Some Thoughts on Hi-Fi, Vinyl, and.CD

[SweatLaserXP]

I was at the bar the other night, having a discussion with my older friend about audio gear. I had overheard him talking about McIntosh with a friend of his, and we all had a discussion about recording tech. as well as hi-fi playback. My friend is an independent recording technician, and in some ways I have more respect for him than some of the folks I've brushed up against in the hi-fi community, whether they are sales reps, both agreeable or full of b.s., or neurologists who have $40,000 systems (who often are amiable guys themselves). I have, though, met plenty of down-to-earth, level-headed sales reps and doctors who truly love this expensive, nebulous, and sometimes frustrating hobby.

It's one of those dirty secrets that many (but of course not all) of the folks who consume the more expensive hi-fi gear do not actually have a very good ear, or they very well may not even enjoy listening to music much. They may get bored or nod off to sleep while sitting at the Metropolitan Opera. They may fire up their B&W 800Ds once every three months. It's kind of like a rich but lousy driver who buys a Ferrari 550 Maranello- obviously, a 550 Maranello is a marvelous beast, but unfortunately, without those lousy millionaire drivers, Ferrari would not be able to stay in business. The engineers and staff at the numerous high-end audio companies are passionate, brilliant, and tireless people who love this thing called hi-fi, but they all know that their livelihood depends on patrons who are often apathetic to their raison d'etre.

There are also those who can hear quite well, but they are obsessed with the technology, with sound of their own particular gear, and not the beautiful music flowing from the speakers. They may see their five-star recordings as tools to demonstrate the transparency of their system. They are constantly swapping components and cables, tweaking things, moving things around, constantly listening "into" their system rather than sitting back with a wine, closing their eyes, and allowing the music to envelop them. These people are often wealthy as well, but they don't fit the previous category because, as I said, they are perfectly capable of distinguishing a Conrad from a Krell. Some of the people on this forum fit this description, but they serve a certain role in hi-fi audio. At least they are quite aware of the complexities of their expensive circuitry and acoustical treatments. Trial-and-error, incessant tweaking, and modification are the modus operandi of circuit design.

There is a third category, and many of us belong to it- those who are involved in this hobby because they love music, and they see the equipment as a means for sheer enjoyment. They are not blowing their wad to impress their rich associates, or to achieve absolute precision, but to be moved and entertained by the music coming from the system. They appreciate the essence of the music, which is simply embellished by their nice hi-fi system.

Getting back to my buddy, who records for a living- he's always listening to real instruments, and accounting for many factors of acoustics, choices of microphone, microphone preamp, etc., and trying to relate that to what the mix will sound like through speakers. What this means is that he probably has a better idea of what, say, a cymbal actually sounds like, or how to tell when he's properly set up to record a bass kick, than what some hi-fi folks may perceive as accurate sound. People often are very confused about this- they prefer a speaker that smooths out the sound of a trumpet, when in fact, trumpets, well, sound harsh in small spaces. I am a conservatory student in violin, and I am around a plethora of instruments all week. Violins are not necessarily "smooth" or "lush" sounding. They actually have a very piercing tone, especially in close proximity, and very much so when right underneath your left ear. Like many instruments, the sound becomes beautiful and dimensional when it flourishes in a large space.

My friend and I got into a long discussion about analog and digital. As a 48-year-old recording tech., he has embraced digital since its entry into mainstream recording. His love of digital is the convenience of working with a digital studio, and the S/N ratio and low noise floor of CD. We talked a long time about this, but I eventually admitted to him that, though I really only listen to CD, the most exquisite and engaging sound I've ever heard from hi-fi systems has always been exclusively through vinyl playback. Period.

He had some half-baked theories about why vinyl "fools" the ear into thinking that the sound is more warm and continuous: that a higher noise floor and needle friction created background noise and thresholds that the listener is not consciously aware of during playback. I didn't fully understand what he was trying to say- he may indeed have no idea what he is talking about in this corner of audio. Digital playback certainly has its share of sonic flaws that are only resolved in the finest players available, which most of us can't afford. I explained to him that silent backgrounds are only one virtue of good sound. He, of course, agreed wholeheartedly because he's a good sport. A much greater virtue- indeed the most important one- is an open, natural, and involving midrange. It's the most important frequency range for loudspeakers. Vinyl can be a very expensive, high-maintenance format, but the vinyl enthusiasts are engaged in a noble cause because even a very modest analog playback system has an easy, continuous, engaging sound that digital playback always struggles to contend with.

Even at the highest eschelons of the hi-fi industry, whether it's the big-wig reviewers or the lousy Ferrari drivers, there seems to be a deep, basic awareness that recreating every nuance of a musical performance, in its entirety, is an exercise in futility. Someone at TAS commented that the $47,000 MBL 101e's, when complemented by all of MBL's reference equipment- the $20,000 preamp, the $75,000 monoblocks, the $XXX transport and DAC- sounds "fool-you real on select cuts at select moments", which means that it very occasionally sounds like a real venue. Only after the consumer has spent $200,000 (not including cables, power conditioning, and acoustical treatments). Also note that reviewers constantly, constantly remark that though a component may lack in detail, or low-end authority, or [insert quality here], it is highly "musical", or it is "immensely pleasurable".

I think that the deepest satisfaction in audio playback has little to do with venturing to create holographic images of recording venues. The studio engineers and the component manufacturers designing $1000 amps knows this. The most successful stereo systems have have an almost imperceptible quality about them that, every time one sits down, with any kind of music, makes them immensely pleasurable, relaxing, and very involving. They can be systems costing well under $5000, even budget systems. It's that "special something" that happens when the components synergize with the right speakers in the right room. This pleasure is not commensurate with the amount of money spent. I was more moved listening to a system with B&W 803s, Pathos Classic One MkII, and Rega Jupiter, than I was by the Wilson Alexandria X-2s with a complete Spectral front-end. I'm not criticizing the higher-end of hi-fi- a lot of the components are remarkable designs and a lot of brilliant ideas and experience is necessary to create this stuff. New ground is usually only broken in the state-of-the-art. Also that technology trickles down into the more affordable circuits.

I am a poor college student, and my system can only barely pass as hi-fi. I'm also aware that for many of you, I'm simply preaching to the choir. But, I think that it's important that the hi-fi community remember how this industry came into being. It wasn't because McIntosh, Dynaco, or Marantz were perfectly re-creating live venues. It was because the gear was capable of projecting the "essence" of the music.

[Modernaire]

Thanks for the enjoyable read.

As a new very low budget lover of MUSIC and as someone who actually hasn't had much HI-FI listening experince, I learned a bit with your post.

To my ears, my very humble system sounds quiet great to me and I find it immensly enjoyable. Maybe thats key, stay immune to the higher end stuff, the enjoyment of music might get distracted.

The issues you discuss remind me of the actual makind of making music. There are many musicians or producers who obsess over the computer or technology rather than the craft of MAKING the actual music. Very similar issues, getting blinded or side tracked from songwriting and performance, emotion etc, rather than the latest OS or plug-in update.

Thanks again!

[Bernd]

Thanks for an enjoyable read.
I think there are more variables why people buy what they buy. I love music first and foremost, but I also strive to create the sound in my room that in my opinion comes close to the original master tape and manipulated work of the recording engineer.Again just my perception. Unless you buy some recordings from the Direct to Disc line you will always have to content yourself with the work of the mixing desk operator. I have been upgrading for more years than I care to remeber and I am pretty sure that I have finally reached the level I always aspired to. But the pleasure of the music was always in the forefront of my mind.
True I can enjoy a good tune anywhere, but to enjoy the performance and appreciate the techniques involved you need to listen to something fairly decent.
As for more enjoyment through Vinyl as compared tp digital. An awful lot has been written about this and people have their own idea and beliefs.
One analogie that sticks in my mind was this: Take two fillet steaks and mince one. Then try and shape the minced one back into the shape of the steak. You will not end up with two steaks, but one steak and one hamburger i.e. Analogue and Digital= continuous and bits.

Bernd

A final thought (just for fun): "Digital preserves music the way Formaldehyde preserves Frogs. You kill it, and it lasts forever."

[gonefishin]

Certainly alot of B^llsh!T in this post. But it does seem that you enjoy flattering yourself...that must feel nice for you.

Hooray for you

dan

[Feanor]

Certainly alot of B^llsh!T in this post. But it does seem that you enjoy flattering yourself...that must feel nice for you.

Hooray for you

dan

Everyone like to feel that theirs is the right perspective: how about you?

[gonefishin]

Hi Feanor,

Your right...I was being too harsh. I apologize for that SweetLaserXP.


I just find it odd that it's such a popular view among many audiophiles that a person who buys gear cannot enjoy music as much as someone who doesn't go through as much gear. A persons music enjoyment should/could be totally independent from their enjoyment of their audio hobby. Though the two may have similar threads, they can easily provide enjoyment outside of each other. They just aren't directly related to each other. This is what I was referring to.

He also made comments regarding a persons who buys more expensive gear has worse hearing than those who spend less money on their systems. This is also what I was referring to.

He continues to put down other groups as well...and his claims are substantiated as poorly as the other examples above. In fact...it seems that every individual has poor hearing except those in his group.

Everyone like to feel that theirs is the right perspective: how about you?

I don't know about that. Sometimes I end up being right...sometimes wrong. Other times I end up simply just expressing my opinion. But saying that someone unlike myself suffers from a disabling injury/illness. No...I don't believe I do that too often. That would be B^llsh!T


I should have worded nicer...sorry.

dan

[Feanor]

...

I just find it odd that it's such a popular view among many audiophiles that a person who buys gear cannot enjoy music as much as someone who doesn't go through as much gear. A persons music enjoyment should/could be totally independent from their enjoyment of their audio hobby. Though the two may have similar threads, they can easily provide enjoyment outside of each other. They just aren't directly related to each other. This is what I was referring to.

...

dan

People's motivations for our hobby are complex. We shouldn't be judgemental.

Personally I like to listen to music: I like to listen to good music (of the types that I like) and I like it to sound good. Am I a music lover? It would be presumptuous of me to claim that because I have no real music training; I don't read music and I don't play an instrument. Also, I really don't care about musical history, the lives of composers or famous performers, nor about the music industry. Nope, I just like to listen to music.

Beyond that, I do have a non-obsesive interest in things technical, what they can do, not how they do it. I know that different devices reproduce sound more or less well, and I enjoy the search for those that work well without costing too much.

[Geoffcin]

Hi Feanor,

Your right...I was being too harsh. I apologize for that SweetLaserXP.


I just find it odd that it's such a popular view among many audiophiles that a person who buys gear cannot enjoy music as much as someone who doesn't go through as much gear. A persons music enjoyment should/could be totally independent from their enjoyment of their audio hobby. Though the two may have similar threads, they can easily provide enjoyment outside of each other. They just aren't directly related to each other. This is what I was referring to.

He also made comments regarding a persons who buys more expensive gear has worse hearing than those who spend less money on their systems. This is also what I was referring to.

He continues to put down other groups as well...and his claims are substantiated as poorly as the other examples above. In fact...it seems that every individual has poor hearing except those in his group.




I don't know about that. Sometimes I end up being right...sometimes wrong. Other times I end up simply just expressing my opinion. But saying that someone unlike myself suffers from a disabling injury/illness. No...I don't believe I do that too often. That would be B^llsh!T


I should have worded nicer...sorry.

dan

While I don't agree with the original post entirely, it did strike some points well. Feanor has it correct when he says that this is a mulit-faceted hobby. Even those of us that lean one way often also enjoy the others. For me it's mostly about music enjoyment. I still like cool gear though, and I have switched out several speakers in the last few year, along with components. So what? It was fun, and I enjoyed doing it. The minute I start obsessing about things to the point where it doesn't become fun then it's time to move on. I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

Oh, I agree that the guy is realy ego-centric. He doesn't hold a candle to Florian though!

[emaidel]

The concept that died-in-the-wool audiophiles, or "tweaks" as they were once called listen to their systems, and not to the music is as old as this hobby/industry itself is.

Fortunately, it's entirely possible to be an audio enthusiast (which is what I consider myself) and also one who greatly appreciates music. During the heyday of direct-to-disc recordings, much of the recorded material, though sparkling clear insofar as sonics, was just plain horrible when it came to musical interpretation. Fortunately, today, one can experience both sonic and musical nirvana on a good system.

Also, the debate as to whether analog or digital is better than the other is an argument that simply will never end. I am a believer that digital has the potential to be the superior medium, but often is not. I flatly refuse to believe that digital is to recording as Scientology is to religion, or anything else along those lines. I own over 1,000 LP's and 1,000 CD's, and NO classical LP that I own comes even remotely close to the sonics and musical fidelity as do many of my over 100 Telarc CD's.

The total lack of surface noise on a CD adds an immeasurable amount of pleasure when listening to a classical piece that has an extremely wide dynamic range. The eerily quiet introduction of the chorus in the spectacular Mahler "Resurrection" symphony is one such piece of music that demonstrates (at least insofar as the benefit of no background noise) how good digital recording can be.

I've invested "only" about $10K into my system, and prefer the sound of CD's to LP's when listening to it. Are there better sounding vinyl systems out there? Certainly, but having to refinance my house in order to own a ClearAudio turntable/cartridge/head amp combination is somewhere I refuse to go.

There is no "absolute" answer as to the never-ending debate over analog vs. digital. I prefer the digital domain, and others do not. I also love sushi, and others hate it. Am I right and the others wrong? Or are they right, and myself wrong? Ultimately, the debate settles into the realm of the question, "Is day or night better?" There isn't any answer. At least, not yet.

[hermanv]

My god, I find myself agreeing with GoneFishin, we may as well close the forum .

It is possible to be all those things; an equipment snob, a hunter for exquisite details in sound reproduction and a music lover all at the same time.

As a young man I played a lot of music, but as young people do, it was usually in a crowd surrounded by friends. As I grew older I found myself listening to music at night by myself or with my wife. My neighbor describes it as "active listening" more like you do at a concert. The music has your full attention.

I noticed that I was loosing interest; the music no longer captivated me the way it used to. It took me years and a couple of visits to audiophile's homes to discover that it was basically "listener fatigue". By spending a lot of time reading the audio magazines, spending a lot of money on equipment and spending a great deal of effort to optimize my listening room and the synergy of various pieces of equipment I was able to get back to a state where I could listen for long hours, captivated once again by the artistry of the musicians and the music. My wife and I usually spend a couple of nights a week, no TV, maybe some candles and just listen, a real joy.

It was necessary (for me at least) to significantly improve the reproduction system to re-capture that enjoyment of music. Yes, I still listen in my car, thank god I can't afford a car stereo as good as my home system. It would be so distracting as to make my driving quite dangerous.

A good system compels one to listen to the music. Once you heard this, once you've been that close to the music, the standard home stereo just won't do.

It is perfectly posible to enjoy the hobby AND the music.

[Florian]

Certainly alot of B^llsh!T in this post. But it does seem that you enjoy flattering yourself...that must feel nice for you.

Hooray for you

dan

I agree with that