[rextrade]

Lately, I found myself falling into the-over-analyzing-sound-quality rut (you know, rather than, uh, actually listening to the music). I'm guessing a lot of people on this board know what I'm talking about--listening to the decay of a high hat a little too intently, while forgetting there is music happening underneath it all.

Well, I just got the VU's Live at Max's Kansas City, and needless to say, the sound quality is ****--it was recorded on one of those tape recorders a reporter would use (and a 1970 version at that). But, I love it, and I've been listening to it over and over again all weeked. It's funny, because the sound quality was so bad that I don't even bother focusing on it, if that makes any sense. I can just get into the incredible energy of the music and not worry about whether my speakers are potisitioned perfectly in my apartment.

Just thought I'd share. Anyone find themselves falling into that same rut? And if so, how do you get out?

 

[Wmcmanus]

I think you're right. I'm sure there are wine "experts" who can hardly enjoy the taste anymore, and the same goes for cigar "experts", so the main thing is not to get too excited or overly analytical and to just enjoy the music.

My tendency is to reserve certain times, and certain tracks of music for "critical listening" exercises when evaluating a new peice of gear or doing any A/B comparisons. This often occurs when someone asks what I think of one product versus another, rather than being something I would do on my own initiative.

I've found that this has "ruined" certain music for me. For example, I used to really love the "Brothers in Arms" albulm by Dire Straits, but now I've done so much critical listening on certain tracks (especially "Money for Nothing") that it really annoys me.

This same phenomenon occurs with CD's that I use for break in purposes. I keep walking by my "break-in setup" and hearing the same CD playing all day and night, but just in faint murmors. After a while it drives me nuts and makes me wonder if it's even worth breaking in headphones and amps (and the least of which, cables!).

Anyway, the point you've hit on is an important one. Don't get too hung up in the recording quality or the quality of your gear to the point where you're not having fun with the music.

 

[number1sixerfan]

Yeah at times, I find it hard to enjoy music with headphones, but that's what speakers are for. Non-analytical listenings. When I want absolute detail, I throw the cans on. But yeah music usually takes a backseat here at head-fi.

 

[viator122]

Lately, I have found myself annoyed by the fact that some of my electronica compilation (dj mixes) albums have lots of noise in the recording - it almost seems like they were recorded off of a vinyl setup and you can hear the surface noise (I don't know if that makes any sense). I find this takes away from my listening experience. However, at the same time I find myself wanting to throw more money at new music instead of new gear, and I find this a much more exciting feeling.

 

[catachresis]

I was just thinking over the weekend that it's hard to beat those unreconstructed Motown and Beatles/Kinks/Beach Boys pop mono mixes. Sure they're two-dimensional - flat as a pie plate - but nothing evokes the energy of Summer for me like them.

 

[Feanor]

actually, I recently discovered the enjoyment of analizing your music (a bit), or maybe just listening with more concentration. I love the way those high hats sound!

 

[lan]

Easy solution. If you are in NYC, I would be willing to hold onto your rig

to ween you off it.

Well similarly, you could just stop listening to music on your main rig.

That's why I have multiple headphones to "change" the sound up so I don't get tired of it.

 

[jefemeister]

I've been guilty of this ever since I started in audio. I've recently told myself I'm not buying anymore gear until I buy a house/condo which will be awhile. I have bought a ton of music lately as a consequence. I say my music collection has grown by a 1/3 over the last 6 months and I couldn't be happier.

My overall recommendation is to find the level of sonic performance that fits your needs early-on and just stick with that until your overall needs (or cash situation) changes significantly. Continually chasing "little improvements" is expensive and you'll probably mistake differences as improvements anyway.

 

[dhwilkin]

Sound quality is not over-rated. Listening critically all the time, on the other hand...

 

[Bill Ward]

I should probably plead guilty here, not so much to over-analyzing as to judging recordings by the sound quality. My musical pleasure is enhanced by the experience of a beautifully recorded performance. This is such an important factor that I'll trade off interpretive finesse for SQ .

BW

 

[chadbang]

Sound quality is a bonus, for sure. But a great performance, however badly recorded, can still knock your socks off. I remember have a steely dan bootleg that I adored, but sounded like crap. Who cared? It was Steely Dan live!

 

[clarke68]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus My tendency is to reserve certain times, and certain tracks of music for "critical listening" exercises when evaluating a new peice of gear or doing any A/B comparisons. This often occurs when someone asks what I think of one product versus another, rather than being something I would do on my own initiative. I've found that this has "ruined" certain music for me. For example, I used to really love the "Brothers in Arms" albulm by Dire Straits, but now I've done so much critical listening on certain tracks (especially "Money for Nothing") that it really annoys me. This same phenomenon occurs with CD's that I use for break in purposes.

I think you need a few recordings laying around for the purpose of evaluating equipment, and yeah, over time you'll get to know them so well that you get sick of them. That's why you keep it to a few recordings!

Overall, your system is supposed to make music sound good. If you want to tune out and enjoy the sound a hi-hat ringing for a few, that's fine, if you're still enjoying yourself there's nothing wrong with that.

Now, what I consider to be the "fiberglass underwear" of hi-fi is when your system resolves so well that you can no longer enjoy anything that isn't an audiophile-grade recording. I dig Chesky and Mapleshade as much as the next guy, but let's face it: if that's all there was to listen to, most of us wouldn't have gotten so into this hobby in the first place.

I think Jefemeister's suggestion is right on: we all need extended vacations from the upgrade train. Heck, the way my finances are going right now, I may be in for a downgrade!

 

[Glod]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Ward I should probably plead guilty here, not so much to over-analyzing as to judging recordings by the sound quality. My musical pleasure is enhanced by the experience of a beautifully recorded performance. This is such an important factor that I'll trade off interpretive finesse for SQ . BW

Well - me too. But there are many recordings which are technically vastly inferior to today's technology but nevertheless leaves you breathless in their interpretation or recording craftmanship, like late 1970's Philips recordings or Karajan's Aida on Decca from 1959. Still - to me SQ is the most important.

 

[pne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus I've found that this has "ruined" certain music for me. For example, I used to really love the "Brothers in Arms" albulm by Dire Straits, but now I've done so much critical listening on certain tracks (especially "Money for Nothing") that it really annoys me.

and your analysis? I'm a big dire straits fan but never really listened to their albums analytically, I'd love to hear someone elses impressions and findings. Shoot me a PM if you've got some spare time

as for the original topic, when I first dove into hi-fi I used to critically listen all the time, not only was it unenjoyable, but at times fustrating and fatiguing. Especially when I was listening for things that weren't there, and psychologically trying to force myself to listen harder to hear them. For example, I used to try to pinpoint the stereo imaging of a singer, and even though my ears were telling me it was spread out and non-focused I dismissed it as part of my tin ears, and kept trying to visualize an image. Later after fine tuning some placement adjustments the image lept out at me clearly, and that's when I realized it was time to stop listening so critically, my ears were perfectly capable of analyzing a track during normal listen, and trying to listen for what's "there" and "not there" is only a waste of energy.

 

[Kirosia]

I try to do some half analyzing and half casual listening, at once. And yes, some of my music has super s**ty sq. Anyone listened to Utada hikaru's song final distance? It sounds like a "hot" recording to me. Not that bad, but the inherently high volume causes problems for me. A couple of the songs I have are unlistenable on my home rig, they just sound cruddy quality no matter how I look at em.