, rather than crossovers between amp and driver.

 

[Anonymous]

Cool, where I come from active means exactly that - active xovers but I get the impression that a lot of the "hifi" active speakers (cheaper ATC and the like) simply have an amp bolted on the side, or am I doing them a disservice?

 

[idc]

I certainly do not want my hifi to sound like the live version of any band. All the live events I have been to have varied from OK to awful.

As for how close to the recorded sound it is, who knows.

All I can say is after thousands and thousands of hours listening to all sorts of hifis, I know what I like.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

naaaah, I'm sorry but honestly I have not seen such snobbery in quite sometime. Ether you guys need to experiment with your speaker positioninhg or you really need to listen to what your system is doing, and stop deluding yourself regards its music reproduction and what you percieve as a realistic sound. I mean active speakers ....prrrft.

Anyone remember the old "is it real or is it memorex" adverts,

to be honest the realism thing is stupid anyway. Curtis Mayfield - 'It's you' a simple recording made back in the 70's (CD re-issue) I think, sounds superb on my system - if I was to discribe how it sounds to you I'd say a big head in the middle of the room suspended in mid air pouring its heart and soul out to me personally.

Now I've never heard Curtis live, but on that day at that time when the recording was done he was on it so was the band playing so was the engineer who did the mix, there is no way he or the band could reproduce the feel of that song live or the image of the big head floating in mid air.

I have what would be considered a budget system but it does instruments that sound like the instruments.With a well produce CD it sounds great - a piano that sounds like a piano......please!

 

[Covenanter]

I think people are missing the point! If you are talking on this forum about improving your systems then you need to have some common target to be aiming at! If you are all aiming at what sounds good to each of you individually then you are wasting your time talking to each other because what sounds good to one of you may sound dreadful to another. What I am saying is that you have to have a standard of "good" and it needs to be a common standard too or you can't have a meaninful discussion.

The stuff about not wanting to reproduce live concerts is a red herring. I wasn't saying that your hifi should make studio recordings sound like live performances! What I was saying was that if you have a recording of a live performance your hifi should reproduce it as close as possible to what you would have heard if you had been there. If it doesn't then it is by definition distorting. As somebody pointed out the problem with studio recordings is that you don't know what they "should" sound like.

Chris

 

[Thompsonuxb]

But Chris, surely you can see most are trying to achieve better fidelity, cleaner, more defined top end, fuller midrange and defined tonally textured low end. The basics for what could be considered a good sound. music with weight yet clean enough to sound seperated (yes, I said seperated) but also cohesive.

So the deg on a chord on an accoustic guitar or piano does not last as long as the real thing.....c'mon, who's missing the point?

 

[Native_bon]

I certainly do not want my hifi to sound like the live version of any band. All the live events I have been to have varied from OK to awful.

As for how close to the recorded sound it is, who knows.

All I can say is after thousands and thousands of hours listening to all sorts of hifis, I know what I like.

Hum, not sure if you understand live, as in live instruments, not live as in amplified sounds. Am in a recording studio enviroment & not a live show.

 

[Covenanter]

But Chris, surely you can see most are trying to achieve better fidelity, cleaner, more defined top end, fuller midrange and defined tonally textured low end. The basics for what could be considered a good sound. music with weight yet clean enough to sound seperated (yes, I said seperated) but also cohesive.

So the deg on a chord on an accoustic guitar or piano does not last as long as the real thing.....c'mon, who's missing the point?

Well you see I'm not so certain that they are or to be more precise how they will know when they have got there! (BTW I'm not sure what all your words actually mean! "Tonally textured" has me a bit worried.) The thing I'm getting at is how you know you are making progress unless you have a standard to aim at. For me I want my hifi to reproduce music that comes as close as possible to what I hear when I see it performed live. I accept that there are restrictions on that, for example I live in an apartment and volume levels have to be limited, but that's what i'm aiming for.

Chris

PS I'm not sure where your last line comes from. I haven't mentioned the "deg on a chord". What I have mentioned, indeed I started with it, was a piano not sounding like a piano.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

But Chris, surely you can see most are trying to achieve better fidelity, cleaner, more defined top end, fuller midrange and defined tonally textured low end. The basics for what could be considered a good sound. music with weight yet clean enough to sound seperated (yes, I said seperated) but also cohesive.

So the deg on a chord on an accoustic guitar or piano does not last as long as the real thing.....c'mon, who's missing the point?

Well you see I'm not so certain that they are or to be more precise how they will know when they have got there! (BTW I'm not sure what all your words actually mean! "Tonally textured" has me a bit worried.) The thing I'm getting at is how you know you are making progress unless you have a standard to aim at. For me I want my hifi to reproduce music that comes as close as possible to what I hear when I see it performed live. I accept that there are restrictions on that, for example I live in an apartment and volume levels have to be limited, but that's what i'm aiming for.

Chris

PS I'm not sure where your last line comes from. I haven't mentioned the "deg on a chord". What I have mentioned, indeed I started with it, was a piano not sounding like a piano.

You know exactly what I mean, you fool no one......

Tell you the truth chris I think you are just trying to be controversial. You listen to music 'live' you say but you don't really hear what it sounds like, what you hear is the sound coloured by the accoustic of the venue - how can you expect to reproduce the sound of a big venue in your 10x12 front room unless you actually use those dsp's modes I mentioned earlier. So does your music really sound like those live performances?, really chris?

And of course people know when something sounds good, points of reference are not required, if it sounds good, then better to said individual then really thats job done, who is to say it does not.

PS the deg/chord thing was with regard to what would a real piano sound like compared to one played back on a cd, whats the differences you actually hear that make such a huge difference is all -

 

[Native_bon]

Everyone seems to always prove thier piont is the right piont. Yea why not. But if all things being equal, in a treated room you can always find the short comings of particular HIFI system or product. Putting together a system to sound the way you want it to sound is one story & having real HIFI sound is another.

However should there be any rules to how a Hifi should sound?.. Well if you enjoy the sound then the answer is no. Those who are after the very best will always want to get as close as possible to the real thing, the Instrument Sound & emotion of the music. Simples!!