Jump to content
  • entries
    17
  • comments
    756
  • views
    12579

The Purpose of Audio Reproduction


fas42

Time to crack this back open again, 😄.

 

Yes, what's the point? There could be a zillion answers, but my answer is to be true to the contents of a recording ... I was going to post this to that unloved thread, now gone to zombie land, but I'll do it here, instead,

 

 

Bit of a mess, eh? And, this is the remaster, from 2015!! - I've got it on a double CD from 1998 - a low cost release - sludgy, plus? ... You bet!

 

What should a system do to, for this? In my book, absolutely nothing more than the best job possible to being accurate to the data - now, what I'm getting at the moment is not elimination of the sludge - but is a realistic pickup of what was heard in that club. The reproduction, currently, is not the best it could be - my active speakers still need to be refined more; which will gain me greater clarity, a better connection to the musicians doing their thing ... this sort of track is very helpful in making it clear where the shortfalls are.

479 Comments


Recommended Comments



4 hours ago, kumakuma said:

A truly liberated individual has no need for distractions such as music nor the noise of sites like this.

 

A truly liberated person is in tune with what is. Nothing is rejected, nothing is required. 

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

That's what I'm talking about, the mind is living an illusion. But I am not a mind, and neither are you. I know undisputed truth and you know, but in your case it is veiled by restless mind.

 

The reality is that you have no way to know if what you believe is in fact "undisputed truth" and no way to know whether or not my mind is restless or not. As the saying goes, even a saint sometimes needs to wash the dishes and take out the garbage.

 

 

Link to comment
Just now, AnotherSpin said:

 

A truly liberated person is in tune with what is. Nothing is rejected, nothing is required. 

 

My point exactly.

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

The reality is that you have no way to know if what you believe is in fact "undisputed truth" and no way to know whether or not my mind is restless or not. As the saying goes, even a saint sometimes needs to wash the dishes and take out the garbage.

 

 

 

I am, this is undisputed truth. I am subject that knows objects. Every thing is in my knowing. Is mind required here? No.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

I am, this is undisputed truth. I am subject that knows objects. Every thing is in my knowing. Is mind required here? No.

 

As I said, the mind is tricky.

 

Yours, for example, has convinced you that its own existence is optional when, in fact, all that you perceive as truth are simply illusions created by your mind.

Link to comment

I do not need mind to know that I am. And I is not my body/mind, both body and mind (as any other things, or objects) appear in my knowing.

 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

I say something else, but - yes, we don't have control over the results of our actions. For example: we can make a whole sequence of different changes and upgrades with a clear aim to make a serious improvement, but the end result will be a sound that will be less satisfying after all. 

 

Unfortunately, your 'liberation' has not given you more insight - if you have a clear idea what the goal is, and what methods are available that are effective for achieving that, then you most certainly have control. For example, you want to achieve a certain time for running a certain distance, as something that will make you happy by achieving it - then training, and getting advice from coaches and mentors will guide you to such.

 

The same is possible in audio - why there is so much apparent wasted money and effort here, is because the goals are very poorly defined, by even the most experienced in the business ...

Link to comment
1 hour ago, AnotherSpin said:

I do not need mind to know that I am. And I is not my body/mind, both body and mind (as any other things, or objects) appear in my knowing.

 

 

The sense of self has to come from something; otherwise, you would be at one with the whole of the other 7 or so billion people on this planet, be fully intertwined with their 'consciousness' all the time ... so, what is that, "something"?

Link to comment
10 hours ago, kumakuma said:

A truly liberated individual has no need for distractions such as music nor the noise of sites like this.

 

True, but a truly liberated individual acts out of choice, not need.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, kumakuma said:

Everything goes through the filter of the mind and there is no "I" outside the mind. 

 

How do you know you have mind? Who have mind?

Link to comment
9 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

The sense of self has to come from something; otherwise, you would be at one with the whole of the other 7 or so billion people on this planet, be fully intertwined with their 'consciousness' all the time ... so, what is that, "something"?

 

Yes. Our essential nature is absolutely the same in each and every person. As such we are the same. Only illusions created by individual minds make as separate and different. Our "personal history" which is myth, differs. There is no past outside of our head where all the thoughts, including the thoughts referring to so-called "past" happen - now, every moment now. There is only now, no past, no future.

 

This something you ask about is actually nothing. No-thing. No object, but a subject which knows all the objects, things. 

Link to comment
15 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

Only illusions created by individual minds make as separate and different.

 

So, you are saying your sense of self is an illusion? If you see the latter word as being a negative, then it implies that your individuality has little value; what's the point then of you being "alive"?

 

15 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

Our "personal history" which is myth, differs. There is no past outside of our head where all the thoughts, including the thoughts referring to so-called "past" happen - now, every moment now. There is only now, no past, no future.

 

I agree with this, largely.

 

15 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

This something you ask about is actually nothing. No-thing. No object, but a subject which knows all the objects, things. 

 

Word games don't clarify things - there is structure in everything 'we' deal with; there has to be an 'over' explanation for why this is so - just using the cop-out that some films, etc use, at the end, that everything that happened previously was a dream sequence, by 'somebody', doesn't cut it ... the 'somebody' has existence, and hence can be explained.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

So, you are saying your sense of self is an illusion? [..]

 

Our understanding of ourselves is false. It just so happened "historically". We see ourselves as confined in a body, when in fact we are limitless, beyond the measured space. And we are outside of time. Time and space are illusions of the mind. In reality, there is no past, no future, there is the eternal now. I am not in the body, the body is in my knowing. We are not objects, we are no things, we are subjects which know everything.


There is nothing negative about the word "illusion", just as there is nothing negative about any word. There are delusions of the mind. The mind is so conditioned. 

 

I am, this fact has no alternative and is therefore undeniable. But the mind cannot "understand" it. Therefore the mind cannot understand who I am, offering illusory explanations instead.

 

Such a thing as individuality and its value is in my knowing, as any other objects. Each and all objects are known to me equally. 

Link to comment

Just so you understand where my heapspace is, I discovered and consumed the Jane Robert's Seth books many, many decades ago - if you're not familiar with them, these are an intelligent blending of the "nothing is real!" mantra, and exposition of how the whole shebang operates; also known as, you create your own reality, continually ...

 

Now, I'm happy with that idea - I have my reality - you have your reality ... where it doesn't work is when you tell me, my reality ain't the goods ... comprendez?

Link to comment

I had one of the Seth books back in 90s, someone's gift. I don't think I've read it. There's nothing in books that will make you free. You are already free, books only get in the way. You don't need to understand anything, know that you are, it is enough. The only obstacle here is confused mind, put mind into rest and you'll be fine. 

Link to comment

Should have been "headspace" in my last post of course ...

 

A recent post by Confused reminded me of a point I've made many times - if a rig "sounds better" when you fiddle with the frequency response, then it's a giveaway that the SQ is not yet optimised. In the real world, you just have to put up with the spectrum of sound that impacts you all the time, being as twisted and mucked up as circumstances dictate; not unless you are in some special circumstances, as say an acoustically treated room, does one start to be able to control things. And the human hearing system is well adapted to this - a particular instrument, live, always sounds uniquely itself, no matter how bizarre the response curve is at the spot where you're listening from; if you were able to examine it.

 

So, why is it so different, often, with hifi systems - well, the big variation is that the live sound has zero playback distortion, the other, unfortunately not :). What one achieves by playing with FR is a masking, of the irritating qualities that the replay chain adds to the sound you hear - if there is an anomaly in the 'signature' of the reproduction which is more irksome, typically this will be prominent in some ranges of frequencies; so, attenuate the latter, or, boost everything around them ... voila, a better listening experience !!

 

Turns out that one can lift the SQ to a high enough level, such that these anomalies no longer trigger the, say, "Hey, I'd better turn down the treble!" reaction - at this standard, the playback does become 'effortless'; and any volume is fine, from whisper quiet, to rattling the windows intensity ^_^ - with the proviso that at all times the system is operating comfortably within its limits, of course.

Link to comment

Heapspace works just as well. In the sense that we tend to imagine a bunch of stuff. And only because we are not able to think various thoughts at the same time simultaneously, just one thought after another, does it seem that our head is in order 🙃

Link to comment
On 1/6/2022 at 10:45 PM, fas42 said:

Should have been "headspace" in my last post of course ...

 

A recent post by Confused reminded me of a point I've made many times - if a rig "sounds better" when you fiddle with the frequency response, then it's a giveaway that the SQ is not yet optimised. In the real world, you just have to put up with the spectrum of sound that impacts you all the time, being as twisted and mucked up as circumstances dictate; not unless you are in some special circumstances, as say an acoustically treated room, does one start to be able to control things. And the human hearing system is well adapted to this - a particular instrument, live, always sounds uniquely itself, no matter how bizarre the response curve is at the spot where you're listening from; if you were able to examine it.

 

So, why is it so different, often, with hifi systems - well, the big variation is that the live sound has zero playback distortion, the other, unfortunately not :). What one achieves by playing with FR is a masking, of the irritating qualities that the replay chain adds to the sound you hear - if there is an anomaly in the 'signature' of the reproduction which is more irksome, typically this will be prominent in some ranges of frequencies; so, attenuate the latter, or, boost everything around them ... voila, a better listening experience !!

 

Turns out that one can lift the SQ to a high enough level, such that these anomalies no longer trigger the, say, "Hey, I'd better turn down the treble!" reaction - at this standard, the playback does become 'effortless'; and any volume is fine, from whisper quiet, to rattling the windows intensity ^_^ - with the proviso that at all times the system is operating comfortably within its limits, of course.

 

In case anyone is reading this and wondering what post @fas42 is referring to in the above, I believe it is this one:

 

 

Link to comment

Correct ... :).

 

Also, just to say that I'm feeling content with how my active speakers are working right at this moment - which is not a good thing!! :S. Why?  Because, it make me lose the urge to "try the next thing!" - I need motivation to go the next step, :D.

 

An example ... put on an 'anonymous' compilation of Country, religious themed, songs yesterday, all recorded around 50 years ago by various artists of the time. Fabulous stuff! Every song was a new, and different sound world, completely engrossing, and satisfying to listen to - a perfect example of what people mean when they say, Just Enjoy the Music! ... :)

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Correct ... :).

 

Also, just to say that I'm feeling content with how my active speakers are working right at this moment - which is not a good thing!! :S. Why?  Because, it make me lose the urge to "try the next thing!" - I need motivation to go the next step, :D.

 

Why do you need to go to the next step if you're happy with the way your system sounds?

Link to comment

Well, a major one is that visually the whole shebang looks awful! For a start, I'm using piles of newspaper to mass load the cabinets - that has to be made to happen using more aesthetically acceptable means; without going silly on the money used to create a solution. And, the filtering setup is 100% prototype in nature; that has to be rationalised, and packaged properly. One of the goals is to be able to easily transport what makes up the system; to be able to load it up in a car and take it somewhere, set it up anew and within an hour have it work as well as it does now - this means thinking through how to engineer everything for portability, while still retaining the necessary electrical, and physical integrity.

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Well, a major one is that visually the whole shebang looks awful! For a start, I'm using piles of newspaper to mass load the cabinets - that has to be made to happen using more aesthetically acceptable means; without going silly on the money used to create a solution. And, the filtering setup is 100% prototype in nature; that has to be rationalised, and packaged properly. One of the goals is to be able to easily transport what makes up the system; to be able to load it up in a car and take it somewhere, set it up anew and within an hour have it work as well as it does now - this means thinking through how to engineer everything for portability, while still retaining the necessary electrical, and physical integrity.

 

It will be interesting to see how you make out.

 

1*DDsOx6D3oe8ZxcA-OTfIDA.jpg.a8fb3271c33bdf0b4c7e51791ac9b917.jpg

Link to comment
10 hours ago, fas42 said:

Correct ... :).

 

Also, just to say that I'm feeling content with how my active speakers are working right at this moment - which is not a good thing!! :S. Why?  Because, it make me lose the urge to "try the next thing!" - I need motivation to go the next step, :D.

[..] :)

 

Here is the possible nest step. You could try the following. Stop focusing on a single object or a sequence of objects, e.g. sound, distortion, listening space, etc. And turn your attention to yourself listening to the music. And, in doing so, stop concentrating on a single object and perceive everything that is heard equally. Everything, all and every sound equally, without pushing your attention to any thing particular. In fact, it already happens naturally. Just stop focusing.

Link to comment




×
×
  • Create New...