Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Do audiophiles "like" music?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do audiophiles "like" music? - Page 3  

post #31 of 345

I've had a life long obsession with music.  My pursuit of high quality music reproduction equipment is entirely about enhancing the experience of listening to music.  It's the music that excites me.  The gear is just the means to that end.

post #32 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by dailysmoker View Post

What quality you wanna hear Darkness On The Edge Of Town...? i got the normal flac version and downloading the 24 bit version right now...:)
 

 

Basically I was really trying to say that I wish the recording was better, but it is what it is. The music itself transcends all that.
post #33 of 345
I suspect that one of the reasons why there's so much mediocre music being created is because they use such high end equipment in the studios, and recordings that sound good on that equipment do not necessarily sound good on the crappy equipment that the majority of non-audiophiles have. Essentially, high audio quality masks the mediocrity of the music. Truly good music must pass the "crappy gear test." What do you guys think?
post #34 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueangel2323 View Post

I suspect that one of the reasons why there's so much mediocre music being created is because they use such high end equipment in the studios, and recordings that sound good on that equipment do not necessarily sound good on the crappy equipment that the majority of non-audiophiles have. Essentially, high audio quality masks the mediocrity of the music. Truly good music must pass the "crappy gear test." What do you guys think?

That is what they do. They compress the chit out of it so it sounds great out of a clock radio.tongue.gif

post #35 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redcarmoose View Post

That is what they do. They compress the chit out of it so it sounds great out of a clock radio.tongue.gif

 

Well that too. But what I was saying was, truly good music should sound good even out of a clock radio. But high end equipment makes stuff sound better, which can fool you into thinking that the music is better than it really is, even if it's crappy music with impressive sonics.
post #36 of 345
I hate music. Man, it's just a bunch of random sounds and pitches and it makes my head hurt. I'd rather listen to pink noise and test tracks, that way I just have the satisfaction of knowing how good my system is. It's so good that it makes me better than everybody else just by having it. Except, of course, the people that have better systems. They're better people than me, but one day, someday, I will have a better system than them, and then I'll be better. On that day, I will gloat, and come here to let everybody know how good I am.

I also hate fun, happiness, and kittens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueangel2323 View Post

I suspect that one of the reasons why there's so much mediocre music being created is because they use such high end equipment in the studios, and recordings that sound good on that equipment do not necessarily sound good on the crappy equipment that the majority of non-audiophiles have. Essentially, high audio quality masks the mediocrity of the music. Truly good music must pass the "crappy gear test." What do you guys think?

It's the other way around.

Good gear is revealing. The closer you get to neutral, the more resolving your gear becomes. Recording problems are immediately obvious on reference systems, even miniscule problems. And, even though I'm not an industry professional, I have friends who are, and I can more or less tell you that reference systems are not the target audience for the final album in the vast majority of cases.

Recordings are brickwalled and overcompressed because the labels and the artists want it. The recording engineers know better, but they're not the clients, so they don't have that choice. It comes out of the idea that in a mix on a radio, or on an ipod, a louder song will stand out (never mind that radio applies its own compression to everything it plays). Then, when you do it for long enough, you have a generation of listeners that grows up with that kind of sound and actually prefers it, and it becomes entrenched.

The good news is that even as the headphone market grows towards maturity and mediocrity, consumers are becoming more educated. And, there's enough room in the hobby for every niche, hi-fi and lo-fi alike.
post #37 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bones13 View Post

 

My answer : Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms.

Great answer-which brings up another point: I'd argue some great music needs a great rig just to be able to do it justice in the first place. Fornstance-I've heard Dire Straits songs over the radio most of my life.Heard tons of Radiohead too-even on a decent low end speaker system. I was never really a fan of either-didn't love it-didn't hate it though. Once I heard these same songs on my 'proper' HD800 rig-I fell in love. <3 They are so brilliantly mastered, and have so many subtlies in them that I truly felt I was hearing them 'for the first time'. Now they are both probably my 2 most played artists with headphones-even though I hadn't even 'liked' them for years and years...

 

-Daniel

post #38 of 345

I understand very well where the op is coming from.   A decade ago, when I had time and more money, I had a decent system and had several audiophile friends.  We liked music, we liked gear and always looked for better gear to get that synergetic system.  Sure, at times, it was listening to the same 30 secs trying out cables and cartridges and power cords and outlets etc..  Heck, one guy was placing cotton balls at "strategic" spots in his listening room and had precisely 5oz of sand in baggies on his speakers.  A little mental but still just part of the fun.  Still, when we got together we listened to "music" too.  Each time the system improved, there was that "discovery" feeling the op mentioned.  Suddenly the music would take on a new dimension, an instrument would come through clearer and I think the intention of the artist was more realized.   

 

People listen to music differently.  My brother listens for a catchy melody and an even beat and that makes him happy.  Even though he is much better off financially than I am, his $100 "ghetto blaster" in his exercise room is all he needs.  I like being able to tell the age of a violin by listening and whether the strings are gut or metal.  I like to hear overtones and instrument placement.  To me, that's all part of the music and if it means being and audiophile at times to discern through gear for those pure listening sessions where it is about the music and the delivery, then so be it.

 

Having been raised studying music, (piano, cello, euphonium etc) I can see both sides of this question.

 

Not to be offensive but your comment below makes me think that you don't focus as much on the detail of music as much as I do so maybe it's just you don't hear the same way and so audiophilia is more audiophoolia.  Music as background is quite a different event than turning on your tube amp, cleaning a record and sitting in a special chair with a glass of port (or whatever you like).

Quote:
Originally Posted by dosprompt View Post

 

I am a consultant and have the good fortune to be able to listen to music while I work all day.  I listen to at least 5-6 hours of music a day. 

 

 

 

And I love this analogy. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kamcok View Post

It's like playing a piece on a $20 000 piano vs a $200 keyboard

It's the same piece, it has the same notes, but the way they're delivered and the sound that comes out will be different.

I might still enjoy the piece on the keyboard but maybe not as much as if it was played on the piano.

 

I grew up studying piano but have never had the space or means for a good piano so I bought a $2000 keyboard for convenience.

I once went into a shop and tried out a Bosendorfer...  I could not believe how much better of a player I sounded.  I asked the price and the salesman told me it was on special for only $90,000 down from $120,000.  It was no comparison both in sound but also in how it showed my capability.


Edited by SBranson - 8/21/13 at 2:02pm
post #39 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonance View Post

You have your thesis and 'proof' in the original post, why even ask the question, sounds like you've already decided what you think the answer is.

You meant to say "hypothesis". Thesis is after one acquires the data. ;)

post #40 of 345
Are we being trolled?
When was the last time the OP contributed?

Anyway, I am enjoying reading everyone's posts.......in a good way! biggrin.gif
post #41 of 345

Some people get lost in the search for fidelity and don't treat their music the same as they used to before they became an audiophile. I for one, still care for music the same way I did before I become an audiophile. The only aspect of my music library that changed is that I prefer well mastered music now, whereas before I didn't care. You just have to remember where you came from before you came an audiophile and love music for what it is, not just the musical qualities it has. I love music for lyrics and atmosphere, but that doesn't stop me from loving the way it can sound on high fidelity gear as well regular_smile%20.gif.

post #42 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

 

Basically I was really trying to say that I wish the recording was better, but it is what it is. The music itself transcends all that.


Oh ok in that way...haha

post #43 of 345

I do understand your point very much, and often have asked myself the same question.

 

I grew up with music, played drums professionally, and studied music. So for me it is always music first. Personally, I don't listen to music that I don't like in the first place, even if the recording is absolutely incredible. If I don't "feel it", I don't want to listen to it.

 

Nevertheless, I have noticed lately that now, after a nice stereo upgrade, I listen less to music that I like but that was not recorded very well. I guess the devil is in the details... the better your reproduction system is, the more you will notice badly recorded albums, and will eventually neglect those albums.

post #44 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by drtebi View Post

Nevertheless, I have noticed lately that now, after a nice stereo upgrade, I listen less to music that I like but that was not recorded very well. I guess the devil is in the details... the better your reproduction system is, the more you will notice badly recorded albums, and will eventually neglect those albums.


Yes I've experienced those but I never neglect any album I like no matter how bad the recording is, I can't say for others however.

post #45 of 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by laon View Post


Yes I've experienced those but I never neglect any album I like no matter how bad the recording is, I can't say for others however.

"Neglect" was maybe not the right word. I just tend to prefer to listen to the better recorded ones. I wouldn't completely throw one out just because I don't like the sound of it.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Do audiophiles "like" music?