How important are music and replay, taken together?

I'm casting about for ideas.

My initial thought is that replay is equally important to the music being played.

Didn't really think about where it would go from there.

And don't think computer based replay is competitive with Naim based replay, not from what I've heard.

quote:

Originally posted by Whizzkid:
I have heard a few so called neutral systems that at their heart are very clean sounding, they add this sheen to all music so clean is a form of colouration in my ears.

Very often these "clean" sounding systems are just bright and thin, not neutral. Most domestic hi-fi systems are voiced to sound bright to varying degrees, and speakers are the worst culprits. You've always got frequency response curves to fall back on if you don't trust your ears, although both have their limitations!

You're right in that you can't know what the original signal really sounds like, but most hi-fi colourations are quite easy to hear. Also the overall presentation is often quite obviously voiced in some way - warm, bright, thin, fat etc.

One of the reasons I upgraded from Sennheiser HD595s to the AKG 701s was because the 595s had some obvious midrange colourations that grated a bit. (And I was feeling extravagant!) The tonal balance of the Essence/701s isn't 100 % neutral, but I can't hear any significant artefacts.

bye.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
bye.

Baaaaa!

This might put things on track and get them moving.

What in particular do you listen for in replay, independent of the equipment you might use?

And how important is that, relative to the musical experience?

A sense of 'ease'...by which I mean the replay equipment is in perfect control whatever it is called on to play but at the same time it allows the appropriate passion and dynamics of the original through without any feeling that musical edges have benn polished off.

Essentially this means a bad recording sounds as though the best has been made of a bad job, while a good recording shines through in all its glory.

The bad recording thing does not have to mean you can't enjoy the content. There are older recordings which are not intrinsically bad but suffer from the circumstance and history. For example take Bille Holiday. Some of her recordings are not great but they are still marvellous to listen to because she is Billie Holiday. So for me the music itself can transcend the vagaries of the recording, but only when the artistic content is great enough to do it.

regards
Geoff

The trick is not to listen for anything but just respond to the music. The degree to which you do being your guide.

I note with interest that many on this forum have given up hi fi and are listening to music on their computers. I see this as something basically positive.


Noyes

Yep, I pretty much agree with Geoff. I suppose I'd say I'm keen on tonal accuracy, I like the absence of sibilance and obvious distortion, and I'm also hot on resolution. I strongly dislike electronics that present the music in an artificial or overblown manner.

That said, although I've taken an inordinate amount of interest in hi-fi over the years, I tend to find that I still enjoy the music I like even on less than wonderful equipment. The musician in me sneers at the hi-fi enthusiast I have become, who worries about sonic niceties that don't really affect the music itself. It doesn't surprise me that few professional musicians are hi-fi enthusiasts!

So I like it to be as good as possible. I still enjoy great music even through a crappy car stereo or through my MP3 player (not that that gets much use, truth be told) although it's all the sweeter via the 701s!!

EW

quote:

Originally posted by Geoff P:
A sense of 'ease'...

That's more like it :-)

For me, as previously stated, if I am hearing clear articulation and the overtones are shining through, I have a good recording.

Older recordings are typically shy in overtone reporduction, so require more work to listen to. But as Geoff says, artists like Billie Holiday are worth the trouble.

Suppose a hi fi has 'articulation' 'tonal accuracy' is 'neutral' and has no 'sibilance' and plays with a sense of ease....but bores you stiff when you listen to it. Would that matter ?

Breaking music down into meaningless compartments leads nowhere.... The nowhere abyss of the hi fi enthusiasts. That's why most people have no use for hi fi..


They have more sense.


Noyes

I could not really put into words exactly what I look for in replay except to say that I never want to notice what the machine does of itself!

I want to have enough depth of detail to be amazed at the beauty and wonder in the music, and to marvel at how it has been comprehended and brought to life by a great performer or ensemble.

If the music is great and the performance equal to its demands there is no need of anything other than the most unobtrusive replay set - call it neutral, call it boring if you like.

I like the boring in replay as the music is not detracted from by a layer of artificial excitement applied by the replay machinery. Most of the larger scaled music - in the losely described "classical style" - is about tension and realese. An over-wraught set may manage the tesnion [building] part but will entirely fail to find the relaxation necessary for release ... It is in the music already and must not be adjusted in replay if we are to be honest with the music, the composer, and the performers ...

It seems to me that replay sets that have a tendency to place me in the front row - rather than in a good seat in the twentieth row, in the confines of an acoustically clear and hall with next to no reverberation like the old [pre-reburbished] Royal Festival Hall - are tedious to a fault. Unlistenable in the great music of Bach or others of equal stature. {I have found that the various Naim models over the years either provoke great admiration or equally great dislike, depending on whether they follow the neutral voicing of the CDS seriesor the over-wraught voicing of the CDX series. It is possible to find a similar dichotomy of voicing among the pre-amplifiers with the 72 and 52 being to my taste, while I dislike the 82 and 102. This may seem a fine line to call, but a component I find with voicing the wrong side of it for me is worse than useless to me].

The music of the greatest staure needs no artifical boost in excitement ... Just a fine sense of pitch, articulation [and therefore rhythm], and a clear sense of lucid musical balances. Nothing else is relevant ... IMO.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
Suppose a hi fi has 'articulation' 'tonal accuracy' is 'neutral' and has no 'sibilance' and plays with a sense of ease....but bores you stiff when you listen to it. Would that matter ?

This is like picking a new trumpet. You have to listen to what you get, and determine if it is what you want.

But some horns play out of tune, speak with difficulty, and/or won't play loud or soft.

Those are best avoided.

Articulation is not a stereo phrase; it is well known to all musicians, and many others.

I think HiFi is less of a hobby than it was earlier on for two simple reasons :

1-HiFi is not massively promoted to the mass culture as an essential of the good life, as it once was.

2-Fewer people really listen to music. It is more often an addendum to some other activity.
Fewer people can really hear music as well, because it is no longer part of their fundamental social education.

And the divorced/single parent lifestyle is not a friendly one to an avid interest in music.

So Noye's Fludde, what's your take on the importance of replay quality, when listening to recorded music?

That would include both the replay system and the recording, considered together and "in action".

Or did you just stop by to fart in the breeze?

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:

It seems to me that replay sets that have a tendency to place me in the front row - rather than in a good seat in the twentieth row, in the confines of an acoustically clear and hall with next to no reverberation like the old [pre-reburbished] Royal Festival Hall - are tedious to a fault. Unlistenable in the great music of Bach or others of equal stature.

music needs a fine sense of pitch, articulation [and therefore rhythm], and a clear sense of lucid musical balances. Nothing else is relevant ... IMO.

ATB from George

Moving from Theil 1.5s to Spendor S5es places me about 10 rows further back in the hall than I had been. Curiously, it seems resolution of detail improved a bit as well.

Ditto on the needs of music, assuming lucid musical balances encompasses frequency extension and dynamics.

Enough of each is a pre-requisite in my view. Yes.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
The trick is not to listen for anything but just respond to the music. The degree to which you do being your guide.

The trick is to listen without paying attention to the notes, and hope something pleasant drifts into your mind (for no apparent or related reason)?

That works with some limited choice of music, but not for all, and is especially destructive of great classical music.

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:
This is like picking a new trumpet.

Mike,

There you go again, comparing musical instruments to hi fi. Very strange,.. and the schoolboy insults do not become you...


I would respond to you with the same incivility and childish language but,.. it's not worth the bother


Noyes

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
There you go again, comparing musical instruments to hi fi. Very strange,.. and the schoolboy insults do not become you...

As I play and listen to HiFi, the comparisons come naturally.

No schoolboy insults, just a reaction to the tiresome negatives. Give it a rest. Break out of your bonds, and say something insightful and positive :-)

quote:

Originally posted by mikeeschman:

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
There you go again, comparing musical instruments to hi fi. Very strange,.. and the schoolboy insults do not become you...

As I play and listen to HiFi, the comparisons come naturally.

No schoolboy insults, just a reaction to the tiresome negatives. Give it a rest. Break out of your bonds, and say something insightful and positive :-)

Okey dokey, boss....

quote:

Originally posted by Noye's Fludde:
Okey dokey, boss....

I can't wait :-)

A central musical experience on a replay system has always been to recognize players I know well.

Those are the recordings you fall into.

The stereo simply disappears.

And if you thought you got the player right, but it turned out to be someone else?

Well, that's how I find new players.

Once in a very great while, I will hear someone who WOWs me, and is completely unfamiliar.

Those are the ones you live for :-)

Mike,if you recognize them, how do they turn out to be someone else? or did you mean try to recognize? I can only do that with singers and be almost 100%, with players, depends, maybe some pianists or fiddle players, that would probably be it.
I don't know if i totally agree with your hifi assessment #1 and 2 earlier, I think the mass merchants (box stores) caused great harm when they came along with mass produced goods and consumers were offered cheaper/inferior goods with inferior sound quality.
And I do feel people listen to music just as much, although there is so much more to spend your free time on; remember having 7 channels of television? What's changed is people do not expect to have to pay for music any longer. Just a thought.
and to agree with someone else, I would never compare a hifi to a musical instrument.

... recognize their playing on a recording, where I can't see them. As in, I thought that was Herseth in Chicago, but it's actually the guy who replaced him.

I know the sounds of a number of trumpet players in orchestras, but sometimes a student can sound like a teacher.

What do I care if anyone else thinks it's appropriate to compare a hifi to a trumpet?
I'm certainly not asking. I am telling you I think it appropriate, as someone who plays trumpet. Do you play trumpet? If not, how would you know if it was appropriate? Even if you did play trumpet, so what? This is my opinion.

The other things you say about people listening to music and mass markets are sadly true, in addition to what I said earlier, which is a view shared with Gordon Holt of Stereophile fame.

But soundsreal, how does your replay affect your enjoyment of music? You didn't really say.

OK, no more comparisons of HiFi to musical instruments.

On playing recorded music on a hifi? If it's great it sends me soaring, if it's bad, it sucks.
All right, if a performance moves me or just the music in general moves me, I can get goose bumps on a car or table radio. If I hear it over a hifi system, if the hifi is to my liking, I can really get sucked into the music even more. If the hifi is not to my liking--introducing some artifice, bad timing, poor setup which shows in the sound, it can be off putting. But, only to a point. If I like the music, it doesn't really take too long to settle in and still enjoy it.
Like popping in on a friend to hear a record I had just played at home, you sit for a moment and take in the new sound, obviously assess it, noticing the differences, both good and bad, and then in the end listen to the music.
Of course, if it's some ol spendors that sound like they have a wool sock over them, I might tend to eventually drift away and fall asleep.

and thank you, there is no way you can compare a hifi to a musical instrument, no matter what instrument you play. if you mean you like to compare recordings to live musical instruments, that's fine, although you'll never the real thing come through your speakers.

quote:

Originally posted by soundsreal:
Of course, if it's some ol spendors that sound like they have a wool sock over them, I might tend to eventually drift away and fall asleep.

I like my Spendors. Am I the only one?