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
Ndeslions speaks a lot of truth.

I have auditioned so many mega $$$ digital sources and amps that has this phenomena. Etched and focussed sound images. Mostly stripped of air soundstage.

Real live music (non amplified for the most part) has plenty of air around notes (Sounds basically generates by movement of air, Duh!). The more instruments on stage playing, the more the air movement. Sometimes so much that some high freq can even sound blurred-not so etched) when played in sync with bassey sounds. this is due to interaction of sound field (moved air) This moved air bounces off rear and side walls and propels forward. You can feel the air in your face and body if you are seating in front rows.
I guess I can't see why studio recordings would not have 'some' air during recording sessions. It got to in order to produce sound. May be not as much as normal venue since the walls probably are much absorptive. But there is still lot of air has to be to produce sound/s. So it comes down to recording process and recording equipment and/or Reproducing components. The fact that some components do a good job of reproducing the air tells me that it might be, for the most part ( and recording process to certain extent) the component's design be the culprit, as Ndeslions says.
"You can feel the air in your face and body if you are seating in front rows"
ahh that would be something else...make sure you don't inhale---anymore

hi-fi systems are not necessary to get the "soul" of the music...you are either moved emotionally by a song or not. How many of you heard a song for the first time on a high end system and felt emotional with it right then and there, vs the stuff you hear on radios, cars, stores, live venues....etc. For me, everything that I love i've heard 99.9% elsewhere (outside of my system).

Most hi-fi systems that i've heard and assembled (until now) snare us to listen to the top recordings only, and head for the door, or volume ctrl on inferior recordings (wide, flat bandwidth, neutral equipment...etc).
For me there is usally an inverse relationship b/t recording quality and how I REALLY feel about the music. So, the typical high-end vision of the "purist" approach has screwed me somewhat; I love the equipment, love those times when the magic combination is in play, but i'm sometimes repulsed by the expense and effort to, in the end not, have something that brings me maximum joy for the music I love the most. The large scale abandonment of truly high quality analog tone circuits is one primary cause to the merry go round, I suspect for a lot of folks.
hi dpac996:

a great tune is a great tune, regardless of sound quality.

i can listen to music on a radio and get what ever the composer intended as i would on a "high end" stereo system.
the only difference between the two is the sound, not the emotional content. i can recognize a clarinet on a boom box. it may sound more "authentic" on a stereo system.
music is still music, regardless of the medium.

regarding air, i believe one hears notes not the air. air is silent. go outside your house or appartment building. do you hear air ?
HiFi and high-end audio have NEVER, EVER, EVER come close to the sound of live music, and don't seem to be necessarily any closer now.

The point made about soundstaging is particularly relevant; hyperdetail as well. Real, live music has neither of these. Conversely, live music has dynamics and flow that are not produced accurately by ANY high-end audio system I have ever been around.

In my opinion, when it comes to loudspeakers, those that possess the necessary dynamics and instaneous swings in volume, for example, horns, tend to sound far more agressive, brash, and threadbare than real life, while those that can reproduce the proper timber, liquidity, relaxed nature, voluptuousness, or flow such as electrostatics (which often overshoot the mark) are woefully inadequate when it comes to dynamics and being able to reproduce both the suddenness and power of the real thing. Typical cone/dome speakers fall somewhere in the middle of those two, determined mostly by their crossovers and/or their drive units.

Bottom line, perfection does not exist today when it comes to audio. And, it doesn't seem imminent on the horizon, either. So, in the effort to get as close to whatever idea of such exists in our minds, we chase after that which we believe lines up best with that - be it soundstaging, clarity/resolution, timbre, immediacy, liquidity, fullness, dynamics, etc. Sure it's incorrect, and sometimes wildly so, but it's the best we can do for now.