What is good hi fi for you

[avole]

is that to which I listen, and do not worry about upgrades, cables, active speakers, passive speakers etc.

Avole same question to you. How do you know what your listening to is good. What have you been active listening to recently.

Anyone can live in a bubble and only listen to their own system. Thats fine but in this instance their opinion on good is extemely limited i am sure you will agree.

For you not to be thinking about it your system must sound perfect for every song? Thats a system i would like to hear

ellisdj is indeed trolling as the above indicates.

 

[ellisdj]

is that to which I listen, and do not worry about upgrades, cables, active speakers, passive speakers etc.

Avole same question to you. How do you know what your listening to is good. What have you been active listening to recently.

Anyone can live in a bubble and only listen to their own system. Thats fine but in this instance their opinion on good is extemely limited i am sure you will agree.

For you not to be thinking about it your system must sound perfect for every song? Thats a system i would like to hear

ellisdj is indeed trolling as the above indicates.

How is asking you a question about your recent hifi experiences trolling. Are we not on a hifi forum?

Its interesting to find out the background of people that post on here. What have you got to hide?

 

[Electro]

Interesting Idea - this is what is Good HiFi Thread

Quick Survey - What do we think Good HiFi should do?

A - Bring the music into your room

B - Take you to the music the room was made in

Interesting one this - please post answers below - we can develop conversation and debate around this that should be constructive

This is a very good question indeed , I think you should start a new thread asking this question it would be a very interesting topic.

For me it is most definitely B, it has always been my aim to add the music and the space it was played to my room rather than bring it into my room .

I want my room to be the seated listening area of the venue and the stage and music created to be added to the end of the room, but loud transients should project forward with force right into my room and even behind me as they do when listening to live music.

I love it when I close my eyes and I can realistically believe I am listening to live music in a live space, in other words transported to the venue with all the refections and feeling of space .

 

[shadders]

Hi,

I thought that SACD is superior to CD given that it is by design, presenting a potential higher signal to noise ratio and greater bandwidth. Hence, it has been proven by science to be better than CD, in this regard. Whether the recording is better, or you can hear the extended S/N or bandwidth, is subjective.

A cable, is linear, and the signal received at one end is linearly related to the signal at the input end. Whereas an amplifier will distort the incoming signal, with the manufacturers specified/measured THD, a cable does not distort the signal. Therefore, a cable cannot add extra signals, it will only relay the incoming signal. As such, cables do not have a sound, and anyone that thinks they can hear the sound of a cable is experiencing expectation bias.

Regards,

Shadders.

No it is not subjective. It is impossible. Science has established this. We are limited by human biology and what our hifi equipment can actually reproduce. Why do you continue cherry picking your facts?

Hi,

Subjective from the point of view of the listener, I never stated science is subjective. As such, I am not cherry picking facts. Perhaps I should have said, you believe you can hear.... Does that help?

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[Gazzip]

No it is not subjective. It is impossible. Science has established this. We are limited by human biology and what our hifi equipment can actually reproduce. Why do you continue cherry picking your facts?

Why don't you just say that you haven't understood what we've been saying about using different masters. That's a completely different issue from whether we can actually hear difference between Redbook CD and SACD. If the masters are different, we will a difference. If they're not, we won't. But even the article you linked to states that hi-res reproduction will not lead to worse quality than Redbook CD. The author of that article simply states that he thinks that hi-res distribution is overkill.

Not quite what I read. You didn't fully read the article did you. *biggrin* Read the bit about intermodulation from ultrasonics (for ultrasonics read unnecessary, inaudible unless you are a dog, recorded frequencies on the SACD layer) in a given system. The author concludes that such ultrasonic-born distortion will on plenty of systems audibly hurt fidelity. Ergo SACD can actually sound worse.

https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

 

[Electro]

Interesting Idea - this is what is Good HiFi Thread

Quick Survey - What do we think Good HiFi should do?

A - Bring the music into your room

B - Take you to the music the room was made in

Interesting one this - please post answers below - we can develop conversation and debate around this that should be constructive

This is a very good question indeed , I think you should start a new thread asking this question it would be a very interesting topic.

For me it is most definitely B, it has always been my aim to add the music and the space it was played to my room rather than bring it into my room .

I want my room to be the seated listening area of the venue and the stage and music created to be added to the end of the room, but loud transients should project forward with force right into my room and even behind me as they do when listening to live music.

I love it when I close my eyes and I can realistically believe I am listening to live music in a live space, in other words transported to the venue with all the refections and feeling of space .

It is an interesting question because it's quite possible that the sound you hear from your speakers is actualy better that the original sound that was recorded.

This is because the audio can be cleaned up and improved during the mixing/mastering process. For example the drums might have been a bit too loud when a song was played live and drowned out the guitar. No problem. Just tweek the volume in the mix and the result can now sound better than when it was played live.

∙ Soundstage of one of the instruments is skewed to one side and the stereo image for just that one instrument needs moving?

∙ Not enough bass on the vocals but there's too little bass from the guitar?

∙ Too much dynamic range (yes having to much as well as not having enough can be an issue too)?

∙ Everything sounds perfect except for one line which was sang incorrectly and needs replacing with an audio sample from a previous recording?

All of these issues can be fixed in the mixing/mastering stage to improve on reality. Most of the time what was originally heard in the recording studio has a lot of issues which need fixing before it sounds right.

I agree, this is one of the reasons that I love good live recordings taken straight from the venue mixing desk with minimal added manipulation.

It has to be said that some recording / mastering engineers are very good at simulating a natural live sound if they are allowed the time and money to do it.

I am contantly amazed at how good some recordings can be on humble Cd.

 

[steve_1979]

Interesting Idea - this is what is Good HiFi Thread

Quick Survey - What do we think Good HiFi should do?

A - Bring the music into your room

B - Take you to the music the room was made in

Interesting one this - please post answers below - we can develop conversation and debate around this that should be constructive

This is a very good question indeed , I think you should start a new thread asking this question it would be a very interesting topic.

For me it is most definitely B, it has always been my aim to add the music and the space it was played to my room rather than bring it into my room .

I want my room to be the seated listening area of the venue and the stage and music created to be added to the end of the room, but loud transients should project forward with force right into my room and even behind me as they do when listening to live music.

I love it when I close my eyes and I can realistically believe I am listening to live music in a live space, in other words transported to the venue with all the refections and feeling of space .

It is an interesting question because it's quite possible that the sound you hear from your speakers is actualy better that the original sound that was recorded.

This is because the audio can be cleaned up and improved during the mixing/mastering process. For example the drums might have been a bit too loud when a song was played live and drowned out the guitar. No problem. Just tweak the volume in the mix and the result can now sound better than when it was played live.

∙ Soundstage of one of the instruments is skewed to one side and the stereo image for just that one instrument needs moving?

∙ Not enough bass on the vocals but there's too little bass from the guitar?

∙ Too much dynamic range (yes having to much as well as not having enough can be an issue too)?

∙ Everything sounds perfect except for one line which was sang incorrectly and needs replacing with an audio sample from a previous recording?

All of these issues can be fixed in the mixing/mastering stage to improve on reality. Most of the time what was originally heard in the recording studio has a lot of issues which need fixing before it sounds right.

 

[ellisdj]

Electro i will start a new thread when i get a minute but i think your preference is more of an a answer.

I was thinking of our shared experience when i wrote this.

Only because your trying to make your room the venue putting the music in the room as it were.
If we cant even agree on this simple thing no wonder this forum is as it is..... lol

I will do thread need to find some resources first need a bit of time dude but worth it. Hope your well

 

[Electro]

Electro i will start a new thread when i get a minute but i think your preference is more of an a answer.

I was thinking of our shared experience when i wrote this.

Only because your trying to make your room the venue putting the music in the room as it were. If we cant even agree on this simple thing no wonder this forum is as it is..... lol

I will do thread need to find some resources first need a bit of time dude but worth it. Hope your well

I think it is more of a case of adding the venue to the end of my room as a kind of extension rather than make my room into the venue , it is just my personal preference.

I don't think there is a right or wrong way it's just you are a front row man and I am a 10 rows back man *smile*

I often have this dilemma at a live music venue, my mates want to push down the front whereas I prefer to be further back to take in the big picture / sound , in fact I often wander about to find the best sounding spot and stay there.*biggrin*

 

[ellisdj]

There is no right or wrong dude i was not saying that - i was hoping to discuss approaches to either and how you truly achieve either challenges problems pitfalls etc.

You have the luxury of putting yourself as many rows back as you want

I need to link to some resouces. I watched a brilliant video. It was on eq but there was a lot of great info from someone who is really trying for a b type system. Its a good reference for what that actually takes. I hope its as good as i remember when i find it.

For you i have a picture from a kef listening room might be useful for you. Post that up later. They are going for something simialar to you by looks of this howver give you an idea for treatment to remove side wall reflections. Flat wall doesnt remove the wall because the ear is sensitive to the time of the reflection. If you want space diffusion tricks brain. However i think diffusion on side causes sound to lose focus but not tried it in bigger room.

 

[shadders]

No it is not subjective. It is impossible. Science has established this. We are limited by human biology and what our hifi equipment can actually reproduce. Why do you continue cherry picking your facts?

Why don't you just say that you haven't understood what we've been saying about using different masters. That's a completely different issue from whether we can actually hear difference between Redbook CD and SACD. If the masters are different, we will a difference. If they're not, we won't. But even the article you linked to states that hi-res reproduction will not lead to worse quality than Redbook CD. The author of that article simply states that he thinks that hi-res distribution is overkill.

Not quite what I read. You didn't fully read the article did you. *biggrin* Read the bit about intermodulation from ultrasonics (for ultrasonics read unnecessary, inaudible unless you are a dog, recorded frequencies on the SACD layer) in a given system. The author concludes that such ultrasonic-born distortion will on plenty of systems audibly hurt fidelity. Ergo SACD can actually sound worse.

https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Hi,

The graph where he shows the intermodulation, uses two tones about 30kHz at -10dB each (assumed as graph is low res), and each intermodulation component is -70dB at most (down). As such we can state that the intermodulation components are 60dB BELOW the two test signals.

If you examine the Hifi News hi-res download graphs, those recordings that do extend above 20kHz have the 30kHz region 60dB BELOW the main lobe of the audio energy.

As such, the -60dB intermodulation products will be further reduced by 60dB, resulting in intermodulation product in the main audio band being at -120dB.

Therefore, despite intermodulation being present, those intermodulation products are inaudible.

Regards,

Shadders.

 

[lindsayt]

Interesting Idea - this is what is Good HiFi Thread

Quick Survey - What do we think Good HiFi should do?

A - Bring the music into your room

B - Take you to the music the room was made in

Interesting one this - please post answers below - we can develop conversation and debate around this that should be constructive

Good hi-fi should do both.

It should make it sound as if you have real musicians playing real instruments in your listening room, track after track after track. The vocalist should be there, standing in your room, singing their hearts out, track after track. Not just on the best audiophile recordings, but on indifferent recordings too.

And a good hi-fi should also let you hear the acoustics of the room or hall or recording booth, as well as the production effects that have been used - including the ubiquitous excessive compression on modern CD's.

With the more compressed recordings, a good hi-fi will make the best of a bad job and preserve all the dynamic impact and musical interest it can.

 

[lindsayt]

∙ Too much dynamic range (yes having to much as well as not having enough can be an issue too)?

Can you, or anyone else nominate a recording that has too much dynamic range?

I can't.

All the recordings that I have with high dynamic range sound fantastic!

I would not want to water any of them down by compressing them.

 

[luckylion100]

Good hifi to me is not having to worry about what most of this thread has been dominated by. It's about being content with what I have, not stressing over the next upgrade or endless quest for better. There are too many other things in life to worry about.

My system provides me with constant delight, I love to share it with those that visit. It's a modest setup but more than ample for the living space it occupies. I'm re-exploring my music collection as a result, I may be some time...

I do not attempt to bring the exact original recording or live performance into my living room, nor do I attempt to because it's impossible. I simply enjoy what I have and I enjoy the gift that is music.

 

[steve_1979]

∙ Too much dynamic range (yes having to much as well as not having enough can be an issue too)?

Can you, or anyone else nominate a recording that has too much dynamic range?

I can't.

All the recordings that I have with high dynamic range sound fantastic!

I would not want to water any of them down by compressing them.

You're unlikely to find albums released with too much dynamic range because this is something the sound engineers will fix during the mixing/mastering process. That's kind of the point I was making. Any problems with the recorded sound get fixed before you listen to it.

However that said, there is one album which I know of that has too much dynamic range:

Tielman Susato - Dansereye 1551

https://open.spotify.com/album/1DpZzyCj2WmY9HecnFDwwK

It's a case of personal opinion of course so you may disagree. But I find the difference in volume between the quiet passages and the loud passages a bit to much for home listening. It goes from a whisper up to neighbour annoying loud volume levels. Whenever I listened to it I felt the need to keep adjusting the volume control while it was playing. If you listen to it on Spotify make sure you have the 'set the same volume level for all songs' option unchecked otherwise Spotify will automatically apply dynamic range compression to the audio.

I've now applied a small amount of dynamic compression to my copy using Audacity which has improved things considerably at the most extreme limits of the volume scale while still keeping a good dynamic range intact for everything else.

 

[lindsayt]

You're unlikely to find albums released with too much dynamic range because this is something the sound engineers will fix during the mixing/mastering process. That's kind of the point I was making. Any problems with the recorded sound get fixed before you listen to it.

However that said, there is one album which I know of that has too much dynamic range:

Tielman Susato - Dansereye 1551

https://open.spotify.com/album/1DpZzyCj2WmY9HecnFDwwK

It's a case of personal opinion of course so you may disagree. But I find the difference in volume between the quiet passages and the loud passages a bit to much for home listening. It goes from a whisper up to neighbour annoying loud volume levels. Whenever I listened to it I felt the need to keep adjusting the volume control while it was playing. If you listen to it on Spotify make sure you have the 'set the same volume level for all songs' option unchecked otherwise Spotify will automatically apply dynamic range compression to the audio.

I've now applied a small amount of dynamic compression to my copy using Audacity which has improved things considerably at the most extreme limits of the volume scale while still keeping a good dynamic range intact for everything else.

I disagree about the sound engineers fixing problems during the mixing / mastering process - in terms of dynamic range. All they can do is muck it up. Less is more. As in: less interference is better.

I don't have spotify. Is the Youtube version that comes up with a Google search the same as the Spotify one? When I played it, it did not come anywhere near close to challenging the dynamic range I can cope with in my room. Nor would I expect it to. It's Elizabethan era music. It's not Stravinsky's Firebird.

Do you have a noisy listening room, Steve? Or a limited maximum volume, due to neighbour considerations?

 

[muljao]

Good hifi to me is not having to worry about what most of this thread has been dominated by. It's about being content with what I have, not stressing over the next upgrade or endless quest for better. There are too many other things in life to worry about.

My system provides me with constant delight, I love to share it with those that visit. It's a modest setup but more than ample for the living space it occupies. I'm re-exploring my music collection as a result, I may be some time...

I do not attempt to bring the exact original recording or live performance into my living room, nor do I attempt to because it's impossible. I simply enjoy what I have and I enjoy the gift that is music.

I agree with this 100% It's nice to have a good system that helps you enjoy the music. End of..(for me)

I do understand that many here have a passion for the very very best in sound reproduction, and while I appreciate that I wonder does that sometimes get in the way of enjoying the music

 

[Gazzip]

Good hifi to me is not having to worry about what most of this thread has been dominated by. It's about being content with what I have, not stressing over the next upgrade or endless quest for better. There are too many other things in life to worry about.

My system provides me with constant delight, I love to share it with those that visit. It's a modest setup but more than ample for the living space it occupies. I'm re-exploring my music collection as a result, I may be some time...

I do not attempt to bring the exact original recording or live performance into my living room, nor do I attempt to because it's impossible. I simply enjoy what I have and I enjoy the gift that is music.

I agree with this 100% It's nice to have a good system that helps you enjoy the music. End of..(for me)

I do understand that many here have a passion for the very very best in sound reproduction, and while I appreciate that I wonder does that sometimes get in the way of enjoying the music

Yes, sometimes it does. It is the way some of us are wired up that makes us need perfection, leaving us uncontented if we haven't got it. A good personality trait for me to have on a professional level given that I am an architect, but bad for my wallet on the hifi front!

When I made my first steps in to the hifi world I actually fell completely out of love with certain genres of music. My hifi began to dictate what type of music I bought. That was back in the early 90's and I actually left the hobby for a number of years because of this. I found that the first couple of rungs of the hifi ladder actually made certain music sound worse than it did on my midi system, and I knew that I would never get to where I wanted to be with the funds I had available at that time.

Now I have the money needed and have got very close to where I want (need) to be to enjoy hifi, but there is still some music I can happily listen to in the car on the crappy radio, but would not play through my hifi if you paid me. Before Lindsayt jumps all over me and says you don't need to spend tens of thousands to get the sound you want, I know it can be done for cheaper through careful research and buying second hand, but some of us just don't have the time!

 

[ellisdj]

I am going to start a new thread on this - why - well because people are always arguing this makes it better - no it doesnt.

Well hold on - this thread has shown massive discrepancies between posters activities with the hobby - some are very active to hear and get better sound, others less so. So what they hell is going on, what the hell are we all doing.

Is there is any focus to what we are looking to achieve or is it just random hope for the best.

I want to write the opening post with some good references - hopefully this will get the brain grey matter working in a different way where it becomes con and not desctructive - not holding my breath though

 

[luckylion100]

is nothing to be afraid of Ellisdj. But it's how we deal with it that matters ;-)

The following is not intended as the opening exchanges of another verbal sparring session. It's just my take on this, especially after reading endless pages of this thread seemingling going in circles.

The thing is (and sometimes as I read it, maybe this a point that simply bypasses you) some of us may have no choice but to 'accept and enjoy' the current state of our systems. Speaking for myself I'm not at liberty to spend thousands on a system (let alone cables) With what I have I've pushed the boat out. I was lucky to get this much, so I intend to enjoy it, not continually focus on what I suspect I'm not hearing. I don't find obsessive patterns of behaviour like this productive, unless I'm able to do something about it. Sadly unlike yourself, I'm not able to address these curiosities by throwing thousands of £'s at them.

I'd suggest reminding yourself of the website this forum belongs to. Many people come on here asking for advice, looking to spend less than perhaps you do on a single cable on a start up system or a single component. Money is tight for a lot of us. You have previously been extremely dismissive in posts in this thread concerning the worth of other people's systems, the seriousness of their passion for enjoying the hobby, their motives etc, at times bordering on insulting. Then when it's mentioned and perhaps the offence that it's caused has been brought up, you simply laugh it off as it being their problem and that they don't understand your 'humour'. Come on...

We can talk about this till the cows come home but I doubt that a neat, one size fits all answer will be forthcoming apart from the fact that we should all agree to disagree. At times it's interesting and informative, other times I feel like banging my head against a brick wall. I'll admit at times I feel my understanding of the hobby has grown, especially from your and Shadders exchanges so for that I thank you.

A new thread is worth a pop, good luck with that but keep it simple, let it go where it goes naturally, you needn't attempt to control it so...

 

[ellisdj]

Maybe I have come across in the wrong way - Sorry if I have - I am passionate on the subject and maybe it comes across as arrogant - again sorry if it does.

I am not dismissive of money, trust me its tight for me too, especially at the moment. I choose to spend a lot of my free income on my av system instead of buying new clothes, or spending it on what I should be spending it on - doing the house up etc. I am very selfish man hands held up - only child maybe that is why. I work hard and have worked everyday since I was 16, never given anything, no silver spoon here trust me. I dont believe hifi is only for well to do people that listen to classical - no offence intended its just a stereotype joke - its for everyone.

The purpose of the new thread would be to try and help people focus on a goal and think about that goal and discuss getting better sound with some definition (s) of good sound. That way hopefully it can help people spend their money wisely and not on things that bring the term up I personally hate - Law Diminishing Returns. I hate that term.

Back to money - its not about what you spend its about the sound that you create in your space with what you have spent.

Look at all the blind tests where people cant tell the difference between a £100 setup and £10000 setup - that proves it outright to me. How do you make the £10000 setup sound like £10000 - not £100. Alternatively can you make the £100 setup sound like £10000 - LindseyT thinks you can - I am sure he will be adding input.

Whether you can afford it or not at the moment hopefully shouldnt change the interest and desire for better sound - learning and sharing how we actually get it. I cant afford a ferrari and never will but | can still very much enjoy seeing someone else drive it on tv and tell me all about it. Hopefully there will be conversation with more relevance in the thread - will see.

The reason I want to get it right with good references is so that ideas etc are not coming from me - thats going to take me some time with work and family load.

 

[Gazzip]

An interesting and measured post Luckylion100. I often share your thoughts and sentiments regarding affordability and what many must think when reading threads like this. Perhaps however the financial disconnect you describe is actually down to the breadth of WHF's content and not a loss of touch with the forum's roots? A quick search of the WHF reviews section brings up products from B&W (£68K), Dan D'Agostino (£44K), Burmester (£36K) and Pathos (£34K), products not entirely aimed at your average Richer Sounds customer I am sure you will agree.

You suggestion that certain forum members can sometimes be dismissive of lesser systems than their own may be true, but it works both ways you know. I have quite an expensive system and have personally felt the backlash from the other side of the fence. I have been derided and mocked for "wasting" my money on "voodoo" and "snake oil" from some who have probably never heard a system costing more than £500, and who have no idea how much better it can get. This actually reached a point where I felt the need to remove my system signature to avoid any further agression.

I take your point and agree with you that there is room for all of our opinions on here regardless of expendable income. However please be aware that free speech is a two way street.

 

[ellisdj]

FAO Electro - this is what I found looking for something else a month or so ago.

Just an idea for you dude you have the space to do ti

 

[pi-electronics]

I thought the deep bass is the good function to have and also the ultra noise cancellation on the earphone will provide a perfect experiencewhen you use that. I have the piduet can help me to listen to the perfect music.

 

[Electro]

FAO Electro - this is what I found looking for something else a month or so ago.

Just an idea for you dude you have the space to do ti

I love those diffusers !

If you saw my room in it's present state you would either laugh or cry or maybe think I have totally lost it .

I have built my own modified version of the Viking studios attack wall out of 1.2m tall rolls of loft insulation and I have to say the sound quality results are far better than it looks !

I will be adding some black acoustic fabric to the "attack wall" *smile*