anyone who grew up in the golden age of "mid-fi" should be pretty capable, providing they listen to a broad range of music (as in "beyond rock and roll") to understand what "balanced sound" is. whether it was JBL century speakers or Advents (for me it was ADS-L810's), a decent turntable and a receiver that didn't "feel cheap" (as in the "knobs") could take on steely dan AND jazz AND some classical as well. IMHO, the "Eventual Goal" early on was to get speakers that could "go down to 20" (20Hz). that meant going from bookshelfs to floorstanders. well Then you needed more watts, so eventually the music would be better served with an integrated amplifier. the next step up would be a high-current power amp with a preamp that wasn't just alot of knobs, although that would be tempting. anyway, at this point you would probably have taken up some considerable room in the house between your loudspeakers and your components. along comes monster cable and tells you that all those "Free Cables" you're using are terrible. OK, but then which monsters do you get- the $50 ones or the $200 "pretty" ones?
OMG! before you know it you're spending several hundred bucks and you don't really care if it makes a difference or not- if the packaging tells you about the sonic loss from cheap interconnects and speaker cables, and you can see how much nicer the pricey cables look, then that's all that matters. THEN along comes digital and completely confuses the issue of "good sound" with "cleaner sound". but you don't have any choice anyway, because all the newer stuff you want to add to your collection is going to be on cd's.
and so on and so forth, progressing to hdcd and finally sacd. but IF you go back to the primordial beginnings with the LP and FM radio, i think things sounded very very good back then. there was no discussion over soundstaging, but the rolling stones, mantovani, mancini, brubeck, and the philadelphia orchestra, all sounded pretty decent with the available technology. so if you even have to ask in 2008 if you "know" what sounds good or not, maybe you spent too much money and have to beat yourself up over it! i have spent WAY, WAY too much money on audio, but it STILL possesses that fundamental balance between bass, mids, and highs. only now i can hear really deeply into good recordings. and ALSO, thank goodness, i can still enjoy a really inspired performance of mozart on a cd that doen't sound all that great. that goes for alot of jazz that pat barber just wasn't born yet to play on. BUT as for rock and roll, i have to admit i play it in the bedroom through a nice pair of JBL's. the last time i listened to a re-mastered cd of CSN&Y on the big stereo i could not believe how sloppy and disjointed it sounded, with musicians coming in at the wrong time, either too loud or too soft, miked differently or sounding artificial, etc. same thing happened with my copy of JA's Surrealistic Pillow. or J.Taylor's S.B.James! this is the LAST thing i need to hear from groups that sits in my personal R&R hall of fame. i never heard all that crap back in the 60's and the 70's, at home or in the car (that's right, in the car!). oh my poor poor ears! now i can hear so good, and i'm such an "expert", i'm talking like those idiots that write for the "absolute sound". oh no, there's no going back now! there is only one cure- talk radio. ON AM. a good debate with 20% THD about who's sleeping with who. only THAT will cleanse your soul... that and a battery powered transistor radio (with an earphone for private listenting). ah, now i can relax again...!
OMG! before you know it you're spending several hundred bucks and you don't really care if it makes a difference or not- if the packaging tells you about the sonic loss from cheap interconnects and speaker cables, and you can see how much nicer the pricey cables look, then that's all that matters. THEN along comes digital and completely confuses the issue of "good sound" with "cleaner sound". but you don't have any choice anyway, because all the newer stuff you want to add to your collection is going to be on cd's.
and so on and so forth, progressing to hdcd and finally sacd. but IF you go back to the primordial beginnings with the LP and FM radio, i think things sounded very very good back then. there was no discussion over soundstaging, but the rolling stones, mantovani, mancini, brubeck, and the philadelphia orchestra, all sounded pretty decent with the available technology. so if you even have to ask in 2008 if you "know" what sounds good or not, maybe you spent too much money and have to beat yourself up over it! i have spent WAY, WAY too much money on audio, but it STILL possesses that fundamental balance between bass, mids, and highs. only now i can hear really deeply into good recordings. and ALSO, thank goodness, i can still enjoy a really inspired performance of mozart on a cd that doen't sound all that great. that goes for alot of jazz that pat barber just wasn't born yet to play on. BUT as for rock and roll, i have to admit i play it in the bedroom through a nice pair of JBL's. the last time i listened to a re-mastered cd of CSN&Y on the big stereo i could not believe how sloppy and disjointed it sounded, with musicians coming in at the wrong time, either too loud or too soft, miked differently or sounding artificial, etc. same thing happened with my copy of JA's Surrealistic Pillow. or J.Taylor's S.B.James! this is the LAST thing i need to hear from groups that sits in my personal R&R hall of fame. i never heard all that crap back in the 60's and the 70's, at home or in the car (that's right, in the car!). oh my poor poor ears! now i can hear so good, and i'm such an "expert", i'm talking like those idiots that write for the "absolute sound". oh no, there's no going back now! there is only one cure- talk radio. ON AM. a good debate with 20% THD about who's sleeping with who. only THAT will cleanse your soul... that and a battery powered transistor radio (with an earphone for private listenting). ah, now i can relax again...!