Music vs. Components

bside123 · « **on:** 19 Jul 2010, 02:41 pm »

Greetings everyone. Here's a biggie: When you sit down for a session with your hi-fi, what do you find that you are really listening to most 1) the music, or 2) your components? Where and what is that mysterious, illusive, fine line between 1) simply and wonderfully enjoying the music and.... 2) listening critically for either how "great" your system sounds (such as trying to justify upgrades, tweaks, tube rolling, wire changes, etc.) or listening for all of the flaws and weaknesses of your gear. When does the tweaking stop and the enjoyment begin? Conversely, when is it time to improve and upgrade because, in reality, you would be happier if your system sounded better?

jimdgoulding · « **Reply #1 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 02:56 pm »

Always the music but when a recording is exceptionally well done I am aware of it and that enhances the feeling. The last component I added was a power conditioner, the UberBUSS, and this has helped make the front end of my room more spacious and instruments more distinctly placed and convincingly real. That and the placement of my speakers and sitting position. The next thing I will buy is a record vacuum cleaner and a new set of tubes for my pre towards the end of the year.

BobRex · « **Reply #2 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 03:24 pm »

Can you do both at the same time? Last night I was listening to Steeleye Span's "Live at Last". I was singing to the songs, "Maid and the Palmer" anyone?, and at the same time listening to Pegrum's drumming and being satisfied that they weren't recorded backwards. (listen to the placement of the snare and hi-hat. It's pretty common to record drums from the drummer's perspective - hi-hat to the left of the snare. This drives me crazy; I don't listen from behind the drummer, so why do they record that way!?!?!) I was also listening to Hart and Carthy on either side of the band and trying to identify each other's contributions. Oh, and I was also listening for Maddy's inflections on certain phrases- listen as she sends the false knight to hell or described Montrose' death.

This is pretty much how every listening session goes - follow the music, but be aware of the sonics. So where does that put me?

Letitroll98 · « **Reply #3 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 03:50 pm »

It changes, if I'm evaluating a new component or trying to fix something, its all system. When the system is right, I lose all consciousnesses and the music sweeps over me in waves. I have no thought that the music is being reproduced by something.

jsaliga · « **Reply #4 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 03:56 pm »

Music first and foremost. Equipment is simply a means to an end, IMO.

--Jerome

bside123 · « **Reply #5 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 05:03 pm »

I wholeheartedly agree that the music comes first and is the reason for the whole ordeal. Much, or even most of the time, I am listening to THE music. I love the idea of "lose all consciousness" of the gear and just have the music wash over me in waves. Fortunately, this kind of experience is pretty frequent. It certainly is the goal.

That being said, I think we all know the experience of our minds being distracted from the music, as it wanders to the gear, the room, the recording, the cables, etc. A perceived "little" change, a comment from a guest, something seemingly sounding different or not as good as the last time I think I heard it, etc. can initiate another ride on the roller coaster between tunes and gear. Little whispering voices chatter in the head.... "What if I ...." "If only.... " "I wonder...."

I've also noticed that the "better" my gear has gotten, the more I expect from it. Sometimes my expectations might not be realistic. Maybe I should have just hired the band for a night to perform in my living room... then again, maybe my hi-fi sounds better than the band live!?

Unfortunately, sometimes I found my gear trying to "tell me" what to listen to and what to avoid. This can happen with a piece of music that I really like, but I can't stand the recording. So I don't play it as much anymore as when I had a "less revealing" system. On the other hand, sometimes I found myself listening to music that I wouldn't have ordinarily chosen under the pretenses that it made my stereo sound magnificent! (as in too much Diana Krall) Who picked THAT stuff... my preamp?

Can anybody relate to the above?

BobM · « **Reply #6 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 06:15 pm »

I was into DIY modding for some time and, although it is and was a very educational experience, it put me into a critical listening state of mind. I was constantly looking for differences and nuances. Not a very relaxed way of listening.

So I burnt out on that and am generally happy with the sound I am getting now. No upgrades or changes on the horizon. This lets me relax and enjoy the music, which is the way it should be.

Of course, the next pull to change something or the next cable comparison or the next ... will put me back into equipment evaluation mode, at least temporarily.

decal · « **Reply #7 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 06:50 pm »

Quote from: jsaliga on 19 Jul 2010, 03:56 pm

Music first and foremost. Equipment is simply a means to an end, IMO.

--Jerome

Well put Jerome!!

KnowTalent · « **Reply #8 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 06:55 pm »

When the music AND recording is good then I care less about the system.
Cream: Live at Royal Albert Hall, Little Feat: Waiting for Columbus, Dire Straits: Live at the BBC... all sound great on just about any system I've heard them through. To me well recorded "good" music makes the system dissappear.

For me personally, my biggest frustration is ~ 50% (...or more

) of my CD collection is unlistenable on a "high resolution system", ~ 30% is bearable, with the balance ranging from good to excellent. Since the bulk of my collection falls into the unlistenable-bearable category I often listen to these disks in the car, on my boombox or thru my Ipod (lossless)/Bose docking station and everything is fine.

While I do enjoy the extra soundstage dimensionality, instrument separation, etc... that a hi-rez system "can" bring I have been seriously rethinking the cost/benefit of investing in systems (components

) that cost as much as a small automobile and rather focusing on systems that allow me to enjoy more of my music collection.

After living with a few sub $1000 english designed CDPs I still find the new Bryston digital players to offer clearly audible improvements... but at 2-3 times the cost, is it worth it?
After owning a BAT VK-D5SE and Wadia 381, I'll never spend that kind of money again unless I come into some inheritance or win the powerball.

eclein · « **Reply #9 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 07:00 pm »

Up until a month or so ago it was 50-50 now that I'm finally done tweaking or at least slowed down considerably its all Music!!!!

CSI · « **Reply #10 on:** 19 Jul 2010, 07:15 pm »

Quote from: bside123 on 19 Jul 2010, 02:41 pm

Greetings everyone. Here's a biggie: When you sit down for a session with your hi-fi, what do you find that you are really listening to most 1) the music, or 2) your components? Where and what is that mysterious, illusive, fine line between 1) simply and wonderfully enjoying the music and.... 2) listening critically for either how "great" your system sounds (such as trying to justify upgrades, tweaks, tube rolling, wire changes, etc.) or listening for all of the flaws and weaknesses of your gear. When does the tweaking stop and the enjoyment begin? Conversely, when is it time to improve and upgrade because, in reality, you would be happier if your system sounded better?

This is the audiophile dilemma. Your love of music, and the fun of your hobby, sets you on a journey to create a system that will connect you directly to the emotion of the music. Eventually you get there and you are in seventh heaven. For awhile. Then you begin, in spite of yourself, to listen for the flaws. Soon you make changes that move you toward higher resolution. How many of our reviews begin with, "I'm hearing things I never heard before!". Then, without meaning to, you cross a threshold and find you have "refined" your system to the point where half your records (CD's, files, etc.) are unlistenable. So you start over in frustration (this is often the point where you sell everything and buy a used, mellow sounding, British integrated amp).

An old audio sales guy once warned me about upgrades, saying, "You open the window wider, you let in more dirt". Wes Phillips, a good reviewer, says the hardest thing for an audiophile is to know when to quit.

I think the luckiest people of all are those friends and neighbors of yours you guided into great sounding systems. They never upgrade because they have no interest in doing so and every time you see them they thank you again for turning them on to such marvelous sound. The unluckiest are those audiophiles who are so neurotic that, for them, music is the ultimate distortion they have to put up with in order to listen to their gear.

jsaliga · « **Reply #11 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 02:49 am »

Quote from: KnowTalent on 19 Jul 2010, 06:55 pm

I'll never spend that kind of money again unless I come into some inheritance or win the powerball.

I don't think my system would change too much from what I already have even if I came into a major financial windfall. My set up is pretty much where I want it, and if I felt that I needed to do more I would spend more. I would, however, go on a major spending spree for some rare and pricey original vinyl pressings, mostly jazz. This would be consistent with my belief that the best way to improve the sound in your system is to imporve the quality of the recordings you listen to.

--Jerome

bside123 · « **Reply #12 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 03:19 am »

Truth be told, if I had an "unlimited" budget and cash flow, I don't know if my system would change that much either. I would still be faced with making value driven decisions between my infinite longing and my real time limitations. Audio is so subject to the laws of diminishing returns. More isn't always better, and I've never witnessed any amount of money curing the existential problems such as the audiophile's dilemma. Some of the most unappealing systems I've heard were the most expensive, most complicated and most finicky. Other music systems had me grinning ear to ear with goose bumps. My intention of starting this thread was not to complain, but it was more to examine some of the issues that drive audiophiles, because they love music. We love music so much, we love to reproduce it to our pleasure through the means of our stereos. It seems that even the want of more and more recordings is another side of the same issue. We want more and more... I am not criticizing anyone in anyway; believe me I can relate.

Pez · « **Reply #13 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 05:20 am »

Whoa, what are you dudes smoking! This is some strong sh!t man... Wait a minute I'm starting to feel it to.

Ok I have one... Ok, can you like really see something? Like isn't all light just reflected off of objects so you're really not seeing that object, you're just seeing the light that isn't being absorbed by that object.... Whoa... Also the light enters you eye and is absorbed by your retina and really the only thing your mind sees is a chemical and electrical reaction produced by your optic nerve. So really your not really seeing light, you're experiencing a reaction caused by it.

My head hurts.

jimdgoulding · « **Reply #14 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 05:31 am »

That's cool. Not that your head hurts. What's up with that?

Tyson · « **Reply #15 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 05:37 am »

Pez is like, Morpheus!

Look, every system is made of up different strengths and weaknesses. No one system will every be perfect. My ultimate solution to this is to have multiple systems (once I get a place with a basement). Right now, my fully active system with multiple tube amps and SS amp, sounds GREAT! But, on the other hand, I've LOVE to have a very high efficiency setup like the Gedlee Abbeys or the Troels Gavesen DTQWT and a 211 or 300b based SET tube amp. Why be forced to choose if you can have both?

K Shep · « **Reply #16 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 05:44 am »

Quote from: bside123 on 19 Jul 2010, 02:41 pm

When you sit down for a session with your hi-fi, what do you find that you are really listening to most 1) the music, or 2) your components?

Music

Until I add a new piece of equipment to the system, then I listen to the component, hear the change, settle in and then its back to music.

bside123 · « **Reply #17 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 12:34 pm »

Quote from: Pez on 20 Jul 2010, 05:20 am

Whoa, what are you dudes smoking! ..... My head hurts.

Smoking? 12AX7s Drinking? Nitty Gritty Pure II. Dropping? DeOxit Shooting? Milty Zerostat Gun

It's ".... the hole in Daddy's arm where the money goes." John Prine

konut · « **Reply #18 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 01:50 pm »

WUT?You'll have to speak up. The stereos' CRANKIN'!!

JLM · « **Reply #19 on:** 20 Jul 2010, 05:14 pm »

Music versus gear represents the two sides of being an audiophile. I enjoy the music itself but it’s a hoot when I can hear it so well. The answer to the O.P. lies in what the individual audiophile is listening for. The chase for this nirvana is simply the audiophile extension of the problem with the human condition (of never being satisfied). In my struggles with this dilemma I have turned to emphasize musicality and imaging while backing away from ultimate detail, frequency extension, and dynamic range.

Before you kick me off the audiophile island for not being neurotic enough let me say that I’m not promoting dull sound. This is just the place I’ve found after 40 years of striving for musical satisfaction and learning to separate the marketing types from what I can enjoy in the long term. It’s no coincidence in my mind that dynamics, far reaching frequency response, and extreme detail (in the forms of bigger amps, extra drivers, and exotic circuitry) are what have gotten pushed onto the buying public for decades. Only recently has convenience taken a prominent role in the hype shoved at audiophiles.

As mentioned above, “excessive” detail can suck enjoyment right out of big chunks of your library and take you down this pathway of never being happy. Detail also seems to emphasize the “sins of commission” (distortions that are added into the reproduction chain and make for listener fatigue). So striving for ultimate detail brings to bare many of those distortions that drive audiophiles crazy.

Like frequency extension, dynamics can be another two-edged sword. The bulk of available music is already over-hyped while our environments have far too much background noise (or in the case of frequency range they’re much too poorly designed) to allow hearing the natural sound of the original performance. And while I believe proper bass to be fundamental for good sound reproduction, everyone knows the challenges involved as we go for those last few hertz.

I’ve found that as imaging resolution improves so does detail, and in a most natural way. It’s like adjusting the focus on a lens. And somehow, even though we are primarily visual creatures, some loss of visual focus seems easier to ignore or tolerate (at least for audiophiles). Plus certain “rightness” is evident to even the most casual of observers when a “mass of sound” congeals into the recognizably proper size and shape of an ensemble or orchestra.

Musicality is harder to define. The best term I can think of is “tonality”. It’s the juice of the musical fruit, not just the skin that detail provides. By itself it would be a watercolor where pure detail would make for just black and white sketches. It’s the emotive versus the analytical side of the musical coin.

Its no coincidence in my opinion that music must be primary.