Is the quality of the sound more important than the quality of the music?

orientalexpress · « **Reply #20 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 01:11 pm »

Music is first and then again Quality recording expose me to difference music.Last year u couldn't get me to listen to classical music until a friend of mine bring some quality classical recording over and WOW

and Same thing with African acoustic music.I guess Good equipment play a role also without it,Non of those musics never get my attention .

lapsan

saisunil · « **Reply #21 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 01:47 pm »

We audiophile bunch obviously love music and more and more people on this journey have "confessed" that they/we spend more than desired amount of time on equipment / trolling on audio forums and less on really enjoying the music ...

Sure I am making a generalized comment ...

For me, the equipment has made me closer to the musical experience, but also
the equipment (including software) has grown out of proportion and has taken a life of its own ... has become the master instead of serving the purpose of bringing me closer to the music ....

Russtafarian · « **Reply #22 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 07:02 pm »

When I think about it, buying unfamiliar music based on "sound quality" labels or formats has turned me on to a lot of great music.

In general if the label cares enough to expend the money and effort to make a great recording and deliver it in a package that maximizes the playback quality for the listener, it's usually pretty good music. Whether you "like" the music is another issue.

The first SACD I bought after I got a player in 2001 was a Telarc recording of Hovhaness chamber music. At the time I couldn't have cared less about chamber music but I bought it to hear how SACD reproduced stringed instruments. It sounded great as I had hoped. What I didn't anticipate is how I fell in love with the music and discovered a whole new musical world to explore.

Tyson · « **Reply #23 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 08:56 pm »

Here's my test - how much is your music collection worth vs the cost of your stereo system?

I own about 7000 CD's worth of music, at $10 a pop, that's a total of $70,000. I have about $7000 worth of stereo gear. The math says that music is more important to me

. But, by normal/rational standards, $7k is a lot to spend for a 2 channel stereo, so I clearly value good quality playback as well.

Wayner · « **Reply #24 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 09:04 pm »

Good musicians understand the importance of a quality delivery. There are several bands that certainly seek out quality music with quality sound, like Pink Floyd, Alan Parsons, Andreas Vollenweider, Thomas Dolby and the list goes on and on.

There are other bands that just don't get the quality recording concept. I certainly can't get a grip on this thinking and I many times wonder when I hear a new recording that is poorly done. I'd have to ask, what were you thinking? Or was everyone so loaded, they thought it sounded great until they sobered up.

Here is a "Chucker" joke from long ago (old KQRS DJ). "What did the Dead Head say when he ran out of pot? What is that horrible music."........

Wayner

WC · « **Reply #25 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 09:07 pm »

Quote from: decal on 26 Apr 2012, 12:27 pm

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

+1

Just so happens that a lot of what I don't like, doesn't have the best of SQ.
At least that is what I tell myself.
Then again maybe I don't know, since I don't listen to it.

bunky · « **Reply #26 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 09:25 pm »

ones perception of sound quality is subjective and purely a matter of taste. a high resolution audio system will reveal music without veiling its warts and imperfections a lesser sytem is much more forgiving as to revealing the quality of the recording and a larger amount of recordings are listenable as a result. as far as the quality music is concerned one mans junk can be another mans treasure.

werd · « **Reply #27 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 10:42 pm »

Quote from: JohnR on 25 Apr 2012, 09:53 am

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.

I don't understand it either. Sure it's easy to say "it's all about the music". Unfortunately In my house music don't play itself. There has to be a medium and thats my hobby.

For me I can not listen to orchestra, chamber or any classical on anything but a good playback system. My home audio introduced me to stuff that i down right dis liked in classical until I heard it properly assembled with timing and pace.

Good playback shows off the composer real intent into beats that are not apparent over a desk radio. So good systems really help with your appreciation in music and finding new genres. Hey... "it's all about the music"

Wayner · « **Reply #28 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 11:29 pm »

Quote from: bunky on 26 Apr 2012, 09:25 pm

ones perception of sound quality is subjective and purely a matter of taste. a high resolution audio system will reveal music without veiling its warts and imperfections a lesser sytem is much more forgiving as to revealing the quality of the recording and a larger amount of recordings are listenable as a result. as far as the quality music is concerned one mans junk can be another mans treasure.

However, at the same time an inexpensive stereo system can sound wonderful with the right quality recordings. I have this happen many times.

I believe in this theory:

Good band with bad engineer = disaster.
mediocre bad with great engineer = successful album.

The perfect combo is then very obvious.

Wayner

Freo-1 · « **Reply #29 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 11:41 pm »

In a word: No.

It obviously goes without saying that sound quality is a top priority for most all of us, BUT, the actual performance matters more.

Some of the most important recordings in our history are not exactly audiophile quality (example: Benny Goodman at Carnegie Hall circa 1938, recordings of Jascha Heifetz, Van Cliburn, etc), yet these types of recordings have done more to influence music than many of the alleged audiophile recordings.

sts9fan · « **Reply #30 on:** 26 Apr 2012, 11:43 pm »

Hell no! I would forever give up "hifi" to keep all my music.

Austin08 · « **Reply #31 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 12:09 am »

Good music + good recording = my system.
Good music + bad recording = my ipod.
Bad music + good recording = my system

Bad music + bad recording = my neighbor system.

Bad system + bad recording or good recording sounds good.
Good system + bad recording sound like crap.

doug s. · « **Reply #32 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 03:14 am »

it's certainly a mixed bag.

if it's music i do not like, i won't listen to it, regardless of quality of recording or system. if it's music i like, i will listen regardless of quality of recording or system. of course, better recording/better system means it will sound better - duh!

there is one exception. i cannot listen to xm/xirius at all; its sound to me is similar to the sound of fingernails being dragged across a chalkboard. i have literally gotten a headache from it, after 30 minutes of its being played as background music. it is impossible to actually sit and listen to it for even a minute. (i cannot comment about it in a car; i have no experience...)

doug s.

bunky · « **Reply #33 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 02:00 pm »

Quote from: doug s. on 27 Apr 2012, 03:14 am

it's certainly a mixed bag.

if it's music i do not like, i won't listen to it, regardless of quality of recording or system. if it's music i like, i will listen regardless of quality of recording or system. of course, better recording/better system means it will sound better - duh!

there is one exception. i cannot listen to xm/xirius at all; its sound to me is similar to the sound of fingernails being dragged across a chalkboard. i have literally gotten a headache from it, after 30 minutes of its being played as background music. it is impossible to actually sit and listen to it for even a minute. (i cannot comment about it in a car; i have no experience...)

doug s.

I had a polk XM radio tuner that i recieved as a gift . i bought a years subscription to try it out and found that it was unlistenable for me in my rig

Trismos · « **Reply #34 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 03:05 pm »

Quote from: bunky on 27 Apr 2012, 02:00 pm

I had a polk XM radio tuner that i recieved as a gift . i bought a years subscription to try it out and found that it was unlistenable for me in my rig

My truck has the (now) standard Sirius / XM satellite tuner. Tom Sawyer sounded quite nice cranked up on the way to work this morning!
The tuner itself sounds as good as the built in hard drive that burns at MP-3 resolutions. But hey, driving along with all the associated distractions (if being more concerned about actually driving is called a distraction) and inherent road noises, I'd be hard pressed to say that the cd. player sounds better than either of these.

Regards
Dave

Ericus Rex · « **Reply #35 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 03:44 pm »

With Classical music you won't have to give up either. There are, usually, enough recordings that if you look long enough you'll be able to find a great performance of a piece that is also a great recording. With popular music you don't have that luxury.

vinyl_guy · « **Reply #36 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 04:00 pm »

My record collection began with 45s when I was in junior high in the late 50's. I have always loved listening to music. I had fairly low to midfi systems until I heard a friend's system with Marantz equipment and AR speakers. That was a game changer for me and began a journey to owning a high-end audio system. While I am always interested in finding the best pressing and prefer good recordings to bad recordings as long as the music is good, a poorly recorded great song beats a great recording of a crappy song every time.

Laura

woodsyi · « **Reply #37 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 04:03 pm »

I go for high quality music on high quality sound system.

weitrhino · « **Reply #38 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 07:26 pm »

You know how kids will take the wrapping paper tube and go "doo dooo dooo" through it?

That's exactly how Sirius XM sounded in both of my vehicles that had it. When the freebie subscriptions ran out that was the end of XM.

Trismos · « **Reply #39 on:** 27 Apr 2012, 07:38 pm »

Quote from: weitrhino on 27 Apr 2012, 07:26 pm

You know how kids will take the wrapping paper tube and go "doo dooo dooo" through it?

That's exactly how Sirius XM sounded in both of my vehicles that had it. When the freebie subscriptions ran out that was the end of XM.

I'm Canadian so we receive from the original Sirius sats. I wonder if it's any different in sound quality than the XM satellites? I find it the same as a clean FM station.

Dave