Sounding like the artist intended?
Posted by: solwisesteve on 08 January 2019
In the world of hifi I often hear people talking about how xyz music sounds when played with such-n-such kit but are we missing the point here? I mean shouldn't the aim be to reproduce the music to sound exactly as the artist intended? I think this is particularly relevant when playing vinyl where I hear comments like people like the warmth of the vinyl sound where the "warmth" of the sound really means a bass sound that is less accurate to the source. So the aim, IMO, should be to reproduce the music as close and as accurate as intended by the artist i.e. as it sounded in the mixing booth or studio (or stage if live). To that end surely the only hope of achieving this nirvana is using a digital source where the recording is taken as close as possible from the digital mixing?
So talk of this system or equipment sounding better than another should really come down to which sounds the closest to the original. Not which has the best bass extension, or sweeter treble, or better sound stage but which is the closest to the source. If the source has rubbish bass then the reproduction should sound the same even if it sounds rubbish!
If you get what I'm saying :-)