Jump to content
IGNORED

Fas42’s Stereo ‘Magic’


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, fas42 said:

 

I have a Erroll Garner CD with tracks in terrible shape - much worse than that - and it's a challenge to lift them to the point of coming alive ...

 

Or you could just start with well recorded music to begin with... :)

 

 

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
  • 1 year later...
35 minutes ago, fas42 said:

In my mind, I can 'translate' what's in the clip of Lucky Chops to a live experience - the clues are in the sound, I can "go there" and hear them playing, in front of me.

 

Have you thought perhaps this isn't how most people experience recorded music?

 

It would certainly explain why your ideas are met with such derision.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
1 minute ago, gmgraves said:

I dare say that even those people who might agree with some of the things you preach are tired of hearing you talk about it ENDLESSLY in every thread on this forum.

 

Amen, Brother!

 

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Frank, I just listened to that excerpt on my  current laptop, with the fingernail sized speakers while the Utah/CU football game was on.

 

It was magic!

 

I agree.

 

I could even see the "here we go again look" on Frank's long-suffering wife's face during their short interaction at the beginning of the video.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
48 minutes ago, fas42 said:

I'm pointing out that there is an alternative, to people who are fed up with spending big bucks, and never reaching "audio nirvana" ... all that it requires is that one starts changing the attitude as regards what's needed to get there ... 😉.

 

Chris says it better than I can.

 

34 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Thank you for attempting to save those grown men who don’t know they want to be saved. They’ve made it their entire, likely successful, lives without anonymous people on the internet there to save them.

 

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
  • 2 months later...
14 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Noting that @kumakuma just disagreed with me, and that's completely understandable - in life there are many things that "just don't make sense" unless one has personally experienced it; and probably the key element is that it happens over and over, and is completely consistent, year after year - a "you can rely on it!" type of thing

 

A oncer just doesn't cut it - a single exposure to a 'magic' system that ticks all the boxes doesn't carry enough weight so that one's thinking about things actually changes.

 

I was disagreeing with the way you took me completely out of context.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

One still has to define what it is about the recording, that makes it "bad sounding" - I have heard thousands of instances, of innumerable recordings, that "sound bad" at that moment, on that system - to be blown off my chair at another time, by how fabulous the tracks actually are, and how much pleasure I get in the listening to them.

 

Please share a few examples.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

I understand what you're saying, but I will suggest this ... most audio people have at least once come across a "magic rig" - doesn't matter for how short a time it was, or how long ago, or whether it was ultra expensive, or not  - which pushed all the buttons ... I'm the dude who took this seriously, and said "I want to understand what's going on here ..."

 

No one is doubting that you believe what you believe.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Again, no need to be unpleasant, George. As always, audio people seem to have enormous trouble comprehending that an audio system is a, er, system - if 9 parts out of 10 have a quality level of say $100,000, and the last 1 part in 10 has a quality level of $100, then the setup is stuck at the $100 mark - which is what I hear when I listen some high end rigs ... a $100 SQ.

 

 

This assumes that an audio system is like an actual chain in which each link is identical and equally important. 

 

The reality is that not every component/part is equal. Some are tremendously important and others barely matter at all.

 

The majority of your time seems to be spent on the latter.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

So,  if you, personally, play a recording you know well on three very different, high end playback systems the only "sound signature" you hear each time is that of the recording, you can't hear any variation caused by the nature of the playback system?

 

Have you done this?

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
1 minute ago, fas42 said:

As has every audiophile, most of their hobbyist life - many years back I went to the Sydney audio club, which had a group which visited members' homes in turn, and the owner played the CDs that were brought by them

 

So the systems were different, the rooms were different, and you were comparing the sound to a memory from last week, last month, or six months ago...

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 

Are you not capable of recognising the sound of a family member or friend's voice that you haven't spoken to for some time, despite having spoken to perhaps a few thousand other males and females in that time ?

 Are you unable to recognise the sound of a vinyl rip compared with a CD  of the same album when you haven't owned a Vinyl setup for several years ?

 

Not sure how this applies to what Frank and I are discussing...

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

 

Dear me ... so you aren't able to recognise, and distinguish, the distinctive qualities of a recording, from one moment to the next ... interesting ...

 

How does this apply to a comparison between two systems made several weeks or months apart under completely different internal and external conditions?

 

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The recording has a signature ... the distinctive qualities of how it was recorded, the nature of the acoustics, the microphones used, the mixer desk, tape recorder, etc, all add their signature to the recording - it's bingo!!, each time that signature pops out ... to take an extreme example, a pop recording made in the 50's versus one last year - worlds apart 🤣. And exactly the same exists for every recording, just sometimes it's not hit you over the head obvious, 😉.

 

So you're saying that the equipment used to create a recording will always impart a signature but not the equipment used to play it back. 🤔

 

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The latter part is the ideal - can never be achievable in the real world, but can get close enough so that one's subjective focus is purely on the recording content. As an example, the previous Philips HT system was of lower technical quality than the current NAD, and this meant there was a coarseness to the sound which required it to be firing on all cylinders, before this aspect could be ignored; the NAD components don't show this trait anywhere near as much  - result, very pleasant to listen to, even without manifesting a full blown illusion.

 

I'm not even sure what this logical fallacy is called.

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Oh dear ... no presence of the word, "magic" 🙂. ... Note, my mentioning here of the Philips being more limited, in its raw abilities ...

 

What the HT setup did, because I worked on it longer, was to trigger a full blown illusion - you can call that, magic, if you want 😉 ...the NAD and Sharp haven't.

 

I was surprised that Adele 21 came over well - this is a harsh test - and demonstrated again that the potential of the NAD rig was excellent.

 

I'm probably going to regret asking but what is your definition of "magic sound"?

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...