Tír Na HiFi

cybot wrote:Can I go now ;)

LOL. We're all friends here, cybot.

You're excused!

zeppelin doesn't sound bad at all here, suppose it depends how bad the recording is, i came across some Dillons recordings a while back, cant remember what they were but whoever did that recording should be severely beaten, never heard anything like it. i really dunno what gear they were going to sound good on

then im wondering is it the large sq difference between the good and the bad recordings that makes it so noticeable
no doubt we'd be dumbing down the good recordings

although poorer recordings have their flaws getting more detail out of them isnt always a bad thing it often improves

what is real question
really a best guess scenario,
i like live recordings for testing, something ive heard live is always good, reactions/noise from the crowd
if i can close my eyes and almost believe im there, i think im going in the right direction

Just speaking for myself, there is a big difference between hearing music and listening to music as the latter involves my mind which has all kinds of bias including learning, experience and preference.
Personally speaking, the pursuit of fidelity to my imagined live or studio performance is frustrating and so I have found pleasure in the composition, in the melodies, the arrangements, the performance of the music and the poetry in the lyric.
This has the danger in self-confirming my personal biases and limits my music and equipment choices but luckily I'm catholic in my musical taste and fortunately we live in a big interconnected world with lots of choices available, especially in this age of the internet.

Truth and beauty - probably two sides of the same coin and both aspects of the mind.


To quote Keats

When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou sayst,
"Beauty is truth, truth beauty," – that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.


Mark.

Diapason wrote:Aleg, I would have been 100% on your side up until quite recently, but I've realised that quality of recording dictates my listening far too much now, and I want to do something about that. I'm a bit tired of putting on, e.g. Led Zeppelin and then turning it off straight away because it sounds horrible. Now, some of this is probably a function of my own system not *actually* giving me the truth, but one way or the other I'm starting to wonder if my old view of "bad recordings should sound bad" really makes any sense. As sebna says, I'm in it for pleasure, and if I discover that a lot of my recordings don't sound all that pleasurable, maybe I should change my approach?

I'm torn on this question, though, and I'll probably end up trying to find some kind of middle ground a la DaveF. I mean, ultimately you have to ask "what is truth in recording?" and all that.

Diapason

It is just a matter of choice, no wrong or right. You're even allowed to change opinion ;-)

It is also a bit 'the curse of the more revealing' systems, and would for me ultimately depend on the amount of bad recordings in my collection. If a lot would start to sound bad I might change opinion.

But I truly enjoy hearing warts and all, that doesn't distract me from my enjoyment. I get 'thrilled' by hearing a string resonate when plucked on a bass, or hear a bow skipping on the strings in a cello piece. I find that exceptional additional pleasures while listening.

Indeed there are a couple of recordings I stopped listening to, because I can now hear more clearly they are not well recorded or the instruments do not sound pleasurable. So be it, there are a lot more that I do find sounding nice.
Also I have been always very aware of sound quality of recording when buying them. And for some I just accept they are not very good, just because that is about the best one can get from a certain era of recording.

But I still would not like to give up hearing the best possible on good recordings in order to make bad recordings acceptable.

Horses for courses ;-)

Cheers

Aleg

You could add a poll to this Simon. I'd be curious as to how people feel on this. I suspect a strong leaning to the beauty side given many of the systems here but I could be way off.

I'm finding this all very interesting. Poll added.

DaveF wrote:

nige2000 wrote:
Is it not a realism of the recordings were after

But thats the key issue. We don't know how the real performance was because we weren't there.

This. Studio engineers and producers are (generally) not working to the same parameters that we are. They are trying to capture detail and perhaps a certain sense of space but the criteria they have is quite different from ours. I've had musicians sit in front of my system listening to their own recordings and hearing details for the first time or hearing instruments presented in a different way than they thought they were recorded. They liked what they heard but it does beg the question what is "truth" in a recording? If you take a studio amp or speakers home you'll get a very different presentation... all detail... very little warmth.

In summery I've tried to build a system where pianos sounds like pianos, where guitars sound like guitars and where I can sense how they're being played. That should equal truth... but whose?

Diapason wrote:I'm finding this all very interesting. Poll added.

Can you vote twice?

tony wrote: Can you vote twice?

I think I specifically disabled that option! You can change your vote, though, should you find yourself convinced by the opposing team.

I'm quite surprised by the even vote so far, 4-4 at the time of writing this.