![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: What? posted by bturk667 on July 21, 2003 at 17:26:09:
it was meant to be a little confusing but I thought my point was obvious, maybe not. Why, if a system is able to highlight recording flaws is that considered accurate? Secondly, what is meant by recording flaws, since what is recorded is generally engineered to be that way are you referring to a general flawed desire result sought after by many recording engineers, is it because you can hear the character or limits of the recording equipment, or are you referring to flawed musicianship?Similar to you, I try to purchase gear that allows me to enjoy the music but for me the most important quality to this end is vibrancy, it has to feel alive.
![]()
Follow Ups:
You are correct that the 'vibrancy' is the most important thing. However, you can have accuracy too.
When you get it 'right' the extra distortion information can be ignored, yet you can hear the music more clearly. Now, sometimes at a given price-point you have to make a choice. You can make it fairly accurate, with some added 'edge' , then good stuff sounds pretty OK, but the bad stuff sounds awful.
On the other hand, you can 'mush up' the sound and yet get the essence of the music, even when you are listening to an almost muffled sound.
For example, in my bathroom, I use a Telefunken Bajazzo portable radio. This is about my 5th unit since 1965. Put in on an oldies station, and it ROCKS! Guess who helped developed this unit? Dick Sequerra! I did not know that for the first 30 years, I just knew that this radio was special.
Now, my main system has WATT 1 speakers. They were originally designed for studio monitoring. They are forward and bright. A pristine input will give marvelous performance, but the same rock station, as I use in the bathroom, SUCKS!
Then there are Dick Sequerra's latest Met 7's. I replace the Watts with them and I can live with just about any input, but I can't easily what is wrong with the input. You choose.
![]()
I'm not too sure if accuracy can be defined in the context of recorded music and agree with Rodney Gold that there may not be an answer to the question. Each designer I'm sure has their own ideas and philosophies about what makes a piece of equipment accurate, assigning relevance to different mixes of variables. Some of the designers may actually get it correct but with no commandments of accuracy we will never really know which it is, ultimately we must rely on our instincts to make the determination and succumb to the probability that accuracy can not be defined by a measurement or a statement.I do agree distortion patterned properly can be irrelevant to the music the key being harmony. Also key would be using an input from the same techological era as the rest of the equipment after all, generally, that is what the input was originally voiced/referenced with wasn't it? Or does it not work like that?
Getting back to the term accuracy, I speculate that the term "an accurate system" is sometimes confused with one lacking of proper harmonics, with musical harmonics wiped clean or dirtied the unmusical "flaws" which have little harmonic structure become relatively magnified and draw attention. How else could "an accurate system" be unsatisfying musically? I would think a truly accurate system would more satisfying to a greater number of disks than an inaccurate one instead of the general belief of the opposite.
![]()
A more accurate system should sound more like the MUSIC that was the source for the recording, and be true to that sound, deliver it as it was.I prefer a system that brings me closer to the live music than to the defects of the recording equipment used.
Some systems highlight the very boundaries of the recording techniques, not caring for reproducing the music, but showing off what the media is capable of. Is that accuracy? In a way, yes, it shows everything that is on the RECORD.
But that may or may not have to do how the actual performance sounded....
An example: I have a Dyna st70 / PAS / Voigt pipe setup, that is considered very anti-audiophile, some even despise it as unacceptable.
I have a friend who made a guitar recording at his home, that turned out to be 95% of what he wanted. (By my standards, one of the best I ever heard of a guitar recording, and all my audiophile friends wanted to get a copy instantly they heard it). I listened to this recording at a mega-buck system, and it was wow! I heard every detail, everything! But it did not sound at all like his guitar, that I have heard at his place playing.
He has a bunch of guitars, yet based on the recording I could not tell which he was using. Had I not known which he used, I would have said he was using another.Went home, played it again at the supposedly very inaccurate and coloring system, and I was stunned, because it sounded almost exactly as what I have heard at his place! I instantly recognized the guitar from its tone. The experience was _very_ similar to listening to him playing...
Janos
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: