Audio reproduction is a matter of taste?

[kumakuma]

5 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Lo-fi?  ... This is actually rather nifty, and about as far from "low resolution" as most of my CDs - if you want the genuine article, I can point to a track of a 70's pop group competition CD, which was probably made by a family member of one of the players in the group, using a small battery operated cassette machine of the day, while sitting way back in the audience somewhere - done as a memory keepsake, most likely.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lo-fi_music

[kumakuma]

@hopkins

 

Perhaps you should ask Chris to change the title of this thread from:

 

Audio reproduction is a matter of taste?

 

To:

 

I believe that audio reproduction can be assessed objectively. Please only post in this thread if you agree with me because I'm really only looking for affirmation rather an actual discussion on the subject.

 

[kumakuma]

4 minutes ago, hopkins said:

Not at all. I am interested in hearing contradictory arguments, as long as they are made in good faith and are not the result of a personal vandetta.

 

Nobody here has a vandetta (sic) against you.

 

 

[kumakuma]

5 minutes ago, Allan F said:

 

Which would appear to suggest that you value those historical perspectives with which you agree more than those with which you don't. 🙂

 

Don't we all? 👺

[kumakuma]

1 hour ago, Allan F said:

 

And, of even greater importance IMO, is keeping an open mind.

 

I assume this means that you're going to remove Frank from your ignore list... 

[kumakuma]

7 minutes ago, Iving said:

As I read it, the conversation is overlooking a primary factor which determines how "real" (or "accurate") our systems may sound, and how well we may be able to discriminate between similar presentations e.g. similar musical instruments.

 

In my opinion, much of the contention in this thread stems from the conflation of these two concepts on the part of some. 

 

In my mind, at least, these are two very different things.

 

Accuracy refers to whether or not a system accurately reproduces what's on the recording.

 

Realism refers to whether or not a recording sounds like live music. This will be determined for the most part by the recording itself, not the equipment being used for audio reproduction.

[kumakuma]

18 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

To me this says something about how far away we all are from true accuracy - IMO, far enough that our equipment choices are necessarily a matter of taste.

 

 

Or perhaps how poor our ability to judge accuracy is...

[kumakuma]

18 minutes ago, hopkins said:

So if you listen to Guttenberg carefully, since some have chosen him as the "expert" here, this is what he is saying:

 

- detail is really good - but you don't want things to sound only detailed

- you want things to sound as they really are (musical)

 

Now I am getting confused here. Are we talking about the possibility that a DAC will produce "fake detail" ? So that the detail it produces is not the detail of the real instrument ?

 

Or does he mean that there is something else that the DAC produces which is not a "detail" ? If it is not a detail, then what is it ? A "non-detail" piece of musical information that would somehow "balance" or "complement" the detail ?

 

What is this man saying ? Does Guttenberg even know himself what he is saying ? Perhaps its like "matter" and "anti-matter" that make up the universe. Detail is matter, yet we need the "anti matter" ? Yin and Yang. This guy is really deep ! 

 

Help me out here...

 

Of course, those of you who claim that we cannot know "how things really sound" are in luck, as you will not have to explain what your "expert" of choice means since he is not in agreement with you.

 

 

 

I don't watch his videos much but I'll take his enthusiasm for the hobby every day over the excessive negativity and nit picking that you exhibit in these posts.

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

But at the same time you have no problem taking the time to post a peronal and negative comment about me.

 

 

I'm sure my feelings about your posts are more a matter of taste than accuracy...

[kumakuma]

@hopkins

 

Forgive me for another off topic post but have you tried meditation?

 

20 minutes a day has really helped me become less of an a$$hole.

 

Of course, not a perfect solution as my posts today show quite clearly.

[kumakuma]

13 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

Nice one.  Perhaps implying that another forum member is an asshole (as you just have) should be a signal that it's time to close this thread? 

 

I'm sure Chris would be more than willing to oblige if you ask him.

[kumakuma]

11 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

And you have the nerve to reply... 

 

Sorry, I was just making it clear that you have to explicitly ask Chris to close this thread if you want it closed.

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

I've mostly tried to show the many contradictions here...

 

 

Thank you for your service!