Accuracy versus Musicality

[Ajani]

A recent post about the Sony PS1 and its review in Stereophile got me thinking about Musicality and Accuracy. To sum up the Stereophile review: The PS1 sounded very smooth and sounded shockingly good given both its price and its miserable measured performance. So essentially, the PS1 sounds good but is not even remotely accurate.

So which is more important to you, Accuracy or Musicality? Let me start by defining both:

Accuracy: The system replays the music as true to the recording as possible, resulting in maximum detail retrieval. Your well recorded albums will sound good and your not so well recorded ones will sound awful.

Musicality: The system does not paint the most accurate picture, as it tends to gloss over imperfections... hence everything sounds good and butter smooth... but you know that the system is not being faithful to the recording...

So would you:

A) Buy a system that rendered most of your poorly recorded albums unlistenable and choose to upgrade your album collection/musical tastes to audiophile quality recordings only.

OR

B) Buy a system that makes all your music sound good, because you have no intention of changing your musical tastes/albums to fit the system.

Feel free to add an option C or D (if you must)...

[Feanor]

...

So would you:

A) Buy a system that rendered most of your poorly recorded albums unlistenable and choose to upgrade your album collection/musical tastes to audiophile quality recordings only.

OR

B) Buy a system that makes all your music sound good, because you have no intention of changing your musical tastes/albums to fit the system.

...

I go 'B' because it would be both difficult and expensive to replace all my recordings with only best sounding ones.

However I do believe that the very best recordings don't need any help from euphonic but less that completely accurate equipment or medium. I strongly suspect that tubes and vinyl are things add euphonia but substract accuracy -- of course plenty of peoples will disagree.

My current tube preamp + tubey-sounding s/s amp are better with 80% of recordings but they are the lessor quality recordings.

[Ajani]

I strongly suspect that tubes and vinyl are things add euphonia but substract accuracy -- of course plenty of peoples will disagree.

Despite my limited experience with tubes and vinyl, I suspect the same thing... the best setup I've heard used a hybrid integrated amp (Tubes in the preamp section)... The setup made every track I played sound sweet, regardless of the fact that many of the tracks were not high quality recordings...

[musicoverall]

...an accurate system would always be musical and vice versa. Obviously, different recording techniques help keep the world an imperfect place.

As I am one who believes that measurements do not tell the whole story of why a component sounds as it does, I do not trust the measurements we do know to explain "accuracy". Indeed, I can't say that a system is reproducing a recording accurately unless I compare it to the master tape. Since I don't have access to those tapes, I don't worry much about accuracy.

As an aside, the reproduction is about (or should be about) the music. If a system serves the recording but not the music, it is probably not giving the listener what he wants. The music is for my personal enjoyment and consequently, I want my system to do the best job it can of giving me goose bumps.

That said, it should be noted that people have been reduced to tears by recorded music for nearly a century, and much of it was far from accurate reproduction. Whether the systems of the day were doing an accurate job of reproducing what was on the 78 RPM record, I can't say. Nor do I care.

[musicoverall]

A recent post about the Sony PS1 and its review in Stereophile got me thinking about Musicality and Accuracy. To sum up the Stereophile review: The PS1 sounded very smooth and sounded shockingly good given both its price and its miserable measured performance. So essentially, the PS1 sounds good but is not even remotely accurate.

Do you see why I'm not overly trusting of measurements?

[Ajani]

Do you see why I'm not overly trusting of measurements?

I find measurements interesting (much like reviews)... but I don't place much wieght on them...

I totally forgot to give my opinion on Accuracy versus Muscality, so here goes:

Musicality all the way!!! My primary love is music... equipment is secondary and is really there to make my music more enjoyable... Whether I am hearing the most accurate reproduction of the original recording is not a big deal to me... Since, even if I was hearing a 100% reproduction, I'd never know anyway since I don't work in a recording studio.

[Asterix77]

I defenitely choose musicality. To me it's all about the music and though well recorded music improves the pleasure of listening I rather choose great music over a great recording. (both is best of course)

[Brett A]

I like detailed musicality.

Musicality is paramount and detail resolution is one of my favorite system attributes.

.

[GMichael]

After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.

[Groundbeef]

After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.

Most of us don't. But how do you like yours?

[Asterix77]

After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.

Maybe we all do....we just don't dare to admit it

[Ajani]

After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.

Ummm... which one is Bose??? Musicality or Accuracy???

[GMichael]

Ummm... which one is Bose??? Musicality or Accuracy???

Neither?

[Auricauricle]

After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.

Play nice, GM.....It's not the size of the speakers, ya know...

[bobsticks]

My room is not an anechoic chamber so it's a moot point...or maybe a mute point.

I spend alot of dosh on music so I'd like to listen to it. All of it.

[GMichael]

Play nice, GM.....It's not the size of the speakers, ya know...

That's just something that people with tiny speakers say. The truth is, size does matter.

[pixelthis]

After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.

Bose's little clock radio actually sounds quite good...for a clock radio.
CD players have perhaps teh most hype of any device, what a lot of high end owners dont tell you is that the difference between an expensive player and a cheap pos is slight, to say the least.
I have a 300 disc sony changer, and with casual listening the sound is quite good.
Not surprized about the PS1 , Sony does CD drives and codecs like no one else.
And as for accuracy vs "musicality" why musicality is key, its the soul, accuracy is the body.
The best player I have just about ever heard is the 175 buck yamaha changer.
I KNOW THIS IS SCACRALIGE, listening to music is supposed to be a painfull experience, getting up every so often to change a disc.
but I really enjoyed my Yamaha, wish I hadnt sold it.
OF COURSE FOR "COOL" FACTOR YOU CANT BEAT A HIGH END cd PLAYER,
even tho a cheap PC will stream files that sound as good if you do it right

[Duds]

and how much is that little clock radio?

Bose's little clock radio actually sounds quite good...for a clock radio.
CD players have perhaps teh most hype of any device, what a lot of high end owners dont tell you is that the difference between an expensive player and a cheap pos is slight, to say the least.
I have a 300 disc sony changer, and with casual listening the sound is quite good.
Not surprized about the PS1 , Sony does CD drives and codecs like no one else.
And as for accuracy vs "musicality" why musicality is key, its the soul, accuracy is the body.
The best player I have just about ever heard is the 175 buck yamaha changer.
I KNOW THIS IS SCACRALIGE, listening to music is supposed to be a painfull experience, getting up every so often to change a disc.
but I really enjoyed my Yamaha, wish I hadnt sold it.
OF COURSE FOR "COOL" FACTOR YOU CANT BEAT A HIGH END cd PLAYER,
even tho a cheap PC will stream files that sound as good if you do it right

[Worf101]

I ran into this the first time I upgraded my equipment from a Pilot receiver and basic JVC speakers to an Onkyo unit with some Ohm Walsh 2's. I quickly discovered how badly some of my CD's sounded.all of a sudden, no bass, no mids all brittle and alike. But I sound found out that most first generation CD's sounded like this. Those AAD transfers sucked. Later on when albums became engineered for CD with a fuller range of bass and mids, the newer system sounded wonderful. My current system is not 'great" but it sounds marvelous. I upgraded my mains and my receiver and can't be happier. Accurate, nah, musical yah!!!!!

Da Worfster

[Auricauricle]

I have always been in favor of musicality, but to have the leisure of producing such "euphonious" tones (excuse me Feanor), the recording must be of a pleasing quality and the instrument must be capable of reading the information and reproducing it. This opens up a whole can of worms because recordings are either recorded poorly or the engineer in the control booth experienced the sound quite differently than many consumers who will buy the product.

In the eighties, when the CD was let loose (beast!), there was a plethora of very eagerly awaited for, yet shabby recordings. Who remembers the first release of "Aqualung"? Other manufacturers were more canny, and exploited the medium quite bombastically. Can anyone recall Telarc's "Star Tracks"? Thankfully, there were those canny enough to know the potential of the medium and produced very good recordings quite early. Philips was one such example.

On the other pole of the equation, the equipment manufacturers were aware of the CD, but unless you were willing to spend a few bucks extra, you usually wound up succumbing to the Circuit City Syndrome: acquiring something very loud, but not really that wonderful when really tested. Higher end equipment was up to the task, but it wasn't until things had settled down for awhile, that subtlety crept back in and was marketed with much gusto.

You will note that in my profile, there are quite a number of pieces of gear. I bought many of these out of love for the product (the Beocord, e.g.), but there are a number of processors that may appear worrisome at best. In fact, I anticipate quite a lot of hue and cry about this occurence, but I contend that while manufacturers do their best to produce some equipment that should stand alone, there will always be inherent quirks and shortcomings that will never allow any manufacturer to produce the "perfect" component.

The argument that more equipment increases the odds of introducing increasing distortion to the signal path is a valid one and should be addressed at this point. While this caveat has some merit, it is also true that if the interfering equipment is of sufficient quality and if that equipment is used judiciously, the resulting Noise" should be kept to a minimum and produce a sound that is pleasing to the ear.

I know this after much experience in buying and listening to equipment. As an example, I went through about 3 or 4 equalizers made by ADC and BSR until I settled on a dbx
10/20. One may consider the dbx an extravagance, but the ADC's and BSR's were "too noisy"; the dbx was drop-a-needle-on-the-floor-and-hear-it quiet. I listen to music seriously, maybe too seriously, and am very quick to find something electronic, process-oriented, or performance oriented that is displeasing, and so far, I have managed to acquire the goods that will help me achieve my ultimate goals: euphonic rapture....

AND WORLD DOMINATION!!!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.....

[emesbee]

Well, in the end its all about the music for me, so it has to be musicality. No matter how esoteric the equipment, in the end its purpose is to reproduce music to a standard that is pleasing to my ears.

[E-Stat]

So which is more important to you, Accuracy or Musicality?

Your definition notwithstanding, which accuracy? Speakers, sources, and amplifiers all exhibit some performance trade offs which affect different aspects of *accuracy*. Is an amplifier that measures flat in a lab, but is unable to accurately impart the harmonic envelope of an instrument more accurate? Or is it the other way around? A speaker that is dead neutral tonally, but unable to deliver a convincing sound stage? Or the other way around?

I think the gray somewhere-in-the-middle answer depends upon one's priorities and musical preferences.

rw

[bobsticks]

Your definition notwithstanding, which accuracy? Speakers, sources, and amplifiers all exhibit some performance trade offs which affect different aspects of *accuracy*. Is an amplifier that measures flat in a lab, but is unable to accurately impart the harmonic envelope of an instrument more accurate? Or is it the other way around? A speaker that is dead neutral tonally, but unable to deliver a convincing sound stage? Or the other way around?

I think the gray somewhere-in-the-middle answer depends upon one's priorities and musical preferences.

rw

Absolutely, and as usual E asks the questions that leads to the real meat and potatoes of the issue...who's accuracy? Are we talking about the most accurate rendition of what the artists had in their minds? Tough to be sure especially when factoring in the traditional insanity of many artistic types. Are we talking about accuracy in relation to what was going on in the studio? Clearly most modern music is sequenced and multi-tracked making this an irrelevent point and, if you want to get all technical 'bout it, you'd have to have an identical system with an exact reproduction of the room to hear what the artists and engineers were hearing during playback to make application of this theory feasible.

For me this is the grey area...kinda charcoal actually...so I usually look for a mood or intent that was to be conveyed. And, let's not forget technical limitations. As an example I'll give The Sisters of Mercy's Floodland epic. How an album with 48 tracks of the Austrian Boys Choir, the smash-and-grab pomposity of the Doktor Avalanche drum machine and Sid McGinnis' proto-Gilmour nod-to-punky-goth-etherealism guitars can sound both tinny and murky at the same time is beyond me but it does. Some of the greatest content in modern rock music marred...an album of grandiose proportion and technical fumblefingering, but those were the limitations of the day.

So, in order to conform with some "audiophile standard" decreed from on high by the lords of the clan of Frumpy-Old-Guy-Listening-To-Ava-Cassidy-and-Nina-Simone I only listen to this cd in the car because I feel bad and dirty and slightly decadent hitting the "All Channel Stereo" button. I'm in my thirties and I already smoke a pipe and wear a Rex Harrison hat everyday and not one thing written thus far in this paragraph is true. If I gotta tweak my processor I'm gonna do it 'cause that's life in the big city.

That album is but one example and all I mean to say is that, yes, we all would like to find the perfect balance between what we percieve to be "reality" and warm-fuzzy pleasantries but I stopped giving serious consideration to this kind of stuff a long time ago. I try to live life far simpler these days so if it's good, I just roll with it.


Tune in, turn on, and burn out....

[bubslewis]

I listen to all my CD music, with the "direct" button pushed in on my receiver. I also have a "direct" button on my CD player.which is also pushed in. So I'm essentially bypassing any sound processing from either the CD player or the receiver. This would suggest that I want to hear a CD as close as I can get it to how it was originally recorded. I guess this would throw me into the accuracy camp more that the musicality side.

The unfortunate side effect is that I'll end up with 3 piles of CD's. Pile #1 contains what I perceive as superiorly recorded music. Pile # 2 contains what I perceive as average recorded music, and pile # 3 contains what I perceive as poorly recorded.

The downside is that I don't listen to the poorly recorded stuff much at all on my primary system, even if I like the music alot. I'll partially offset this by playing the poorly recorded stuff in the car,or on my secondary systems in the garage and out on the pool patio where accuracy is less important. Not a perfect compromise, but I really enjoy well recorded stuff, especially on Maggies and , conversely, I hate to listen to poor recordings, which the Maggies will readily reveal.

[Auricauricle]

Well just be careful how you plug 'em in....

Ooh, boy: That wasn't necessary!