Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66
  1. #1
    Ajani
    Guest

    Accuracy versus Musicality

    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)...

  2. #2
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    'B' because ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    ...

    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.

  3. #3
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727

    In a perfect world...

    ...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.
    Form is out. Content makes its own form.
    -Sam Rivers

    The format doesn't matter. The music is all that matters.
    - Musicoverall

  4. #4
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    727

    By the way

    Quote Originally Posted by 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.
    Do you see why I'm not overly trusting of measurements?
    Form is out. Content makes its own form.
    -Sam Rivers

    The format doesn't matter. The music is all that matters.
    - Musicoverall

  5. #5
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by musicoverall
    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.

  6. #6
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    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...

  7. #7
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    24
    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)

  8. #8
    Meh. Brett A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    North-Central MA
    Posts
    158
    I like detailed musicality.

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

    .
    Amp Shanling A3000-> speakers Vienna Acoustic Mozart Grand CD Rotel RCD 991 AE TT: Well Tempered Record Player-> AT OC9MLII -> Jolida JD9. cables from AQ, Siltech, Bogdan, Signal DH Labs, etc...
    Some pictures of it all

  9. #9
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  10. #10
    Rep points are my LIFE!! Groundbeef's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Somewhere on Earth
    Posts
    1,959
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    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?
    Pioneer Reciever VSX-1015TX
    JBL Speakers
    Pioneer Plasma PDP-5071HD
    Xbox 360 (The Console to Own)
    Sony BDP-550
    DirecTV DVR HD20 Reciever
    1 Schnoodle
    2 Guinia Pigs

  11. #11
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    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

  12. #12
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    After reading through this thread I'm surprised that we don't all own Bose systems.
    Ummm... which one is Bose??? Musicality or Accuracy???

  13. #13
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    Ummm... which one is Bose??? Musicality or Accuracy???
    Neither?
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  14. #14
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    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.....
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  15. #15
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    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...
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  16. #16
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852

    B

    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.

  17. #17
    Aging Smartass
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Moore, SC
    Posts
    1,003
    I think one of the best examples of how accuracy took precedence over musicality was the manner in which Consumer Reports customarily tested loudspeakers. Not surprisingly, AR speakers (back in the 60's through the 80's) took top place in the rankings. While the AR-3, or the 2ax are "legends" from their time, almost no one in the business could stand them due to their decidedly "lackluster" character. They tested well, but didn't sound, well, musical.

    In the early 80's, I was working for ESS and Consumer Reports, in a test of "expensive" loudspeakers, rated the ESS AMT-1b second in its listings (a Marantz Imperial something or other took first spot). While we took advantage of the fact the 1b was rated so highly by Consumer Reports, most of us in the sales department of ESS at the time owned speakers other than ESS speakers, myself included. I could have had a pair of 1b's for nothing, but I didn't take them because I preferred the very same pair of Dahlquist DQ-10's that I'm using to this very day. According to Consumer Reports, the ESS-1b was a more "accurate" loudspeaker than the DQ-10, which fared rather poorlly in their ratings.

    Therefore, as accuracy was CU's primary interest, the 1b was a better speaker than the DQ-10. So, was it? Certainly not to my ears, or to many other audio enthusiasts. So much for accuracy...

  18. #18
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    231
    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.
    All we are saying, is give peas a chance.

  19. #19
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Quote Originally Posted by emaidel
    ...Therefore, as accuracy was CU's primary interest, the 1b was a better speaker than the DQ-10. So, was it? Certainly not to my ears, or to many other audio enthusiasts. So much for accuracy...
    Again, I think accuracy is important, but there has to be a compromise between the two, call it "accusicality" if you like, so that while the resolution of material is gained, the beauty of the production is revealed. Unfortunately, as pointed out by the "Aqualung" example, if the source is compromised, an accurate output source will reveal everything: warts, pimples and boils....This is where processing comes in: to refine those "beauty marks" and produce something that's more pleasing. Some recordings are simply horrid, nevertheless, and one has to simply be happy with what one has or the whole lot has to be re-recorded or the master's has to be redone. This, I hear, is what Guthrie did when the SACD release of PF's Dark Side of the Moon came out. As masterful a job Alan Parson's did, there were limitations inherent with the extant technology and personal hearing preferences that constrained AP to produce only what he was capable of and what pleased him. Guthrie knew that that things could be improved and that he had his own preferences--and probably a lot of feedback from fans that indicated what they would have liked to accentuate and deemphasize--and came out with the disc accordingly.

    Unfortunately or fortunately this whole issue addresses what this whole enterprise, Audiophilia, is all about. After everything is on the table one realizes it's all about diminishing returns and asymptotic curves...

    BTW: You're a neighbor: I grew up in the big city of Newberry....

    PS: You may know a cousin of mine, what with your experience and location: Marshall Chapman.

    PPS: As long as you're electronically inclined (you are?): I have a dbx DNR that starts clicking off after it gets warmed up. After a while, when the pots that adjust expansion and transitional levels are turned up a few notches, the gain must be such that the unit is overwhelmed and it clicks off and has to be reset by turning it off and back on and the pots have to be cranked down to nearly inaudible levels. Do you know if you, or anyone in the surrounding area can open the unit and see if there's a sensitive resistor or some diode that's wimping out? Locally, the electronic shops either shy away from the task or are so embedded in the digital domain that they haven't a clue.

    Thanks in advance...
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  20. #20
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsticks
    ...I spend alot of dosh on music so I'd like to listen to it. All of it.
    You can spend as much or as little as you like...."It's only Rock and Roll to Me" (apologies to Billy).

    Sounds like your infested, Good Buddy....
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  21. #21
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    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

  22. #22
    Bill L
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Southern Pennsylvania
    Posts
    185
    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.
    Music:
    Magnepan 1.6 QR's, upgraded xovers
    B&K 125.2 reference amp
    SONY SACD 2000ES
    Technics direct drive TT

    HT:
    Yamaha RX-V2500 receiver
    Bang&Olofsun Penta Surrounds
    SONY Bravia 46" HD LCD

  23. #23
    Aging Smartass
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Moore, SC
    Posts
    1,003
    [QUOTE=Auricauricle]

    BTW: You're a neighbor: I grew up in the big city of Newberry....

    I only moved here last July. I'm originally a New Yorker who lived in Colorado for 14 years before moving south.

    PS: You may know a cousin of mine, what with your experience and location: Marshall Chapman.

    Sorry, can't say that I do.

    PPS: As long as you're electronically inclined (you are?): I have a dbx DNR that starts clicking off after it gets warmed up. After a while, when the pots that adjust expansion and transitional levels are turned up a few notches, the gain must be such that the unit is overwhelmed and it clicks off and has to be reset by turning it off and back on and the pots have to be cranked down to nearly inaudible levels. Do you know if you, or anyone in the surrounding area can open the unit and see if there's a sensitive resistor or some diode that's wimping out? Locally, the electronic shops either shy away from the task or are so embedded in the digital domain that they haven't a clue.

    Almost all of the dbx processing equipment I once used eventually malfunctioned in some way or another. Sorry to say, but you're pretty much on your own, which doesn't offer you much hope. You might try the current dbx company (I don't know who owns them these days) and see if they can help.

    QUOTE]

  24. #24
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    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....

  25. #25
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    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
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •