Onwhy61, you wrote:
I believe some of your consternation with my post of 6/13 stems from your misunderstanding of what I wrote. If you carefully re-read the post you will discover that nowhere did I state that I was not interested in fidelity. Rather, I wrote:
That is the only reference I made to anything remotely having to do with fidelity. I said I don't believe I can reproduce the live event. Indeed, this is what I believe. Starting with the acoustics of my room versus the acoustics of the room in which the music was recorded. Reproducing the live event is a Utopian goal that is ultimately impossible. Therefore, I do not endeavor to do this. However, this statement does not mean I don't care about fidelity. For many of the same reasons involved with the impossibility of reproducing the live event, I also do not believe I can reproduce the sound the recording engineer heard in the studio: equipment, room acoustics, etc. are all different.
Please don't critique my opinions without first understanding my statements. If you're not sure about the point I am attempting to make, please ask me and I will try to explain. Once we understand each other, you're welcome to fire away.
Finally, you wrote:
Again, I am interested in fidelity, but I do not and will not get mired down in discussions of double blind tests, statistics and technical specifications. I can hear differences in my system produced by swapping various elements of that system, and this is sufficient for my purposes.
As I stated in an earlier post, the music is everything to me, and if that priority does not make me an audiophile according to your definition of the word, then so be it.
In your 6/13 post you state that you are not interested in fidelity, only whether it makes you feel good.
I believe some of your consternation with my post of 6/13 stems from your misunderstanding of what I wrote. If you carefully re-read the post you will discover that nowhere did I state that I was not interested in fidelity. Rather, I wrote:
I don't believe I can reproduce the live event. I don't believe I can reproduce the sound the mixing engineer heard in the recording studio.
That is the only reference I made to anything remotely having to do with fidelity. I said I don't believe I can reproduce the live event. Indeed, this is what I believe. Starting with the acoustics of my room versus the acoustics of the room in which the music was recorded. Reproducing the live event is a Utopian goal that is ultimately impossible. Therefore, I do not endeavor to do this. However, this statement does not mean I don't care about fidelity. For many of the same reasons involved with the impossibility of reproducing the live event, I also do not believe I can reproduce the sound the recording engineer heard in the studio: equipment, room acoustics, etc. are all different.
Please don't critique my opinions without first understanding my statements. If you're not sure about the point I am attempting to make, please ask me and I will try to explain. Once we understand each other, you're welcome to fire away.
Finally, you wrote:
Just tapping your toes won't get you there.
Again, I am interested in fidelity, but I do not and will not get mired down in discussions of double blind tests, statistics and technical specifications. I can hear differences in my system produced by swapping various elements of that system, and this is sufficient for my purposes.
As I stated in an earlier post, the music is everything to me, and if that priority does not make me an audiophile according to your definition of the word, then so be it.