Can Someone Please Explain

It’s called maturity - or Nirvana, or Valhalla or something. Which dozen LP's are they that did this?

Matthew,

I don't see anything particularly mysterious about your predicament.

My hi-fi upgrade cycle pseudo-code is quite simple :

Start.

Either :

(a) Your system is pissing you off or getting in the way of your enjoyment of music, or boring you, or cracks have appeared that you kidded yourself had been plastered over by the last upgrade, or someone has forced you to listen to some new equipment that has rocked your world (e.g. a CDS3 - Bastard). Solution : slowly give up listening to music (end-of-game) or upgrade and goto Start.

or

(b) Your system is doing everything right. After you have played the last album of the day go back to Start.

I think the most important prerequisite for long-term hi-fi happiness is your motivation for owning a hi-fi system in the first place. If you grew up loving music and finally got some money and thought "great - finally I can have music in my home" and have arrived at (b) you should be able to stay there indefinitely. If however you were raised by wolves and after being rescued walk into a hi-fi shop and find yourself deeply fascinated with tonal accuracy or have a small penis or are primarily driven by any of the hundreds of other non-musical motives that come to mind you may be doomed to live on planet (a) for the rest of your life.

It seems to me Matthew that you are a happy inhabitant of (b). Congratulations and welcome to the club. Enjoy.

You are all wrong.

The more music you buy the less money you have for fancy hifi.

Downloading billions of free MP3s doesn't cure upgraditis, right.

This is not just that old trite banality of "I'm not interested in hi-fi only in music" -- in fact I've not been interested in hi-fi for almost as long as I can remember.

Nor is it the old "my system is so great I no longer worry about upgrades" thing. My system has always been great and consitently enjoyable (this is perhaps the biggest beneift of not being interested in hi-fi).

Nor is it the effect Hockman notes that I cannot apreciate the better hi-fi because I think I do that at least as well as your average person here and perhaps even, rather ironically, better than some.

[An aside: I once heard a hi-fi that had something seriously and very obviously wrong with it in that the hi-hats sounded louder, and "bigger" than the snare drums. The assembled panel of hi-fi lovers, however, seemed oblivious to this but all nodded sagely when a new box of WhateverTech was plugged in and the fundamentally wrong drums were played, I was assured, in a manner that represented a significant improvement.]

No, my current conundrum is more fundamental. I appreciate how much better my hi-fi sounds than most but it is increasingly my belief that this difference doesn't actually matter very much in terms of musical enjoyment. This has become apparent to me in recent months as changes in my lifestyle mean I am listening to most of my music on either an MP3 portable or on my laptop and less rarely on my major system.

I note:

-- I consitently get high levels of musical enjoyment out of, say. listening to an MP3 on a crowded tube. I tap my feet, get the "emotional" thing, etc. in the most un hi-fi of environments.

-- Although its a real treat to listen to my Naim system I don't really miss it particularly. Certainly it pales next to the amount I look forward to the next package from www.insound.com

-- MP3 able features like random shuffle, favourites, genre/mood playlists, etc. are much more effective at increasing musical enjoyment than I would have thought.

I find all this quite hard to explain clearly ("Cognitive dissonance in a man with a £6k CD player" cry the psychs jumping up and down with excitement) so I shall resort to some simple maths.

If we let:

-- the quality 'musical enjoyment' be m,

-- the quality hi-fi owned be h,

-- the quality of a baseline budget hi-fi be b,

-- and the number of CDs bought within the last month be n,

then Robinson's Second Law of the Conservation of Musical Enjoyment states that:

• m(n) > m(h) - m(b)
  

... for reasonably large values of n (say >= 10).

We can also probably say:

• Subjectively m(h) - m(b) --> 0 as n increases, (or conversely tends towards infinity as n decreases).
  
• Values of m(h) - m(b) are inconsequentially small compared to values of m(n).
  
• Another variable m(c) representing the quality of one's existing CD collection can be introduced and may well allow such relationships to be maintained for much lower values of n.
  
• This also explains 'Upgraditis' as the only way to avoid (subjective) decreases in m when n is relatively static is to attempt to raise the value of h. This quickly becomes prohibitively expensive and may well also explain tweaking as hi-fi geeks look to raise h artificially without having to get a second mortgage.
  
• Lonorgan Downgrades and Infinite Value Propositions therefore work by not only by releasing funds to increse n but also because reducing h makes m(n) subjectively higher.
  

This leads to a rather obvious conclusion that in order to enjoy music more one should buy more albums (we take the existence of large numbers of suitably good albums to purchase as axiomatic and assume the reader is not from the 'Nothing after '74, Pink Floyd, Wings and Led Zep' school). perhaps more interestingly though it may also indicte that in order to increase the enjoyment of one's hi-fi (as opposed to music) one should buy less music.

Matthew

Matthew,

I totally get where you are coming from. I don't need a great hi-fi to enjoy music but given that I listen to a lot of music and that I need SOMETHING to listen to it on and that it IS a treat to listen to it on a good quality system, I choose (because I can afford it) to listen to it on a good quality system. I don't obsess about the equipment and I don't care about mains or supports (sorry) and I don't read hi-fi mags (because they bore me shitless) and I don't (normally) lust after the next upgrade, and if I hit the skids tomorrow and had to sell the lot I would (probably) be perfectly happy with a Nait and a pair of Intros. The system is the means to an end, not an end in itself.

On the subject of buying more music. Saying that to enjoy music more one should buy more albums is like saying that to enjoy food more one should buy more food. Besides there being a physical limit to the volume of music or food that one can consume, quantity and quality are very different beasties.

Music & Hi Fi

Interesting post this is...

Hi Matthew, the lecture was uhmmm... long. But you did hit it on the nail for me with your opening post on the relation between having more music and enjoying less hi-fi.

I've been systemless for about 8 months now, and while I do miss my system, it doesn't mean I've not been enjoying my music these months, via other sources I have at home, namely my portable, and (out of all things) my DVD-TV combo! I heard Bill Evans the other night on the latter, and later Miles followed suit, followed by Coltrane and Fitzgerald. Even MJ joined the party, and I enjoyed every second of it.

Perhaps these 8 months away from a hi fi system has in some way placated bouts of audiophilia nervosa that I encounter from time to time, and as a result "liberated" my listening. I heard the music for what it was, as played by the musicians, and couldn't have been more happy with the listen. Was I emotionally connected to the music via my modest DVD/TV combo? Yes! But most would have thought otherwise because it wasn't a "proper" hi-fi system.

Which leaves us the question why we even bother with hi-fi, if it's really the music we're after, for what it is. I've wondered why we spend huge sums of money on hi-fi equipment when a modest dvd/TV combo (or mini compo, or transistor radio for that matter) was equally adept at conveying the music of jazz greats into my living room.

For me, the answer lies in preference and beliefs. I prefer spending my money on good hi fi like Naim to enhance my music enjoyment, relative to my listening preferences. I can enjoy my music via a dvd/tv combo, but I believe I would enjoy the music even more in a properly matched and set-up Naim hi fi system.

If you wanted to enjoy just the music and the music alone for what it was, you wouldn't really need the hi-fi, a portable would do. But if you really wanted to hear the full, detailed performance of the recording from a great musician "as a listening preference", that's when the money flows. And what better way than via a Naim system?

Good listening; the music's groovin' frightfully more.

Regards

Philip

naimniac for life

[This message was edited by Philip Pang on WEDNESDAY 17 September 2003 at 11:29.]

quote:

---

You do not need an expensive hi fi in order to enjoy music

---

Spot on, Hockman. You'd already replied whilst I was typing my rather long-winded post.

Since it's the music you're professing to be after, does this then mean you'd be letting your DBLs/500 out for a song?

Good listening; the music's groovin' frightfully more.

Philip

naimniac for life

quote:

---

Why the more music I buy the less important having a fancy hi-fi seems to be and the less actual difference it seems to make to my enjoyment.

---

Your enjoyment is coming from grazing on a vast amount of shallow music?

(Currently with 'A boy named Sue' on repeat to ensure I fully comprehend the intrinsic sub-constructionalist threads of confluence.)

Paul

Hockman -- I understood what you meant and was agreeing with you but perhaps that wasn;t terribly clear in my subsequent post.

Paul Ranson "Your enjoyment is coming from grazing on a vast amount of shallow music?"

Yes in that I do like "shallow" music and do not tend to actively and intensively listen to, say, Bruckner symphonies on an MP3 player into work.

But I don't agree with the (perhaps) implied prejorative aspects of "grazing" and "shallow". I am an uashamed fan of pop (in the broadest sense) music and when push comes to shove, not much else. I'm also not convinced that the argument for a hi-fi improves if listening to "serious" music, although granted its likely to make portable and listening while doing somethign else less workable.

Matthew

quote:

---

But I don't agree with the (perhaps) implied prejorative aspects of "grazing" and "shallow".

---

Pejorative not intended.

Recent innovation makes it possible, habits change. Perhaps in 10 years time you'll develop a fascination with Bruckner and a hifi will become more important (again?) to your enjoyment.

I had a shallow grazing period when I used to listen to the radio a lot (this was quite recently, when Radio 1 in the evening/night was good and once a week it was 'Out on Blue Six'). I've never really had a tuner connected to the hifi though.

Paul

"For me, portables make an acceptable sound, not much else, but a good hi-fi system makes great music"

My point is not that that this distinction is lost (or at least becomes relatively unimportant) especially if you buy lots of music.

"Another thing, vinyl is where it's at for me, and there's no portable out there (so far) that can replace my LP12"

My LP12 is gathering dust as it fails the convenience test compared to my CDS2 with arguably no loss of music (It also fails the needs a new £600 cartridge test as well).

Matthew

Matthew,

Could it be that you have subconsciously become accustomed to the MP3 sound (and the fact that a considerable amount of current pop music is compressed and "processed" for this format) that the difference between your portable and the "big" home system is not as obvious? It would not change your enjoyment of the music, because if it ain't there to begin with (dynamic range etc.) then the difference in perceived quality will not necessarily be that apparent between the portable and home systems [unlike the comparison of say an LP vs Cassette tape or CD vs Cassette tape or even Radio Broadcast vs the CD or LP (I would expect that radio and MP3 would be very similar in most instances)of the same recording/performance].

Cheers

Matthew doesn't have a problem, we do.

(Actually I don't, but you all do....)

Paul

Matthew,

quote:

---

...in fact I've not been interested in hi-fi for almost as long as I can remember.

---

Quite the opposite for me. I can't recall a time in my life when I wasn't interested in hi-fi -- or what I thought was hi-fi at the time.

But despite my lifelong interest, I'm not at all keen on continual upgrading or in reaching some stratospheric level of hi-fi performance if not hi-fi price. But I would like something better than what I have. (An 82 would pretty much do it, though I think I'll eventually also get a separate phono stage because (a) they do make an important difference, and (b) I've always wanted a little black box that's powered by another medium-sized black box that sends the signal to a big black box that's powered by a medium-sized black box and a very little black box all before it goes to big black box. Hmmmm, maybe a diagram would help.)

Anyway, I have to congratulate you for not getting sucked into believing that you can enjoy music only on an absurdly expensive hi-fi. But I've got to ask: If you've had so little interest in hi-fi and admittedly get enjoyment out of MP3s, why did you ever buy such high-spec kit in the first place?

Joe

The important thing is that you enjoy music on the system you play it on.

I don't buy the "classical deserves better" argument, nor the "subconsciously accustomed to crap" argument. I have heard more expensive naim systems but never thought the extra performance justified the extra price.

Like what you like

cheers

Nigel

Matthew,

Nice one! In my experience there is some stuff that does matter though. It is the kind of gear that prevents the music from sounding really horrendous, like an ARO on the LP12 and some proper support for the whole set.

The rest (i.e. big pre/power amps, active filtering, megapound CD-players)is a complete (well, almost) wast of money. Money that could be invested in a proper record collection.

Have fun!

willem

let me offer myself as a subject of observation and analysis.

lately, i have been listening to my hifi a lot. so much so that i feel it is begining to interfere with work.

i enjoy my second 112/150/Kan system in our lounge -- but i enjoy my main system (active 52/250) much mcuh more.

i also enjoy the hifi system in my car although i know it doesnt do a lot of things that my main system does.

i often wonder whether there is a certain LOWER BOUND of system quality for us to enjoy the music. i suspect there is.

if an opportunity for an upgrade comes my way, and i consider the upgrade worthwhile, i will do it, sometimes quite painfully when it comes to paying for the stuff. value for money never comes into the equation for me -- this is a hobby. i would have the top flight naim system if i could afford it. i cant.

i strongly suspect that people who value hifi hardware more than the software would probably NOT buy naim audio stuff. i believe people who buy naim have a certain minimum level of expectation as far as music reproduction is concerned.

i dont believe there is any reliable measure that determines whether someone if a music lover more than h/w junkie. people are so different. also, type of music is unlikely to be relevant -- i believe pop lovers are just as valid music lovers as hip-hop lovers. its so personal.

anyway, nuff said, my 2c contribution to this thread is that i have often found myself enjoying music on a very humble systems. i have also often been tortured by some absolutely atrocious systems.

anyway,

enjoy


ken

Question for Matthew...

Did you discover the greater variety of music via your fancy HiFi, or via alternative routes.

My experience is the system allowed me to discover what I was missing in the music, but once heard I then found I could enjoy the pieces irrespective of the replay medium.

I also wonder whether it was the fancy system that allowed me to realise what's fundamentally important and hear through the deficiencies elsewhere.

Just a thought, whatever the reason, it's great, for once in my life I no longer desire anything better than what I have!

Andy.

Geofiz said "Could it be that you have subconsciously become accustomed to the MP3 sound"

No. If I play my hi-fi all night I still enjoy my MP3 player/laptop at work the next day and still notice the improvements back at home.

"and the fact that a considerable amount of current pop music is compressed and "processed" for this format"

I get the same result with all types of music from Robert Johnson on wax cylinders, to Charlie Parker to Klemperer/Mahler #2/EMI to modern Jazz, esoteric recordings, etc.

Joe asked "If you've had so little interest in hi-fi and admittedly get enjoyment out of MP3s, why did you ever buy such high-spec kit in the first place?"

Becuase I have re-calibrated my scale of what constitutes a significant difference. The differences are (obviously) still there but the fact that I am currently enjoying such obviously lo-fi things as MP3 from my laptop has made me re-evaluate things. If one spends much of one's time concerned with and listening to the differences between a 102 and an 82 or Hutter and Mana, say, and then starts to compare an uber system to a basic system I think a certain amount of recalibration is inevitable. This is what the downgraders have always said -- go back to the system you enjoyed 10 years ago and you'll be surprised how similar it is (in terms of enjoyment and music) to your current system despite the 7 "massive upgrades" you've been through in the interim.

Nigel said "I don't buy the "classical deserves better" argument"

Neither do I. I think it often requires more concentration on the part of the listener and that miught rule out casual listening on the bus but I think I could in theory enjoy Bruckner on an MP3 player (although of course nobody actually *enjoys* Bruckner no more than people enjoy watching glaciers move down valleys).

Andrew said "Did you discover the greater variety of music via your fancy HiFi, or via alternative routes"

I've discoverd lots of music via my hi-fi but only becuase of the people I've got to know because of my hi-fi. One could argue that the hi-fi makes the process easier I suppose but I think its far from crucial.

Matthew

I originally got interested in hi-fi because I wanted to be able to listen to music without hurting my ears, which the cheap systems of the day were good at doing. I could tell the musical difference between a Linn/Naim system and inferior systems but this was irrelevant: I could enjoy music on any system and simply wanted something that wouldn't hurt my ears. I thought I would never need an LP12 but I got mine just five years later...

Since then, however, my musical sensitivity and hearing have deteriorated. Most of the time I really need an increasingly better system to enjoy music as much I used to - especially classical music. When I've survived those awful times when music has no emotional effect at all, I really need music - and need the right hi-fi to play it on.

--J

There is a fundemental flaw to the main post of this thread.

Its been posted on a hifi forum, indicating a holyier than thou attitude.

If music is your life and not hifi, stop posting in hifi forums.

quote:

---

Did you discover the greater variety of music via your fancy HiFi?

---

Ironically, the limited number of new vinyl releases has actually led me to discover a lot of new music. I prefer vinyl and my LP12 to any CDP I could afford, and so scan new vinyl releases at places like Insound and Midheaven for possibilities, and find much in the process.

New CD-only releases, by contrast, are far too numerous to survey and so I ignore them, unless given reason to look further by reviews or recommendations.

It's slightly sad and fetishistic, I know, but it works to my advantage.

quote:

---

My LP12 is gathering dust as it fails the convenience test compared to my CDS2

---

But Matthew, the "inconvenience" of your LP12 can save your life. You can't get too sh*t-faced at night because you must get up and handle a delicate and expensive cartridge.

quote:

---

indicating a holyier than thou attitude.

---

I think it's obvious that I'm holier than everyone here, especially you, garyi.

Eric

garyi -- There are several fundemental flaws in your post (putting words into my mouth, making false assumptions about my "attitude", false conclusion based on flawed premise, rudeness, etc.)

ejl -- "You can't get too sh*t-faced at night because you must get up and handle a delicate and expensive cartridge£

Sadly I am more or less permanently "on the wagon" these days so I seem to have acquired the monk like levels of sobriety to safely own an ARO and Helikon just at the point I decide I don't really want one.

Fredrik -- I was joking about the Bruckner.

Matthew

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matthew Robinson:
Fredrik -- I was joking about the Bruckner.

Matthew

---

That's a pity. I was all set to leap to his defence. A splendid analogy with glaciers: slow-moving but magnificent. I love being in mountains and I'm pretty fond of my Bruckner, but then it took live performances to 'get' him.

duncan

Email: djcritchley at hotmail.com

Matthew

Are you really using MP3 as track spotting mechanism?

I find I load up my car CD cartridge with "dusty" cd's not listened to for a long time and eh voila as I idely read the number plate of the car in front of me in the queue I suddenly think wow that track would be worth sticking on the Naim kit for a new listen.

I travel on business quite a lot and resort to the trusty company PC CD drive and headphones in the standard model hotel room I always seem to end up in. In these circumstances I really appreciate the music from the PC, but at the back of my mind I am again marking down tracks to put on the reference system when back home.
Hence the question at the top.

regards
GEOFFP