Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › How people perceive music quality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How people perceive music quality - Page 3

post #31 of 39
1/18/10 at 4:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coltrane View Post
That Copland book is fantastic.

The simply fact that many of us miss is that, sometimes, fidelity gets in the way. When you constantly upgrade, you will always 'listen to the equipment.'

I love a nice setup, but I really feel it is almost completely separate from the musical enjoyment. Its about zeroing in on details, details that quite often do no greatly enhance the enjoyment of the music, just modify that enjoyment slightly.

If we are going to get caught up in music 'quality' as well, I would say that if we had two groups: 'real' music fans who listen to ibuds, and 'real' music fans who have hifi setups I would take the record collections of the people with ibuds 98 times out of 100.
X2 !

Plus, everything is relative. If you have never known or heard better, you are not missing anything. I always think back to the 70's when I was buying the new releases of Zepplin, The Who, Rush, Pink Floyd, Genesis, etc. While I wish I had experieced all of that in cd format with a pair of W3's, I don't think NOT experiencing it with better equipment took one bit away from the enjoyment.
Reply
post #32 of 39
1/18/10 at 5:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbax19 View Post

........No music reproduction I have ever heard comes close to sounding live, and most live music I've heard has been blasting through questionable speakers in less than perfect environments.......
I couldn't agree more with you cbax19. For me hifi is about recreating the studio sound as opposed to the live sound. I want to feel as if I am there in the studio clearly hearing all of the instruments being played and the vocals.

I know what a violin should sound like, so I know what to listen for when a violin is recorded and I subsequently listen to it.

A friend who is very into music, who has been to loads of concerts and has a huge collection played through a cheap midi system had a listen to my portable rig. She was singing along and then stopped. It turns out that she had been singing the wrong word at one point for 30 years. Listening to a decent setup had produced the extra clarity needed to hear the proper lyrics.
Reply
post #33 of 39
1/18/10 at 5:59pm
Music quality, quite a difficult subject. I was once at a live performance of the Instant Composers Pool, improvisation jazz which really changes your view on music. In the beginning you are almost disgusted and after a while it just works. It was a revelation for me. I bought the CD, good recording. The sound on the CD just doesn't work while live the ICP rocked my world. That is the best example I can think of, just how hard it is to define the quality of music.
Reply
post #34 of 39
1/18/10 at 6:16pm
My friends are amused by my interest in Hi Fi. My wife rolls her eyes. Most musicians I have met could not give a tinkers toot.
It seems to me that once you start with equipment, it will drive you nuts listening to deficiencies until you get it to a level that allows you to forget the equipment and listen to the music again. Expensive!
Reply
post #35 of 39
1/18/10 at 6:25pm
One of my favourite things about "music quality" from the non-audiophile public is the importance sound quality plays a role in their perception of music quality.

For example - MSTRKRFT. Awful, awful music - and I like this type of thing. It is extremely monotonous (particularly the album Fist of God) to the point of being boring about 10 minutes in. Why do people like it? That big fat bass synth. I thought it was pretty cool at first too but it just got lame after a while
Reply
post #36 of 39
1/18/10 at 7:26pm
The quality of the music (from an audiophile standpoint) DOES matter just as much as it would matter for a photography buff with all the gadgets they use as it would somebody watching HDTV...or whatever other hobbies one could think of you. It's no different. It enhances the experience.
Reply
post #37 of 39
1/18/10 at 11:03pm
I guess a good example (since the last poster referred to HDTVs) would be: I'm perfectly comfortable watching a movie on my 27'' CRT oldie with the sound coming out of the crappy TV speakers, but if I'm watching a 'musical' DVD (concerts and stuff) I HAVE to have good sound. But I don't have an overwhelming desire to upgrade to an HD big screen, can enjoy movies pretty perfectly on the TV I have.
Reply
post #38 of 39
1/19/10 at 1:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by janchadley View Post
I used to be in home and car audio sales and installation for several years and I was always amazed at what people cannot hear. I was always amazed at how many people turn the volume up past clipping and still continue to listen to it?! The answer to your question is that the way people perceive music varies dramatically. As a musician, I would notice the same thing. Just as many people cannot hear when an amp clips or a speaker distorts (something painful to an audiophile), many...most cannot hear pitch. Even some singers cannot lock in exactly nor hear exactly on pitch.

Often I would take someone into our show room and play their favorite music and they wouldn't be able to tell the difference in SQ between a $500 and A$5000 system. This is very very common in my experience.

So, you must understand, when we talk of the differnce between staging, imaging, transperancy, extention and whatnot, these things not only take a skilled ear, it takes a bit of training and experience as well. one of the members up there said that they have a great ear when it comes to music, but not quite as good when it comes to being an audiophile. This is very astute, as the audiophile ear requires development.
I agree with so much in this post. Musicians don't always have the best ears for sound quality - especially rock musicians. I am one of those people on the "other side" of the glass. As a mastering engineer my job is to make sure the music shines. Often times, all an artist cares about is making sure his/her record is as loud as the next popular act.

I can't tell you guys how many times I have had to sit down and explain the loudness wars to someone and even then, they still don't get it.

The general population really doesn't care and most can't tell the difference between something mastered with tubes or solid state. Hell, most can't tell the difference between a 128kps mp3 and a lossless file.

We have HDTV and youtube is popular! We have SACD and mp3's continue to be the norm!!! I guess that in the end the only thing that matters for most people is being able to play it loud in the car and the song have "punch", "fat beats" and a "catchy hook".
Reply
post #39 of 39
1/19/10 at 8:34am
Yea, good point. The HDTV/plasma bigscreen TV thing took off like wildfire. People bought and are buying them when they can't afford them. They simply have to have it (in their minds) (but probably moreso with men than women). This is obviously the "vision" sense. I guess the "audio" sense is nothing like this....or takes an acquired ear.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › How people perceive music quality