Jabroni started a thread on his bitterness and disgruntlement about hifi not overcoming defects in CD recordings. I have started this thread to take his point in a slightly different direction, without being cautioned that I am "off topic." That direction is about what we can expect from our hobby, variously described here as a passion or an addiction.
I start with this question: What are we listening to when we put on a CD or listen to a ripped CD?
René Magritte, a nineteenth century surrealist painter, once painted a picture of a smoking tobacco pipe with a caption reading, "This is Not a Pipe." His point was that it was a painting of a pipe, not an actual pipe, and more importantly, that a representation is not reality. It was a statement about the limits of art, which is the creation of a kind of illusion - the same thing is true of novels, dramas, movies, etc.
We who buy hifi gear to play recorded music need a similar reality check, a caption reading "This is not music." Meaning that it is recorded music. Not live music, and it never will or can be.
Just like Magritte's painting, we are hearing a kind of illusion. But is that a bad thing? Absolutely Not! Even knowing that art is not reality, we can enjoy it because it has value in many ways, not the least of which is sheer enjoyment and, on occasion, a perspective that resonates with a kind of truth about our world.
I think of recorded music this way: It is like a book, the end product of a lot of revision and editing, and a final decision by the author and his editors that this is it - this is what we want the world to see, not the first manuscript.
Recorded music is like that. What goes on a CD is a product of endless variables - the kind of mics used, the kind of recording equipment, the placement of it, the room used, the acoustics of the room, the mixing, etc. Even in an auditorium, listeners sitting in different places will get a different impression of live music, and recorded music is even more complex. But at the end of the day, it is an artificial representation manufactured by artists and technicians.
So what can our audio gear do? Its limit is this: it can try to reproduce as accurately or as faithfully as possible, given the limits of electronics, cable, drivers, etc., what those artists and technicians decided to transfer to the CD (which itself has limitations), or it can add something of its own that listeners want to hear. I think Bryston's intent is to pursue the former and a number of other manufacturers the latter, which is no criticism, since my point is that as a consumer, you have every right to buy the illusion that pleases you the most. I love Proust's seminal novel. I can't stand James Joyce's. But that's my taste, not a judgment on readers who love Ulysses.
The vast majority of works of art are badly done. Only a handful can be called great. Not many can be called very good, but they often can be enjoyed. And sometimes, there are poor works of art that have significant redeeming graces, as in listening to wonderful artists recorded many years ago. Miles Davis' "KInd of Blue" was a notoriously poor recording, but nevertheless is considered a must-have for any jazz enthusiast. Truly great recordings, as with any art, are rare. But those that aren't great still can be enjoyed. And I've found, as others in this Circle have, that this enjoyment is enhanced with good audio equipment.
Dave
