[Rob Babcock]

I don't mean this is a wiseassed way, I'm just curious;  can the average AC'er enjoy reproduced music without a ton of gear?

For instance, I can enjoy pop music on a car stereo of mediocre quality.  If I'm at a restaurand and the sound system pipes in a good song, I can enjoy that too.  I try to get to Canada every summer with my Dad-there's this lodge waaay up in northen Saskatchawan where we fish for a week.  We usually have a boombox, and my brother will take some CDs.  And that's fine for around camp.

Paradoxically, tho, I have a very low tolerance for crappy sound at home.  And even in the aforementioned circumstances I have some standard below which I'd rather just have peace and quiet.

Where does the balance between the technical sound quality and the music itself fall for you guys?

[Marbles]

At home, I'm always just one more piece from being finished.....anywhere else and I don't need fidelity and rarely expect it anyway.

I can and do enjoy music on the beach with a boombox, or playing "Hot Rod Lincoln" on my computer for my 10 year old who can't seem to hear it enough  

Ref systems are great to obsess over, but it is about the music....

How about turning on the classic station in your car and hearing a song that brings back memories from 20 years ago.  That 's always cool

[dogberry]

Perhaps it's as simple as you have control over your home system, and you don't out in the big, bad world.

I also think it's about expectations.  After having dropped serious coin on your home system, it better sound KILLER!

Though I tend to go for "good enough," my buddy is determined to keep after the ephemeral "perfect" sound.  He's dropping big dough, and I can't relate.  His system does sound better, but it cost him 5x as much as mine did.  But hey, it keeps him off the street.

And it is a hobby, right?  If you were to get it "just right," and something new came along, wouldn't you want to try it out?  You know you would!  So, it's not "just" about the music, right?

[nathanm]

A ton of gear isn't nearly as nice as say a few tons of concrete inbetween the gear and the outside world.  Or better yet, a few miles of air.  That would be awesome.   Dropping two grand or more at a crack on gear to me seems almost insane, but compared to the cost of a new listening room: ($100,000 AT LEAST) collecting hifi gear is a freaking bargain!

I wish vendors would start making really ugly gear with like Courier text on the front panels and brown molded plastic cases and stuff.  Save me some money.  No, instead they insist on making stuff out of brushed metal and make me drool all over the place whilst driving up huge debt.  Bastards!

In the meantime all I ask for is big imaging and cohesive bass.  I'm not sure what gear or how much gear one needs for that but so far all my attempts have come up short.  I've gotten little tastes of it, but still no consistency. Hmph.

As much as I love gear I keep telling myself the goal is to forget about gear and get into the music again.  This goal has utterly failed.  Gear 1, Music 0! Doh!

[ABEX]

I wish vendors would start making really ugly gear with like Courier text on the front panels and brown molded plastic cases and stuff. Save me some money. No, instead they insist on making stuff out of brushed metal and make me drool all over the place whilst driving up huge debt. Bastards!  

You know for some odd inexplicable reason you come up with some of the same weird ,if you will,observations I have.

As an example my speaker designer ,if you can call him that,asked me what kind of box I would want my outboard XO made of and what color.I wrote back it really does not matter to me as it will not be anyplace noticable.It will probably go behind a piece of gear of the speakers like my DAC.I also told him it's the quality of the parts inside rather than the box that I am most concerned with.

Another thing is that most things that have nice cosmetics go for alot more than things that do not.The most expensive part of the speaker is the cabinet I have read.Freakin ridiculous.

 

[/code]

[Carlman]

I don't think it's how much gear but, how much thought that goes into my appreciation of sound.  If someone has a good sounding boombox or car stereo, I can appreciate it if it was engineered well and sounds great in its application.

The only 2 situations where the gear annoys me:
1. If I'm at someone's house and the stereo is a clear afterthought or necessary evil.  It irritates me because not only does the gear suck, they make it sound even worse.... They put the speakers on the floor, backed up to the wall, in a corner bookshelf, with speakers on different shelves, nowhere near listening level.... it shows a lack of appreciation of music.

2. Or what's worse, going to someone's house with a lot of money that spent a lot of time on the convenience of sound.  Speakers in the ceiling, other bad Circuit City/Best Buy speakers placed poorly and then a big phat sub pumping...... and the owner brags about the great sound....

So, how much is enough?  Whatever it takes to make an attempt at good music reproduction.... whether through engineering or practical application.

[DVV]

I don't mean this is a wiseassed way, I'm just curious;  can the average AC'er enjoy reproduced music without a ton of gear?

For instance, I can enjoy pop music on a car stereo of mediocre quality.  If I'm at a restaurand and the sound system pipes in a good song, I can enjoy that too.  I try to get to Canada every summer with my Dad-there's this lodge waaay up in northen Saskatchawan where we fish for a week.  We usually have a boombox, and my brother will take some CDs.  And that's fine for around camp.

Paradoxically, tho, I have a very low tolerance for crappy sound at home.  And even in the aforementioned circumstances I have some standard below which I'd rather just have peace and quiet.

Where does the balance between the technical sound quality and the music itself fall for you guys?

I'm not sure it's as simple as that, Rob. Yes, of course we, the users, are paramount factors here, but how much gear also depends on what the industry thinks you should have.

Look at brother Nate's post, as a perfect example. I was about to tell him what to do, and then I remembered that the company in question has its own agenda. Nate wants great bass - so do I, it's VERY important to me that the bass is played right. I don't want excess, boom bass, but if somebody is sweating away hitting that tympani, I want to hear tympani, not a cooking pot turned upside down.

So, just as I was about to suggest that Nate gives Harman/Kardon's integrated amps a spin, because of their uncanny energy and drive in the bass region, well above their price class, I remembered that H/K does not offer its only integrated amp in North America. And I know that their A/V receivers are not quite up to their integrated amp standards.

And H/K are not the only people doing that - my Yamaha CDX-993 CD player, another case of incredible value for money, was also never put on the North American market.

This tells me you guys have been targeted for whatever, but have been denied the choice of what I think are great deals. Why, I really don't know, but I suspect it's because somebody thinks the North American market is reach enough to sustain more expensive products.

To answer your question, all I really need is my basic system, consisting of an integrated amp (Harman/Kardon's HK 680 or Karan Acoustics KA-i180 in alteration), Yamaha CDX-993 CD player and my B&M Acoustics 1041 monitor speakers, with van den Hul cabling all around. Throw in my Marantz ST6000 tuner for background music, although it has a nasty habit of being simply too good for just background music. And of course, some agreeable software.

Cheers,
DVV

[Jay S]

You know, Rob, I noticed the same thing and had been wondering about it.  Its good that you brought it up.  There are times when the relentless pursuit of audio nirvana at home -- through equipment upgrades -- does distract me from the music itself.  

Part of the problem is that we feel we should be in control of our home environment and are therefore more critical.  Another aspect is that we've invested so much of our time and $$ into our audio systems that we are somewhat hungry for justification and, as a result, can tend to nit-pick and over-analyze the sound.  

I find that I sometimes enjoy music the most when I am listening from a different room.     I'll turn up the volume of my system in the living room then listen from my desk in the den or from my bedroom.  This type of listening turns off the analytical side of me and I find myself just soaking in the music and enjoying the experience.  

[PJ]

Half the time I enjoy my music the most with a $100 discman when I am sitting in the uni library studying. Not a "audiophile" as my home setup...but that doesnt effect my enjoyment.

All I want with my setup is a more rounded sound. Extra bass will improve it, however I think a tubed preamp will help as well.

However, I cant afford it at the moment....and I have other monetery priorities.

[Rob Babcock]

Jay S, I think you really got the question as I meant it.  DVV, you sorta missed the point.  This is a rhetorical question, I know, but I don't mean how much gear is necessary in a quantity sense but more philosophically.  My bad, I probably didn't make that clear.

I was reading "Real World HiFi" in TAS a couple months back; they reviewed the NAD C320BEE & Monitor Audio Bronze B2.  It really struck me how elegant that is, and how it would probably make me pretty happy, if only I'd stop reading the mags and quit sites like this!  Even so, I'm talking like boombox level, no int amp & the like.

I'm not talking the type and quality of bass that DVV wants, or any other fetishistic concept, just plain music.  Could a drunk in a bar sing "Johnny I Hardly Knew Ye" on St. Paddy's day and just move you more one time than a fine opera slnger played back on a premium stereo rig?

Again, this is rhetorical, and even I don't claim to have any answer, just wanted a discussion.  We like to think we have a special gift to be able to hear minute differences and subtleties in our systems (often whether they exist or not) and think we're so special.  But what if, hypothetically, we're really deficient, lacking in some gene that lets us listen through the technology filter into the heart of a peice of music.  Oh, sure, we get it when we're "beaten over the head" with it, when all the elements of reproduction are perfect.  But are we like bad speech recognition software that just doesn't understand real speech, that can't get the message unless the grammar is perfect and the enunciation just so?

In short, is it the music or the gear?

BTW, yeah, I love nice gear and good sound, too.

[JohnR]

I might be missing the point too... but I think there are different things here. Listening to a toon, and attempting to reproduce a realistic facsimile of real sound (music or anything else), are vastly different goals. As soon as you cross the line from the former to the latter, you're lost! There's no half-way, really. That's why a boombox is fine, but a less than excellent stereo system is not.

Or at least, that's today's theory

[Hantra]

Funny as it may be, as I read this thread, I am sitting here on the Acoustic Disc web site listening to David Grisman via my $10 Altec's from the laptop's sound card, and I am having a blast!  

I believe that for me, it's the music.  If it's good music, I can listen to it, and get a great deal of enjoyment out of it no matter what system it is on.  My car has a factory Blose in it, and I have choked up listening to some stuff in there.  It all depends on my mood, and the music.  

Too much music these days sounds like it was written, contracted, and recorded by someone like WAL-MART, and made just for profit.  If the music has a message, and the musicians are conveying that, then I don't care what the sound quality is like.  

Of course, if it is on a great sounding system, the choking up can turn into much more emotion, and bring me much closer to the musicians, and that adds to my enjoyment, but it is not requisite for me to enjoy the music.

I do agree with Carl though about certain people having systems and totally not caring about what they do with it.  Let's face it, even your average Circuit City system can give 80% of the sound we enjoy from our hifi these days IF it is setup properly.  So, I wonder if those people are music lovers, or if they just don't know. . .

B

[nathanm]

Again, this is rhetorical, and even I don't claim to have any answer, just wanted a discussion.

Then it's not a rhetorical question is it?  Ideally, there should be NO replies to this post!  jes' kiddin'...

I always maintain that even though it sounds negative, ignorance is bliss.  Hence, I enjoyed music much more when I had less gear\cheaper gear than when I became aware of the gear's performance in its own right.  But you can't always go back.  I wouldn't want to listen to my old speakers again, as in comparison to my newer stuff they sounded awful.

I think there's a "hard knee" on the price\performance curve that you have to hit before you can really enjoy the tunes.  Where that point is depends on the person.  I'm operating way over the knee.  I could probably get by with less, but it's too late now.  

I compared vinyl vs. CD of the same album the other night, and to be completely honest the $3200 I have invested in my analog front end didn't sound as good as the $1400 digital front end.  The vinyl was noisier and more distorted.  Each transient was fuzzy. (used vinyl)  Both are enjoyable in their own right but when you put them back to back the more expensive playback failed. Hmph.  It drives me nuts because I don't know who's at fault; the record or the setup?  That's why I'm selling everything and buying a Yorx boombox!

[Carlman]

I have found 'Soundesign' to be better than Yorx.  Yorx is like GPX, I mean sure, you can get them at the high-end drug stores but, I think Soundesign has just as good a sound at a better price... You may even get a deal at K-mart since they're going out of business.
 

Here's a serious thought...
Maybe high quality gear is easier to obtain than high quality music.  I rarely get excited about a new CD.  It'll be pretty good, or great for a little while but, I haven't heard any music that was emotionally satisfying for many years.  (Maybe I'm just getting less emotional, though.)  In any case, think about how easy it is to improve the sound of your system and how difficult it is to find music that sounds good (that you haven't heard before).

[Rob Babcock]

I'm sure that I'd go nut with a boombox over the long haul; fine for a weekend fishing trip, though.

I guess a better way to phrase my question is similar to a post I saw a few months ago:  would you rather have a boombox, but have like 10,000 CDs or a really nice rig but you'd only ever be allowed 10 CDs/LPs.  Yeah, that's an extreme example.

I'm sure glad I don't live on a hypthetical desert island!

BTW, DVV, you do have a point about market forces driving us to buy more gear.  Sites like this do it, too.  It's about keeping up with the Virtual Jones!

[nathanm]

It wouldn't really matter which you chose, as most desert islands don't have electricity.  The boombox batteries might last a day or two at best.  Or are we talking about solar-powered gear?

Hypothetically speaking, I'd choose the cheap box and 10,000 CDs for sure.  Even if I didn't like them I could construct a solar reflector to keep my shelter cooler during the day.  It would also serve as a signaling beacon to any rescue planes or boats that might pass by.  Then again, if I had hifi gear on the island I could use it to cook food and start fires.  Assuming it was tube or Class A solid state.

[cjr888]

Here's a serious thought...
Maybe high quality gear is easier to obtain than high quality music.  I rarely get excited about a new CD.  It'll be pretty good, or great for a little while but, I haven't heard any music that was emotionally satisfying for many years.  (Maybe I'm just getting less emotional, though.)  In any case, think about how easy it is to improve the sound of your system and how difficult it is to find music that sounds good (that you haven't heard before).

I'll sort of agree with you.

I'd personally go by a modified version of your statement:

That high quality gear is easier to obtain than high quality recordings of musicians and bands you enjoy that are emotionally satisfying.

Obviously this comment regards my musical tastes and favorites.  The number of pieces of music that hit me in an emotional way, whether its a band, musician, vocalist, anything -- alive or dead, is rediculously high.

The percentage of the recordings of those pieces of music that are horrible, or bad, processed, or limited enough to take away from the ultimate emotion is also very high.

There are a lot of people with very particular musical tastes that are the lucky ones, that have rediculous amounts of amazing recordings...that combined with it matching their musical preferences.... Well, they must be in heaven, all the time.

My musical tastes go all over the place -- but its not the norm to have each of those special songs or albums be a gem of a recording.

But when it is.....that's when everything feels worth it.

When it isn't, I almost wish I didn't know that things could sound better.  It doesn't kill the emotion, but you are aware of the 'bumps' if bad enough, and that will consciously or not, detract from the experience, since it introduces thought -- you notice things, things bother you... you know it can be better.

I'm in the process of doing a downsizing of my system and ridding myself of sidelined components.

I first considered this quite some time ago, and frankly, I don't know how many times I was ready to, heard a single track that sounded like magic, that in essence put my in my 'happy place', and immediately got rid of the idea of selling anything.

What could pull me from that?  A potentially great deal on a home purchase.

Will it bother me if the combination of recordings+downsized system isn't the same as before?  Maybe a little bit, but it certainly isn't going to stop me from listening to music, or enjoying it for what it is...

[cjr888]

I guess a better way to phrase my question is similar to a post I saw a few months ago:  would you rather have a boombox, but have like 10,000 CDs or a really nice rig but you'd only ever be allowed 10 CDs/LPs.  Yeah, that's an extreme example.

I'll take the boombox.

Change it to 100-200 CD of your own "Desert Island" discs, and I'd probably go for the high end rig.

There are those timeless albums that you could listen to over and over and over again and the emotion never leaves...  If anything, you give it a break for a couple days when you need a change of pace...  But when you go back, its still there, whether after a year or ten....

[Sa-dono]

I guess I'll be the odd one out and say I would choose the really high-end rig with 10 CD's. While I do enjoy music, on a poor system, it just doesn't have quite the same effect, especially if there is any harshness to the system. I have noticed that when listening to better systems, when I listen to music I love that is poorly recorded, I tend to kick it out of the player really quick. In this respect, I definitely agree that ignorance is bliss.

[DVV]

And if DVV is a fetishist, then his only fetish are shapely ladies, a vice Marbles if anybody will understand and endorse.

Well, I certainly understand and endorse it  

While I am limited in my fetishes, I am not limited in my vices    

and for you Doobie Brothers fans...what were once vices are now habits