djs_6978;614534 Wrote: > Ok, first what's the point of limiting your listening to audio that is > only A1, premium grade, turn the bits up to 11 kind of stuff? If all > you listen to are Linn recordings because of the quality of the > recordings, aren't you limiting yourself and your music/audio > collection? Would you consider watching a film in black and white > sub-standard conditions? Let's say Casablanca, a crowd favorite. > Because it's never going to be like Avatar in glorious HD/3D and color. > Doesn't mean it doesn't belong in the Cinema buff's collection. > > Secondly, just because you have an ultra high end stereo, doesn't mean > the reproduction always yields a desired result. Sometimes it can > magnify the flaws in the recording to the point where a once listenable > recording is now unlistenable, like hiss inherant in the recording. It's > kind of like when an HDTV set reproduces a lower resolution source. I > almost can't watch SD on my HD set now because the SD resolution isn't > native to my HD set. Sometimes I go to my old CRT TV just to watch > something in SD and artifact free. Sometimes all you need is a 12" B&W > TV to accurately reproduce the source. It's awesome when the studio > remasters the source for today's gear in mind. This doesn't mean you > shouldn't listen to a source just because it's not up to Audiophilic > spec. > > If you are truly a "Phile", then your goal should be accurate > reproduction of the source as it was intended to be heard, not trying > to impress the "ideal conditions" of your gear and setup upon the > source. If the engineer was mixing Hank Williams for the reproduction > equipment and technology of the day, then to get the engineers > intention you have to reproduce it through appropriate equipment. > That's why I made the transistor radio comment earlier. To get Hank to > sound his best on your Audiophile gear, you will need someone to > remaster the orignal recordings with the knowledge and understanding of > todays equipment and technology. Your gear cannot do it alone. > > But, I think the purpose of the OP was to find out which offered better > audio reproduction, vinyl or digital. To me it should be about accurate > reproduction of the artist and engineer's intent. If using the high-end > gear gets you there, then you're on the right track. The answer is go > with the gear that is able to accurately recreate the source and the > artist/engineer's intention for reproduction. That's the better rig to > go with. Ultimately your ears will tell you what sounds better for a > particular source. If that's your vinyl rig, go with it. If it's the > digitally re-mastered source, go with it. > > The question is, are we able to ascertain the ideal reproduction > environment for which the engineer mixed the recording for? > > I think some Audiophiles think that if they can hear the > cough/sneeze/fart of someone in the recording space that they have > truly arrived at nirvana. The artist and engineers intent is for you to > hear the music, not the flaws inherent in the recording process. > Sometimes I think they are the same folks who think colorizing an old > B&W film is the right thing to do to improve the source. > > BTW, I troll the Audiophile forums to learn different techniques, > setups, gear reviews, etc. You guys have some of the best, well thought > out points of view for me to get my audio fix. Gear is part of it, but > so much more of it is the music and recordings, then appropriately > maximizing the output for increased enjoyment.
I don't think that MC Ride meant that he only listens to perfect recordings. I think he meant that he prefers to listen to "any" recording on the high quality equipment, regardless of the quality of the recording. I do more or less agree with your point regarding trying to use playback equipment similar to what the recording engineer was mixing the music to sound "good" on. I've run across quite a good number of recordings that sound okay on a car radio or crappy computer speakers only to find that they really sound awful when played on my main stereo. On the other hand 60 year old Hank Williams' recordings and 80 year old Louis Armstrong recordings sound good no matter what equipment they're played on because their great and timeless music allows (actually, DEMANDS) one to overlook the shortcoming of the recording. -- ralphpnj Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels -> Snatch -> The Transporter -> Transporter 2 (oops) -> Touch 'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=85590 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
