Musicians?

Learsfool, thanks for the kind words. I too like horns driven by tubes. The sense of immediacy is amazing. The way that the music jumps out of the speakers is very satisfying. I have always struggled with the incredibly low efficiency of my Stax F-81's, and put up with it only because of their fantastic midrange tonal density (very natural), and ability to let the music move the way it should. They don't play very loud at all, however, and there are times when healthy volume is needed. That's where the Paragons come in.

Perhaps this is a subject for another thread, but do you find it frustrating, as I do, how infrequently references to the sound of live music is part of the commentary on audio equipment?

In most instances where I hear live music (jazz clubs, arenas, stadiums), the sound of the live event is often worse than the sound from my stereo.

I listen primarily to rock, and jazz. Very little classical.

If the baseline for live/stereo comparison must be chamber music in a private home, or orchestral music from the 22nd row of a world class concert hall, then it's an unrealistic expectation for me.

One needs to put these things in perspective. One size does not fit all in this hobby.

Hi Frogman - yes, there are many out there do not use live music as a reference. I think there are many reasons - some audiophiles become so obsessed with their equipment that they haven't even been to a live concert of any kind for years, and have truly forgotten what live music sounds like. I am constantly amazed at those who place the equipment above the music in their priorities. Or those who won't listen to a recording if they don't think it was recorded well, or is not on the right label. Others simply don't want their music to sound live. I have seen that comment many times here. Then there are those who say they don't want any "colorations," usually the same people who are after "complete neutrality" in a component. Yes, I do understand what they think they mean, but to me, and I would guess the vast majority of working musicians, this is a truly ridiculous concept (as if anyone really wants to listen to colorless and neutral music??!), and in my experience, these folks have systems that don't sound anything like live music - they want every recording they own to sound exactly the same, and very sterile sounding, though they usually call it "analytic."

On the other hand, I bet Tvad is right when he claims his system sounds better than many concerts he hears in arenas and stadiums, assuming it is electronic and/or amplified music he is speaking of, which the vast majority of it would be if he listens mainly to rock and jazz. Especially in the rock world, the music is so grossly amplified at pretty much all live venues nowadays. So many people have grown used to this electronic sound that they think that that is what all music sounds like, and they develop very unrealistic expectations of bass in particular (Subwoofers are among the most misused pieces of equipment, in my opinion. Not that they can't sound good, but to my ears I have yet to hear a system including them that sounded like real, live, acoustic music). Even concerts in a great hall can be ruined by over-amplification, as my orchestra's pops concerts often are. Far too many people think that louder is always better, as you must know well, playing in Broadway pits.

So there are a whole host of different reasons, of which I have just scratched the surface, and it can indeed be frustrating. I try to either ignore it or laugh about it, but it's hard sometimes. As Tvad said, one size does not fit all, and there are many different perspectives in this hobby. Sometimes the most important one to us musicians gets completely lost in the process. I guess that's true of alot of different hobbies. I used to homebrew with a friend who got obsessed with the equipment instead of the taste of the beer. Eventually we compromised - we used his equipment to make my recipes, and got some very good results that way. But I've gone on more than long enough, so I'll shut up now. Enjoy the music!

Tvad, I could not agree with you more. It is true that "one size does not fit all in this hobby". Hobby being the operative word. No point begrudging someone who wants his system to sound a certain way, even if that means it will have little resemblance to live music. After all, anyone who can't enjoy a great performance on a table radio, is missing the point, IMO.

Having said that, I think there is a great deal to be gained from applying certain standards to this hobby. Two in particular: that the end result should strive to sound as close as possible to live music, or that the end result should sound as close as possible to what the producer heard in the control room. The only time that I have a problem is when hobbyists start saying things like "component X is more accurate than component Z", or "component A blows away component B". I have to ask: compared to what?. And how did you arrive at this conclusion? Often times it becomes pretty obvious that there is no basis for those proclamations.

It has been said countless times that because every hall, or club, or studio, sounds different; and that because it is usually impossible to know with certainty what the producer or engineer had in mind when a recording was made, that comparisons to live music are irrelevant. I disagree. I think most hobbyists focus on tonal issues. These are the easiest to hear and pin point as problems. I contend that there are qualities to the sound of a live performance, even when amplified excessively or simply poorly, that come through "loud and clear", and familiarity with these can be very useful in evaluating a hi-fi component. These qualities usually have to do with the area of dynamics. The sound has a sense of directness, of speed, of connection to the performer that is immediately recognizable. It doesn't matter wether it's unamplified acoustic music, or electronic rock or jazz. Even if the sound has been distorted tonally by processing or too much amplification, that speed will be there to a greater degree than what one hears come out of our systems after all the amplification, eq, conversion, mixing, etc. that the sound suffers in the process of getting from the microphone to when it comes out of our speakers.

Another great post, Frogman! Agree completely with your comments which, as you say, apply no matter what type of venue the music was recorded in. Whether or not a system can give this sense of sound traveling from/in a real space is very important. The best recordings/systems will give you a sense of the original acoustic, including the ambient noise, and how the sound travels in and fills it.