GoodSoundClub - Romy the Cat's Audio Site

In the Forum: Playback Listening
In the Thread: A random neutralness

Post Subject: ....from other perspectives...Posted by Romy the Cat on: 12/3/2015

rowuk wrote:
I often wonder who REALLY needs real high end? Maybe this is the wrong description.

That is a reasonable question. However, it is not question that aligned with the thread. I do not think that people need high-end audio. However, if a person does form any high-end audio objectives then it should be done with respect of the goals and not in respect of the "literature" that was invented by audio pimps aroid high-end audio consumption.

rowuk wrote:
If we look at custom made trumpets, violins, guitars for musicians, there are parameters that can be played with to reach a desired goal. The artisans results become the working capital of the musician. More instrument does not always mean more money!

That is a separate subject: the difference and similarity between high-end audio and high-end musical instruments.

rowuk wrote:
What is the meaning of a custom midbass horn?

That is a very good question: what is a deference between industry build generic midbass horn and custom midbass horn. As soon a person answers it for himself many thing get cleared. A few weeks back there was a Russian guy with a lot of cash came to this site and begin to ask questions about horns. The questions he asked clearly identified him as an idiot who shall not be doing anything in audio. Why I bring this example? Well, I do feel that the answering yourself the question about difference between a generic midbass horn and custom midbass horn instantly put a person to a proper stratification of audio subtypes. We do need both the generic midbass horns and custom midbass horns we also need people who can understand the difference and map the requirements - they push the High-End objectives farther. The rest of the people, including my new Russian friend, juts reused the same alien vocabulary that they would never understand anyhow.

rowuk wrote:
Does random equipment really mean that we lose neutrality? Can it be that absolute, or is the only issue "no control" over neutrality? Is neutrality a desirable goal? Not from my viewpoint. I like "row 15 sound" where the hall adds its signature to the performance without me losing immediacy. It is also a preference away from pinpoint localization of sonic events. Is the sound of an instrument colored by the hall effects still neutral?

rowuk, no one talks, at least in context of this thread, about neutrality as it is some kind absolute factor. The conversation is not about the neutrality itself but about the interface to communicate with neutrality reached by audio means. All the I was saying that random equipment and random utilization of audio expressive methods dive pretty random chance to get neutrality. BTW, that fact the most of table radio are way more neutral then expensive so-called high end audio installations is a goof illustration of what I was saying.

rowuk wrote:
I think that neutrality is a bullshit argument for the brainless. Music worth listening to is not "neutral". The performers have intentions, the recording engineers and producers have sonic goals. At home we also have expectations based on our relationship to music and audio. Just like I have specific goals when I choose an instrument for a specific playing job, my audio at home also advertises my prejudices, laziness, audio awareness.

Yes, and no. Audio neutrality in the way how you use it in thins thread I feel very much is what you call bullshit. Neutrality might imply many different things and might be understood from other perspectives as well.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site