Does sound quality matter?

Dear Tam,

I think it depends on what is wrong.

If the sonority is constant, like the steady fry of a 78, then no harm is done (for me - Smiley!), but if there are peak distortions more than perhaps once or twice in a whole piece this is more difficult, and pitch variation rules out the possibility of even listening.

Narrow-band recording such as for 78 records makes no difference at all. (Again for me - Smiley). The ear adjusts within sconds to what at least was meant, and then it fills in what is missing.

Musical balances - the lucidity and audibility of each line - is vitally important, but a perfect sonority cannot exist as a benchmark as every hall (in the live context) gets a different one. All one can ask for is something within a reasonable range!

Some over reverberant and distant recordings steam-roller the possibility of ever connecting with the expressive intention of the players.

All the best from Fredrik

hi Tam, this is an issue which has exercised my mind quite on and off during the past couple of weeks when i was struggling with my cdx2.

allow me to add just one piece of what i think is useful insight -- at least from my limited experience.

whenever my system is not sounding right, i invariably find myself listening analytically -- by that i mean things like asking myself questions like "was that bass clear enough?" "am i hearing the backing vocals clearly?" "is the piano in tune?" "can i follow the tune?" etc etc...

however, when my system is sounding OK, vinyl is a case in point for me, i find myself asking a completely different set of questions, like, "i wonder what else this person has done.." when all is OK, i find myself paying very little attention to the individual elements of a piece of music, rather, i find that the piece lingers in my mind and often find myself humming it...

to try to get back to your question, i also find that "sound quality" per se is too dry a criterion, but i cant think of a word to describe "that which makes me enjoy my system and stops me doing some work and playing music late into the night..." i used to thing "musical quality" is the term, but this now carries so much baggage with it that it may not be appropriate. i guess emotion is important, but not when i have to struggle to look for it...

nuff for now...
enjoy
ken

As a straight answer to your question: yes, a lot.
SJ

My two penneth, stimulated by hearing Jonny Cash's 'Hurt' again last night. This recording is distorted at a crucial point in the track with a 'back-off-the-mike' moment but it gives the track even more edge and emotion IMHO. I can think of other moments like this where awareness of the recording/performing process is theoretically intrusive but is actually nothing of the sort. What counts is a connection with the performance.

Bruce

One track that I play over and over, is Robert Johnson's Love In Vain, 1936, recorded in a hotel room with the only surviving recordings being transfers from a scratchy old 78. Sounds like you're listening down a 1930's telephone line long distance. Incredible that it is litenable at all, but I keep playing it.
I think that we make the best of what we have. It isn't necessary to have great quality, but it's nice if we do, to get closer to the music in the absence of being there. If you love music to the extent that we do, you can't help but try to maximise on the experience, but that's all it is. It isn't the experience itself, but getting the best from it is the only part we can play. Spending tons on hi-fi and being concerned with sound quality is our declaration of love.

quote:

Originally posted by Rasher:
One track that I play over and over, is Robert Johnson's Love In Vain, 1936, recorded in a hotel room with the only surviving recordings being transfers from a scratchy old 78.

Having heard what a relatively modest program like Bias Soap can do to clean up a recording, I wonder if a recording studio could do more to remove the noise from Robert Johnson recordings. It may not enhance them, but I'd like to hear the results. I find it difficult to listen to the King of the Delta Blues Singers because of the noise - the songs are great though.

I've just put on Magnolia Mountain off Cold Roses, by Ryan Adams & the Cardinals, through my computer speakers off media player.
Music this good transcends any thoughts as to the sound quality. It's just beyond all that.

Good sound quality is not essential to me, but preferable - or I wouldn't be spending the amounts I have on equipment.

However, when faced with two versions of the same music, I would always take the better performance whether or not it was a better recording.

Steve.

First and foremost it is about the music. Obviously having great sound is desirable as well. I will agree with Steve in that given two versions of the same music, the performance trumps sound quality for myself.

Regards
Matt

Confession time...

Sound quality DOES matter to me. A lot. Just as a preparation for a 552 less time (coming up, soon) I have connected and old integrated amp of mine, a then well regarded cheap little ROTEL amp.

Unlike my recent positive experience with my likewise old speakers (which are still connected), the results were devastating. Played 2-3 tracks of my fav CDs, and hated it. The music just didn't come through to me. Not a bit.

Oh well...
Stefan

Stefan,
Thankfully not having the same experience with my old Nait 1 - it has all the old magic still.

In general, I think that there is an element of musicality that outweighs sound or recording quality. I think Robert Johnson, Louis Armstrong's Hot 5s, Fürtwangler, Boult et al reflect this. Yes, it would be nice if the quality were better but we can still walk (listen) with giants.

Huw

quote:

Thankfully not having the same experience with my old Nait 1 - it has all the old magic still.

Taking this thread even a bit more off track... I was ready to get a pair of Dynaudios Special One from ebay, yesterday, if not within the last 30 seconds a ba***rd was throwing almost double of what I was prepared to give into the pot. Another "classic" that without doubt would show in its best colours if in the right system.

(I confess this here, because I can be sure not to be detected by kuma, and harvest another of his "hey, man, when will your bloody speaker mania come to an end" comments. )

cheers
Stefan

Hey Stefan, it's not about the destination it's the journey that matters

Huw (happily stuck in a cul-de-sac with his Special 25s)

Thankyou all for your responses - a most interesting read.

I think Fredrik has a key point when he says it depends what is wrong and I think that so long as the musical lines and the tones of the instrument are there one can forgive an awful lot of crackle and hiss.

I think, therefore, that where the Magic Flute I mentioned falls down is that the sound is so funny (I am convinced as a result of efforts to remove the audience) that the instruments (and voices) just do not sound right. Even on many of my oldest and poorest (in the sense of noise, etc.) recordings, this basic sound of the instruments is there. It is even there when the BBC's streams drop to a paltry 12kbps. Yet not there.

Similarly I find I agree with Bruce in that the odd bit of distortion can well add, when it is adding an extra edge or emotion. The problem in the Giulini is that it is every time something loud happens, which is often and I don't think intended and too much by way of musical lines is lost (that key point again).

Ken - I very much agree that when one's system is off one cannot listen. I spent several months recently trying to get my speakers placed quite right and every time I listened there was an annoying voice in the back of my mind saying 'this isn't right' or words to that effect (with perhaps some expletives deleted and the desire to find the whisky bottle). However, shortly thereafter I got it right and everything (save these one or two, or the plain bad, are wonderful). Indeed, I find I am listening more than ever and often unable to do anything else while I listen - I just had a wonderful Beethoven 9 on and sat rapt with my eyes shut for most of it. Suffice to say Donald Runnicles other discs will be winging there way here shortly.

Actually, what is interesting about this disc was not only was the music wonderful (I have discs such as the Furtwangler 9th that do that) but the technically quality of the disc was among the best I've heard - but then this was Telarc who are a wonderful recording company. The best of both worlds truly - hence why I find myself in such a great mood. (In other words, I agree entirely Steve and Matt.)


Stefan - isn't what you're discussing the quality of the system a little more than issues of the recording? That said, I find the best discs I can enjoy almost as well from the rubbish speakers wired up to my computer as I do on my main system. As someone else said great music almost always overcomes such problems. Indeed, I suspect that even the unnatural harshness of that Magic Flue might not bother so much if I loved the reading (after all, the sound on my Krauss Ring cycle goes horribly tinny in places and yet I adore it). I know that in theory a bad system shouldn't be able to ruin the best records, but it can render them in a very disappointing way and so it bothers us as we know what we could and, indeed, should be hearing (I suspect that actaully, my £30 pc speakers, which I went to the trouble of auditioning, actually get as close to the kind of sound as I like for that kind of money and thus don't bother me).

regards, Tam