When is digital going to get the soul of music?

the question is:

does the ability of music to commuincate depend upon sound quality ?

i say no. if one accepts that premise, the medium is irrelevant.

sound quality has varied over time, based upon the available technology. 80 years ago, people were enjoying music. today, people are enjoying music. people experienced the message of the music 80 years ago, as they do today.

do people enjoy bach, beethoven or brahms more today, because of sound quality of stereo systems than they did 80 years ago , listening to "phonographs" ? i think not.

there is no evidence that enjoyment of music is highly correlated to sound quality. in fact there were two studies published in stereophile, authored by markus sauer, which indicated that the satisfaction accruing from listening to music was not highly correlated with sound quality.

so, it seems that the issue of digital vs analog vs a live performance is one of sound quality, not "soul".

Obviously this group of music lovers over here, including myself must live on another planet, since

"there is no evidence that enjoyment of music is highly correlated to sound quality. in fact there were two studies published in stereophile, authored by markus sauer, which indicated that the satisfaction accruing from listening to music was not highly correlated with sound quality".

Then the enjoyment of a painting does not correlate with the quality of a painting, a good cigar not with the quality of the leaf, a good book not with the quality of the writing, o good glass of wine not with the quality of wine. Aw well, if that is the case, I'd rather be on my planet... and of course the issue of digital vs analog vs live music is one of sound quality. No doubt about that. But if you demand good sound quality, the chance of you being moved by lesser quality, especially if your are blessed with a first class system, is rather slim. Well, I rest my case and get some "soul" from my rig, analog no less and I am out of this thread. 'T was fun, thanks to all.

Detlof

Thank your MRT for your valuable lecture in Poetics. I consider myself duly chastized. next time I Listen to the aforementioned recording, I shall remind myself that my emotional reaction is woefully incorrect, or at least that my recollection of emotive change is essentially flawed.

The medium is relevant.

I used to think there was something special in a live performance that couldn't be captured in any recording. I thought it was something almost magical going on between the performers and the audience that made the difference—that wavelength can't be recorded. Then I finally heard CDs through a system that can recreate what is IN the recording. It's not magic. It's the full range of audible frequencies, the dynamics, the impact, the transients, the musicians breathing, the fine details. It's the space between the notes. Distortion of any and every kind takes away those 'special,' 'magical,' 'mystical' qualities and the detail that make live acoustic music ALIVE. Limit the bandwidth, something is lost. Add noise, something is lost. Of course, we can enjoy music through a boom-box or a clock radio, but it's no comparison to the impact of live, is it? Analog or digital is not the real issue, but LPs can't begin to hold all that's on a quality analog tape recording. Recording quality and reproduction quality can and does convey the 'soul' of music.

when you use the word "quality" to judge books, wine, food and art, the word much be defined so that one can recognize what quality is. quality is subjective. if i like it, it is good quality, if i don't quality is not good. thus, it is possible that an arbitrary definition of quality will not produce a relationship between it and enjoyment.

back to music... if you listen to a favorite "tune" on a table radio or other "inferior" medium, do you say "i can't get into the song because the sound is bad " ?

i would hope not. if you like the music, you like it, in spite of the sound. you can give reasons for liking it, regardless of the sound. note, sound "quality" is not absolute. it is subjective.

let's consider movies . a highly reviewed movie may not be enjoyable . a so called "quality" movie may or may not be enjoyed by many people.

there is no existing demonstration of a high correlation between enjoyment and any definition of quality.