Audiophiles only

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 4148 times.

PhilNYC

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #20 on: 17 Jan 2007, 12:20 am »
Just returning from CES, all you here is jazz :roll:, or simple "sounds" (albeit recorded well).

I think "jazz" is too often used to represent a far too broad a range of music to make generalizations from.  Stuff that gets classified as "jazz" includes Louis Armstrong, Kenny G, John Scofield, Oscar Peterson, Jimmy Smith, Sade, Diana Krall, Glenn Miller, John Coltrane...its all so different!  

mfsoa

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #21 on: 17 Jan 2007, 12:51 am »
Phil,
You are so right!
In high school (1981 grad) I was one of the few jazz lovers - Jazz being from Mahavishnu to Louis Armstrong - And I was criticized for being the one with limited musical taste because I didn't like the southern rock that was popular!

BradJudy

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #22 on: 17 Jan 2007, 01:24 am »
I doubt many regular folks are listening for the "music".

Really?  His last album was on a lot of the music critics 'top 10 of 2006' lists. 

BradJudy

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #23 on: 17 Jan 2007, 01:32 am »
I think "jazz" is too often used to represent a far too broad a range of music to make generalizations from.  Stuff that gets classified as "jazz" includes Louis Armstrong, Kenny G, John Scofield, Oscar Peterson, Jimmy Smith, Sade, Diana Krall, Glenn Miller, John Coltrane...its all so different! 

Jazz is a very large genre (swing, bop, vocal, smooth, etc), but so is 'classical' (opera, symphonies, baroque, etc), 'rock' (grunge, punk, hard, metal, etc), and other genres.  Most major genres have lots of sub-genres that can be very different.

aerius

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 383
Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #24 on: 19 Jan 2007, 07:21 pm »
I had a Mahler symphony CD which was highly lauded by audiophiles, supposedly it was the best thing since sliced bread and would reduce any listener to tears and produce an epiphany while exposing the true strengths & weaknesses of any system.  Well two out of three ain't bad, it bored me to tears and I had an epiphany; I can't stand freakin' Mahler.  I traded it off to one of my friends for something more to my tastes.

Brad

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #25 on: 19 Jan 2007, 08:07 pm »
I had a Mahler symphony CD which was highly lauded by audiophiles, supposedly it was the best thing since sliced bread and would reduce any listener to tears and produce an epiphany while exposing the true strengths & weaknesses of any system.  Well two out of three ain't bad, it bored me to tears and I had an epiphany; I can't stand freakin' Mahler.  I traded it off to one of my friends for something more to my tastes.

 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Premuda

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 16
Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #26 on: 22 Jan 2007, 04:34 pm »
I had a Mahler symphony CD which was highly lauded by audiophiles, supposedly it was the best thing since sliced bread and would reduce any listener to tears and produce an epiphany while exposing the true strengths & weaknesses of any system.  Well two out of three ain't bad, it bored me to tears and I had an epiphany; I can't stand freakin' Mahler.  I traded it off to one of my friends for something more to my tastes.
Don't worry,someday your taste will grow up(hope so) and you will beg your friend :" Bring me back my Mahler please,šmrc!!!  Hi-hi

robert1325

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #27 on: 22 Jan 2007, 04:38 pm »
I've definetly had a rough time enjoying my music when listening to my two previous solid state amps,   but now with this small low  powered t-amp sitting here I'm actually listening to music,  my school results are suffering.

dwk

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 483
Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #28 on: 22 Jan 2007, 06:35 pm »
Tom Waits has struck me as an aphile act.  I doubt many regular folks are listening for the "music".

Tom, 'audiophile'??? I don't get this one. He almost never comes up in audiophile circles in my experience.

I realize that his work is 'challenging' (or alienating) particularly the 2nd phase of his career, but that's rather different than the usual sterile/vacuous material that is typically labelled 'audiophile'. Not to mention that his stuff doesn't tend to be sonically impressive - not horrible, but not demo-grade.

Having said that, 'Rain Dogs' is quite possibly my favorite album, and IMHO generously rewards audiophile-style dedicated listening.

Really - how can one NOT appreciate music that has been described as 'the sound of refrigerators being pushed drunkenly down fire escapes'?  :D

aerius

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 383
Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #29 on: 22 Jan 2007, 06:46 pm »
Don't worry,someday your taste will grow up(hope so) and you will beg your friend :" Bring me back my Mahler please,šmrc!!!  Hi-hi

That'll probably happen around the time I take up golf, which is probably close to 50 years off in the future... :icon_lol:

carusoracer

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #30 on: 22 Jan 2007, 08:48 pm »
"It's funny someone mentioned Pat Barber.  I wish I could hear her (band's) music with someone else's voice.  She sounds like a man trying to sound like a woman to me... and I can't get the tranny visual from overtaking the actual music when I listen... and I just laugh." 
 :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:   Carlman
 

Now that is a interesting visual......

mfsoa

Re: Audiophiles only
« Reply #31 on: 22 Jan 2007, 10:43 pm »
Not to be disparaging in any way, but the visual I get is of a, well, I won't say the N@&* word, but I see Germany, WWII cabaret, and there's this Uber-tough female spy/SS agent who can also sing and has this killer band...