The focus and air lie


There always have been some kind of fashion in the way a system sounds and since a few years it seems that more and more people are looking for details, air and pinpoint focus / soundstaging.
There's a lot of components, accessories and speakers designed to fill full that demand... Halcro, dCS, Esoteric, Nordost, BW, GamuT are some examples.

This sound does NOT exist in real life, when you're at a concert the sound is full not airy, the soundstage exist of course but it's definitely not as focused as many of the systems you can hear in the hifi shops, it just fill the room.

To get that focus and air hifi components cheats, it's all in the meds and high meds, a bit less meds, a bit more high meds and you get the details, the air, the focus BUT you loose timbral accuracy, fullness.
It's evident for someone accustomed to unamplified concert that a lot of systems are lean and far from sounding real.

Those systems are also very picky about recordings : good recordings will be ok but everything else will be more difficult...
That's a shame because a hifi system should be able to trasmit music soul even on bad recording.
In 2008 this is a very rare quality.

So why does this happened ?

Did audiophiles stopped to listen unamplified music and lost contact with the real thing ?

Is it easier for shops to sell components that sounds so "detailled and impressive" during their 30mins or 1 hour demo ?
ndeslions
"On second thoughts I guess I must add that I probably listen very differently from most people. I listen to recordings and concentrate on a particular individual instrument and then play it again listening to another"

Shadorne, I tend to focus more on different individual or group played lines or elements in the music when I listen also.

Some of these may be more prominent in the mix or buried way back in the mix somewhere.

I suspect a lot of people do this.

One big goal that drives my system design is to be able to do this as often as possible without limitation with as many different recordings (both good and bad) as possible.

Sometimes I'll just listen for specific parameters of the overall sound as well, more so when I suspect that some specific aspect of the detail I am focused in on does not sound right for some reason.
I go to lots of concerts both classical, rock, popular, etc. In all types of concerts except for classical, the sound is amplified, and comes at the audience from many directions, and therefore that magic that we call air is not available except for an electronic echo that is ubiquitous in almost all of these venues. In classical musical concerts, however, it is possible to achieve that magical sound that we say is "air" if we find the seat(s) that can maintain the proper phase of the performance. That means that you should choose a seat in the 1st row of the balcony, with no ceiling or second balcony above yours. You will find these seats to be absolute magic and will give you a memorable performance in sound quality. You will notice that you are in perfect alignment with the recording microphones of the orchestra.
it seems that you are more interested in the parts than the whole.

No I would say that as a music lover I am interested in both. How the parts fit together to make a whole is one of the most interesting aspects of complex musical pieces. It is why I have several version of the same pieces of music and it is interesting to compare and contrast how they are played differently (even if the melody is the same).

I think some people hear only "melodies" when they listen to music whilst others hear things like the relative timing of specific notes, instruments and their relative emphasis.

Like in any field, there is a superficial level and a detailed level. An engineer might marvel at the visual beauty of a bridge spanning a river in the same way as a layman but the same engineer may also be looking at structural details and complexity: the engineer may marvel at the beauty of how it was designed, clever use of materials and how well it has been constructed.

There is nothing wrong with being a layman but to suggest that listening to music on a radio is good "enough" is to ignore an entire aspect of the beauty of the creation process and the artistry of the musicians.

Frankly, the hyper compressed garbage being put out by major labels on CD these days (particularly in the pop genre) means you can't tell a Keith Moon from John Bonham from adam. The sound is so clipped and gated and manipulated that it becomes irrelevant who the musicians are! Unfortunately, layman don't know the difference and don't care to know the difference => and we get what we deserve: the lowest common denominator in music reproduction - mostly manipulated noise completely lacking subtlety or artistic expression from highly trained and skilled musicians!
Shadorne, I tend to focus more on different individual or group played lines or elements in the music when I listen also.

I think that any audiophile would necessarily want to do this but I begin to suspect that many are just proud collectors of shiny glowing cabinets, cables with precious metal and veneered towers that come with high price tags. Like a Rolex watch - it begins to have very little to do with teh accurate telling of time and much more to do with pride of ownership - the feeling of exclusivity - a conversation piece.

A high resolution system is just jewellery if there is absolutely no interset in listening to details, IMHO.
Testify, brother Shadorne, testify!

I like nice looking things as much as the next guy, but the irony is that good looks is not required for good sound though many may equate the two.

Good sound can be had for not very much if you really just pay great attention to the details.