The myth of "The Absolute Sound"

[Soothsayerman]

It's not a myth. It is a benchmark or standard or an ideal, but it is not a myth.   The controversy is that it is subjective as all sound is. Hearing is a purely subjective experience but, you can listen to an acoustic guitar playing music (un-amplified) and establish your own standard for "The Absolute Sound."   This is meaningful because un-amplified music is the purist form of music and it gives you an benchmark to shoot for.

 

Even if you never listen to un-amplified music it is still a useful benchmark in establishing a systems fidelity.  Why is it relevant? because music uses musical instruments and voices. 

 

If you like to listen to the sound the wind makes when it rustles the leaves on trees through your stereo, then maybe it is not relevant to your personally.  It's not that complicated really.

[Soothsayerman]

15 hours ago, barrows said:

One can only achieve above with access to (fairly good, especially the microphone) recording gear and the free time to record that acoustic guitar to then be able to compare the sound of the guitar live in the room and the recording.  A comparison of an acoustic guitar one owns at home with a different guitar on a recording is not a valid comparison.  Even two guitars of the same make and model will have different timbres.  This is my point, as stated in the first post I appreciate the intent of the concept, it is flawed in practice.

And, even with a recording of the same guitar for comparison, this will not tell one that much about how well the system will do with a trombone...

 

BTW: I listen to everything form Bach to TOOL and have no bias for or against acoustic instruments.  I just acknowledge that there is lots of great music which includes electric and electronic instruments as well. 

You have some good points for sure and I agree with them.  I will say however that it depends on the person.  I used to go to classical guitar concerts once a week that were held in a very small auditorium or in someone's home.  After a while, you get a very good idea of what the sound is supposed to be.  I think if you go see live music on a regular basis, you will have a better foundation to build upon.

 

If you can't do that however, then I think what you say is more applicable.  However, it all falls apart when you have to rely on a recording chain to record the event. You must do it from memory which requires repeated exposure to get a good handle on it I think.  I think your point about the fact that the "Absolute Sound" is an objective tool may be a stretch because everyone is different, but where do you start? I do think however, that if you are a professional audio reviewer that has some integrity, hopefully you attend live music events to provide you with a touchstone.   I guess my point is in a way, you have to put a stake in the ground somewhere to understand what fidelity is.

[Soothsayerman]