| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Playback Listening » My Audio Philosophy (31 posts, 2 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 2 of 2 (31 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2
12-24-2018 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 173
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 26
Post ID: 25197
Reply to: 25196
Classification is not related to audio components
I do not classify audiophiles by their components. I 100% agree most horn owners may be in first group or many tube lovers be in the first group.Audio components are just our tools and those classification (i do not look at it as classification) refers to mind and awarness of audiophiles. 
12-24-2018 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rowuk


Germany
Posts 241
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #: 27
Post ID: 25198
Reply to: 25195
Levels of perception are not tied to audio or hardware
Amir, I question your statement. There are so many senses (visual, aural, touch, smell). These senses can be fooled very easily.We do not need audio playback for anything except our own personal pleasure. I insist that there is no way to measure personal pleasure.
When we want to develop our senses, there are no set ways to attack this. Sometimes a great cognac or cigar can alter our mood and we perceive a deeper level of appreciation for a book, a snack, or a live concert. The ability to appreciate MUSIC is the beginning of road to better aural awareness. Knowing Haydns intentions is significant to developing taste for that music, its performance and perhaps the recording process.
Limitations in the quality of a concert hall, recording quality, analog or digital medium do not affect the appreciation of fine music. If we allow ourselves to get distracted, then the music was not important enough.
I maintain that audiophoolery tries to convince us that there are hardware solutions for sound quality. I disagree. Hardware solutions only feed our egos.


Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
12-24-2018 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 173
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 28
Post ID: 25199
Reply to: 25198
Music is different to Audio
 rowuk wrote:
Amir, I question your statement. There are so many senses (visual, aural, touch, smell). These senses can be fooled very easily.We do not need audio playback for anything except our own personal pleasure. I insist that there is no way to measure personal pleasure.
When we want to develop our senses, there are no set ways to attack this. Sometimes a great cognac or cigar can alter our mood and we perceive a deeper level of appreciation for a book, a snack, or a live concert. The ability to appreciate MUSIC is the beginning of road to better aural awareness. Knowing Haydns intentions is significant to developing taste for that music, its performance and perhaps the recording process.
Limitations in the quality of a concert hall, recording quality, analog or digital medium do not affect the appreciation of fine music. If we allow ourselves to get distracted, then the music was not important enough.
I maintain that audiophoolery tries to convince us that there are hardware solutions for sound quality. I disagree. Hardware solutions only feed our egos.

I 100% agree you that music is not tied to audio or audio hardware. those are different worlds and i look at audio as a separate subject.many times i listen to music with apple crap airpod or i listen to music in my car. i have no problem and i enjoy music .i think we should separate music from audio discussion. many times i enjoyed music from my 100$ portable sony but i did not enjoyed live concert of same melody.
William James "Will" Durant say "does the life quality of humans really improved after advancing Civilization?the term of "reall improvement" refer to the fact that not all improvements are real improvement .
i think smart peoples look at audio only in concept of "real improvement" and they do not goes for Vicious cycle. 
12-25-2018 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rowuk


Germany
Posts 241
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #: 29
Post ID: 25200
Reply to: 25199
Why audio if not music?
My audio IS a musical event. If we remove the musical appreciation, what are we playing back? Why is playback even important? To feed our ego?
The relation of the recorded event to the playback is different, but the relation to my senses share many of the same things.


Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
12-25-2018 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,579
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 30
Post ID: 25201
Reply to: 25198
Do hardware solutions and sound quality related?
 rowuk wrote:
I maintain that audiophoolery tries to convince us that there are hardware solutions for sound quality. I disagree. Hardware solutions only feed our egos.
 This is very complicated question, rowuk, at least in my estimation. I do not argue that solutions feed our egos, there is plenty of it but it does not exhaust the whole picture. I have been in hear a strong supporter of a view that music and audio have distinctly different objectives and means, probably it is better to say not “means” but inner-mechanism for declaring itself. It is not that music and audio do not have arrays of inner-penetration, for sure they do. Still, they are different animals. It is would be similar to design treadmills and health, they for sure are connected and one can be used to evaluate other but essentially they are very different sectors of humans endeavor. 
 
Now the complex thing: the relationship between are hardware solutions for sound quality. I very much insist that quality of hardware solutions are very directly impact sound quality and very directly impact music consequences of that sound quality. I know that you expressed skepticism but I think you incorrect.  The problem is not in the supposition that I am expressing but with the definition sound quality that might be interrupted very wide. The “audiophoolery tries to convince us that there are hardware solutions [do something] for sound quality”, and they are absolutely correct. The key is their definition of “sound quality”. The sound quality that industry is patronizing for many year is a direct consequence of hardware solutions, some of them positive, some of them negative. Did you ask yourself why for over 100 year of audio industry, in one form or another, the industry never formulated more or less standard methodology for sound quality evaluation and assessment? My point is that when “sound quality” has a proper formulation in the ears (and the most important in the minds) of sound consumers then the relationship between hardware solutions for sound quality is very direct and very unambiguous. Unfortunately, the definition of “sound quality” as it been sponsored by audio industry is not the sound that has any relation to musicality or to any other human benefits … besides the “feeding our egos”. 
 
So, are the hardware solutions and sound quality related, yes they do. Does “sound quality” is a known ingredient or even to say commodity in the industry he produced the hardware solutions? Absolutely not and therefore in most of the cased the hardware solutions indeed are just to feed our egos. It might not ned to be this way…


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-26-2018 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,169
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 31
Post ID: 25202
Reply to: 25201
Guiding System Development

For sure, not everyone consciously guides along and shapes their overall sound with the hardware they choose, and there are many variations of the “guiding” to talk about among the people who do guide their sound development. I would like to say that current “high end” sound is as generally bad as it is because it was guided there by Morons, but this would only be a partial explanation of what’s going on here.  For one thing, it appears to me that guiding sound from the beginning to the end of a system is not common whether it’s a cheap or an expensive system. And, although the music chosen to evaluate components tells a lot about the “system owner”, it’s often hard to be sure we are “listening for the same things” when we listen to “the same music”, including through the same system. This is why shaping audio is ultimately a personal thing, even when there are attempts to “brand” components or build fraternities around them. Yes, people/companies can reproduce components that sound close enough one to the other to where they can be chosen for their sound. But once a component gets plugged into a particular system in a particular room, and the music changes, it gets personal again. And it can be “argued” that this is one reason why demonstrations at hi-fi shows are rarely any good. Of course, another reason is the stupid “music”, invariably pan pipe, that sort of thing, that is used by “manufacturers” to “prove” their ideas. You have to be pre-hypnotized, going in, to buy stuff like this! In general, hi-fi components are designed based on "specs" rather than targeted sound. But this shouldn't interfere with component selection any more than sound targeted by someone else should encourage selection. Either way, it's gotta be personal!



Paul S

> >

Page 2 of 2 (31 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts