are most head-fiers...
Sep 4, 2008 at 3:13 PM Post #31 of 61
Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Music? I just like how my gear looks. I've also found that Mr Sheen is better than Pledge for keeping it all shiny.


Same here, that's why my HP amp and DAC are black
wink.gif
 
Sep 4, 2008 at 5:03 PM Post #33 of 61
music first... afterall, how can you enjoy your gears when you dont appreciate music? Gears are the medium to satisfy our needs of music...
 
Sep 4, 2008 at 6:50 PM Post #34 of 61
I enjoy my favourite tracks a lot even on a ten year old mono radio so music comes first here as well. However, upgrading equipment takes away any flaws and just leaves behind music, that's the ultimate goal of my head-fi journey. Pretty close now.
 
Sep 4, 2008 at 7:37 PM Post #36 of 61
Quote:

Originally Posted by sunseeker888 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Hell, I can enjoy music on 8-track tapes if I had to.


Iffy

My roommate in college had an 8 track player. Some of the tapes were pretty frustrating. Getting into a song when all of a sudden the sound fades out, loud clunk of the track change, sound fades back in.
eek.gif


Really wasn't that pleasant. That clunk should be especially bad with headphones, it was loud enough with speakers
 
Sep 4, 2008 at 8:25 PM Post #37 of 61
Equipment is my hobby
music is my reward

I enjoy building things..
I was supposed to be an architect, but at the cost of $150,000 and 3 extra years of college; I ended up pursuing engineering.
 
Sep 4, 2008 at 8:44 PM Post #38 of 61
Music first for me. I like playing around with tech so Hi-Fi equipment gets lumped into the general category of gadgets for me.

One note about Head-Fiers, a lot of posters are just plain batty. I've responded to another post earlier. It was in regards to this one poster's elaborate 8 PHYSICAL steps for treating CDs before he played them. He believes that it improves sound quality, now, anybody with even a LITTLE understanding of CDs will know that the data is not dynamic thus whatever is on a CD will not change. The laser will either be able to read the data or not, it's not going to change a CDs sound quality (of course a dirty or scratched/morphed CD will tend to have pops or skips but that's clearly NOT a sound quality issue, it's a data loss problem and you'll hear data loss and know it).
 
Sep 4, 2008 at 8:47 PM Post #39 of 61
I love music, but I also love the gear. I'd be a complete liar if I said that in some ways, the gear wasn't just as important. I am a techie pervert.

That said, with regards to the gear, I've found my perfect match now. Now that I have, I enjoy the music more than ever.
 
Sep 4, 2008 at 9:12 PM Post #40 of 61
My hubby and I have had this discussion. He is a composer, with a Master's degree in music. Taught music for several decades. He had always had a "good enough" system. He believes that listening to the "quality of the sound" can easily detract from listening to the "substance of the music". At the same time, with a quality system, more of the music can shine through.

I suppose it is different for each individual, to what extent we are distracted in our listening by our concern for the quality of our gear.
 
Sep 6, 2008 at 5:15 AM Post #42 of 61
Team music first. Although I have had quite a gear journey since joining Head-fi (sorry about MY wallet). My system sounds better than it ever has, better than just spending more money on it, spending money where I think it will do the most good (upgrading weaker links), thats the fun part of it, doing it on a budget, while still having $$ for music, wine and oh yes, the bills.
 
Sep 6, 2008 at 7:12 AM Post #43 of 61
Quote:

Originally Posted by Desertway /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My hubby and I have had this discussion. He is a composer, with a Master's degree in music. Taught music for several decades. He had always had a "good enough" system. He believes that listening to the "quality of the sound" can easily detract from listening to the "substance of the music". At the same time, with a quality system, more of the music can shine through.

I suppose it is different for each individual, to what extent we are distracted in our listening by our concern for the quality of our gear.



Thats an interesting point.

I personally have always felt that there are two types of hifi in this world. I've seen them referred to in England as "round earth" and "flat earth" hifi. God only knows where they got these descriptions from, but i digress
biggrin.gif


So called "Round Earth" hifi tends to major in things like detail, soundstage and that sort of thing and is often said to be to the detriment of the music itself. I know what they mean, I've often heard hifi that sounds ultra detailed and superficially impressive, but often just winds up sounding like a collection of sounds rather than a cohesive tune. They often lose the "groove" in the process. Then we get the "Flat earth" hifi which tends to major on the actual musical message, this stuff is often said to be toe tapping. In comparison to flat earth, the soundstage and detail levels sometimes (but not always) is not quite up there with the best, but you tend to forget that because its just so damn enjoyable.

I find its actually a very difficult thing for a system to get right. I've spent years and hundreds of pounds trying to assemble a system that does the important hifi stuff but also retains the "groove". I think I've got there now. Its not even about price, more about smart choices and assembling a system that is greater than the some of its parts.

I dare say there might be some here who are wondering What I am going on about, because on the face of it, hifi is designed to play music, but you either get it or you dont.

Bizarrely, I often find that cheap components often get the basic "groove" right more often than some of the more expensive gear which is quite often why many are perfectly content without the higher end stuff. Witness for example, the love of classic grooving headphones such as the Koss KSC-35/75/Porta-Pro, low end Grados, Beyers DT531. These headphones all manage to deliver surprising bang for your buck but important deliver the musical message clearly.

I just feel sometimes that the music itself can be lost in the quest for "soundstages" and "detail".
 
Sep 6, 2008 at 7:23 AM Post #44 of 61
I'm a audiophile-like to buy headphones based on the design and sound chararistics.
 
Sep 6, 2008 at 9:08 AM Post #45 of 61
Quote:

Originally Posted by pbirkett /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Bizarrely, I often find that cheap components often get the basic "groove" right more often than some of the more expensive gear which is quite often why many are perfectly content without the higher end stuff. Witness for example, the love of classic grooving headphones such as the Koss KSC-35/75/Porta-Pro, low end Grados, Beyers DT531. These headphones all manage to deliver surprising bang for your buck but important deliver the musical message clearly.


Oh yes, the good DT531. That's why I have finally become such a hardcore Alessandro creature, even the higher tiers have much more "flat earth" than the usual HD650/DT880/K701.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top