[Trismos]

"A bad recording of a great song is better than a great recording of a meaningless jumble of sounds"

This has been something at the heart of my journey into music. I don't think of myself as an audiophile per se; not anywhere in the league of the John Atkinsons or the Srajan Ebaens of the world who seem to be able to pilfer microscopic differences in the placement of a tweeter or the warmth of a tone. But I've been a musician all my life and I do understand imagination and ability and the most wonderful combination of the two joined in a virtuoso performance ... something that can bring as much joy heard over an I-pod while on an airplane as live ... or over a very good kit.

Still, I have been lured into this hobby and I enjoy building speakers and planning the next upgrade to my system. I've bought $400.00 interconnects that I couldn't fathom the difference from the $80.00 ones I had. Purchased the next DAC upgrade to only think that I must be going deaf because I couldn't honestly say to myself that extra grand might have been better spent on a nicer listening chair.

Yet there are times when I sit back with a scotch and plan a night of listening - put my chair in the sweet spot and play my favorite songs - or maybe those I grew up with, and I appreciate my system so much.

But there are other times too, when I turn the radio on in the truck at the right time and I catch the right tune at the right moment. And audiophilia isn't about sound quality, sound staging, or sweet spots. It's about an artist who has composed something that touched me.

The same song heard over a $100,000.00 system may move me more than when I hear it in my truck. But there are so many variables that venue is hard to adjust for. A rock band in a 30,000 seat arena recorded live over the p.a. is going to present itself differently than a quartet recorded in a church with two mics.

Define what an audiophile is my friends. To me the bottom line is in the appreciation of the creation of the music, and not in the recreation of it.

[orthobiz]

Eloquent post. I think the artist and performance are paramount. It's not about recreating the sound alone for me. That's why I search for best pressings of new and old recordings of music I want to hear.

Paul

[FullRangeMan]

Both items are important, bad recording, bad equipment or bad musical quality are all importand or bad things to put up an audition..

[weitrhino]

This is an excellent topic, one that I hope remains in the forefront for some meaningful length of time, and one I hope can generate useful perspectives.

Bluntly, for me it has always been music first, reproduction second.  This seems a natural order to me for it was the music that appealed to me first well back in the days when couldn't have afforded anything more than a mid-fi receiver.  The music must appeal because if it doesn't, no matter how perfectly recorded, there's no emotional connection to be made.  Sure, I've been around guys with nice systems who beckoned, "Just listen to how good that sounds!"  These guys are missing the point from my perspective.  As my musical taste matured and I found music that moved me in some way, it was only then I sought to become closer to that music through an ever more exacting reproduction.

I suppose the question becomes one of where an individual finds quality and how quality is defined.  For me, quality is the interaction between subject and object where the subject is me and the object is the music.  For the traditional audiophile (and all that word connotes) the subject is the audiophile and the object is the reproduction system.

[R_burke]

Good music is a requirement, good SQ is a bonus. I rarely buy a recording because of its SQ although I admit I have bought a few, but those were bought specifically for headphone listening.  Pretty much all of my 6600+ collection was bought based on the quality of the music.

[milford3]

The last link in the audio chain are the speakers.  Bad or good recordings not withstanding. Some good speakers can make a bad recording sound good.

[Trismos]

Ah yes.
Define "sounds good".

[Trismos]

I suppose the question becomes one of where an individual finds quality and how quality is defined. 

Please carry on. What you have to say about it is as important as anyone else"s opinion on the topic. Define 'quality'.

[milford3]

Your speakers are the judge.  "Sound Good" is up the listenter.  I have heard speakers that cost  over 20k that are beaten by blind listening test that cost under 1k. 

[Trismos]

Your speakers are the judge.  "Sound Good" is up the listenter.  I have heard speakers that cost  over 20k that are beaten by blind listening test that cost under 1k.

Modified: I suggest your ears are the judge.... and further to my initial post, how expensive your speakers are.... how expensive your whole system is.... is secondary to the musical experience to begin with.

[halenhoang]

Would it be just and fair to state "The quality of music touches your soul, whereas the quality of sound moves you"?

I have a collection of songs that relate to my experiences.  And for many years, I enjoyed the songs to no end.  I would listen to the songs on my iPod, laptop, home, car and be completely happy.  Everything started to change for me when I was exposed to systems that are much more revealing.  Revealing in terms of being much more defined.  I am not familiar with many speaker brands but the ones I have personal experience with, for instance Focal or B&W.  Almost immediately, many of the songs I once enjoyed that touched me, were not bearable to listen to.  This comes down to system synergy.  The source, amplification, etc..

Overall, I would rather listen to a song in all its intended glory.  I feel the lacking is not on my part,being inclined to sound over music, rather it is the poor production by the record labels.   

Now, quality music with quality sound does exist.  Solves the problem (sometimes)

Halen

[SlushPuppy]

Interesting topic and I'm sure there will be many responses, but in my opinion it really doesn't matter unless there is more than one mastering - if so, buy the one that sounds best. Bad sound quality has never stopped me from purchasing a CD, even if I've read reviews telling me so beforehand.

Half of my CD collection is (by most standards) low-fi. Sometimes I get lucky and purchase a disc that has great music and great sound quality, but it's hit or miss in the genres I listen to. I spend most of my audio budget buying rare and obscure music from the late 70's to late 90's, and generally stuff most A/C members would never listen to. I rarely buy new equipment because I feel music is more important. At times I'm so obsessed by it that I feel like I alone am rescuing the albums from total obscurity.

If I had the choice of buying a better sounding copy, even if it was double the cost, I wouldn't think twice about spending the extra coin. But really, are you ever going to find an audiophile approved version of Sad Pygmy's "Tomato Halo"?


Slush

[JLM]

It's all about the music.

Otherwise we'd just watch a scope making perfect waveforms of music and know that it's perfect (a purely intellectual excerise).

Music speaks to our emotive/spiritual sides.  As many of us have technical backgrounds, it also connects those sides to our left brain, which I believe is why this hobby touches me.

The thrill of listening via a "good quality" system with "good quality" recordings makes us audiophiles.

[JohnR]

Replay and subsequent enjoyment of recorded music is a hobby unto itself, and is a) separate from enjoyment of music per se and b) nothing that needs to have excuses made for. Otherwise, nobody would buy hifi equipment and we would all be spending our money and time on concert tickets and the requisite accomodation and travel.

I really don't understand platitudes like "it's all about the music" - sorry JLM - as you can't enjoy or experience music without significant effort some way or another, whether it be learning to sing or play an instrument, attending concerts, setting up a reasonable hifi, or seeking out recordings of interest for some reason or other.

[NIGHTFALL1970]

I think I agree most with Weitrhino about music first, equipment second.  Most of the music I like was from the late 1960's (FREE, LED ZEPPELIN) thru the 1970's (KISS, RUSH, BLACK SABBATH) the 1980's (FIFTH ANGEL, METALLICA, QUEENSRYCHE) and unfortunately most of it was not the best of recordings.  I have "nice" equipment so that when I listen I can enjoy the music I love as best as it can be.
I have a good friend who is an "audiophile" and he can drive me nuts at times.  All he ever talks about is his equipment.  Whenever I ask him about a certain song or album, he quickly changes the subject back to a "component".  I guess some people are just "music lovers" who have nice equipment and some are "equipment lovers".

[Elizabeth]

The query is a 'either or', rather than a 'both'.
Obviously anyone posting on an audiophile website cares about the quality of the reproduced sounds.

And then the sort of 'apologetics' "We all only care about the music" (All the while planning what uber expensive toy to buy to bring the SOUND up another notch)

Yeah we DO all care about the music. And we all care about the sound. This is NOT A CONTEST.. It is an amalgam of just enjoying playing music on a good sounding system.
And yeah we can all enjoy a great tune on some crap player too. (though a few would disagree with that!)

The op comment is in response to the Audiophile stereotype of the guy with a $500,000 system who only has a dozen 'perfect' audiophile recordings of musical dreck, well recorded dreck, but still just puke.
Which by the way, sounds just like they are alive and in the room, but with the caviat that YOU no longer want to ALSO be in that room listening!! (some of the most beautifully recorded stuff has spectacular sonics, and dredful performances)

I am not busting anyones cojones here, i am just trying to point out this has been discussed before, and it the standard line of defensive audiophiles everywhere.
"We love the music"...  (but want the audio quality too.. but not to make it seem like that is all we care about...) 

So i like a good sounding system with good sounding music. i have spent a lifetime amassing BOTH. no apology neccessary.

[Devil Doc]

Let see now. Well recorded Bubble Gum music or poorly recorded Jimi Hendrix. Are you kidding me? It's a no brainer. I'll go with the poor recording. I can fill in the blanks

Doc

[rollo]

  For me it is all about emotional impact. If the music on its own cannot make me get up and dance no matter how good the system is what is the point ?
  A fine sounding system only enhances the experience. Especially with Classical music. If the performance is lacking no system will make it worthwhile. Granted if a Violin sounds like a Kazoo then all bets are off. For me it has to at least  be somewhat correct tonality wise to get emtional impact. If the system is well conceived all the better.
  Lps, Cds all give me that experience just have to like the venue.


charles

[weitrhino]

Please carry on. What you have to say about it is as important as anyone else"s opinion on the topic. Define 'quality'.

Ah, but I did make a subtle attempt at defining 'quality.'  The difficulty lies with the individual. 

We define quality where we find it. 

Considering the topic at hand, for my personal opinion I find quality to be the intersection between the subject, me, and the object, music.  Where that intersection is minimal or non-existant then the qualitative interaction is minimal or non-existant.  Bruce Springsteen is a case in point.

However when music and I do intersect, something wonderful can happen.  There is the possibility for quality.  The broader this intersection the more quality reveals itself to me.  I have ascertained over a considerable amount of my lifetime that an absolute requirement for quality to appear is music, not the hi-fi system. I can vividly recall my very first AM tabletop radio on the nightstand as I drifted off to sleep while it offered up the possibility of quality night after night setting the stage for what I would later recognize as an adult.  In some respects I think my continual reassembly of a hi-fi system is an attempt to bring that 'sleep-drifting' sense of quality into the conscious part of my life.  In other words, the system is merely a broadening of the qualitative intersection so that true quality may more readily appear.....Springsteen notwithstanding of course.

[decal]

If I don't like the music, I could care less about the SQ of it.