Mediocre recordings with great gear vs great recordings with mediocre gear?

[PeterA]

pooh poohing music/sonic guilty pleasures is a bit snooty i think. there are many paths to musical maturity, and spots on the path. and even end points preferred. my sonic reference points have always included my listening 25 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago, and 5 years ago.

i just think this line of discussion is not friendly to the community here. get's people defensive about what they like or don't like. makes WBF a less welcoming place. today i had a WBF member visitor and the first call for a vinyl cut was Thelma Houston. that did make me smile.

i can like Bartok string quartets or Charles Lloyd......and Diana Krall. or Eva, or Allison.....i have 4 reels of an all analog Diana Krall 'Live In Paris' that sounds amazing.

OTOH i do respect comments about hifi show musical choices. but that's different.

we should not have to defend our musical choices. but it is an easy target for those needing one.

The thread is about recordings and system quality. There’s a place in the discussion for “audio file recordings“. Some people love them, some people hate them. They do tend to make mediocre systems sound better. It’s interesting that people are talking about Diana Krall and not some of the golden age recordings of great classical music.

Really good systems can play a large variety of recordings and musical genres, and the more difficult the music, the more the capabilities of the system come through. Most of the music in system videos on WBF is not very challenging.

The issue is not people’s taste in music. The issue is the quality of the recording and what the recording tells the listener about the capabilities of the system. I am interested in what I can learn about the music on the recording and what I can learn about the system. For this, the choice of music and quality of the recording matter.

 

[Ron Resnick]

When people refer to "audiophile recording" do you mean uninspiring music which is well-recorded using audiophile recording techniques?

I have no problem if people want to make fun of me over this, but I genuinely like musically the Thelma Houston track "I've Got the Music in Me." Amanda McBroom's Growing Up In Hollywood Town by Sheffield Labs certainly is an audiophile recording, but "The Rose" there is one of my favorite tracks of all time.

Is Jennifer Warnes' Famous Blue Raincoat considered to be an audiophile recording? I genuinely like musically "First We Take Manhattan, "Bird On a Wire," "Famous Blue Raincoat" and "Song of Bernadette."

I assume that all of Reference Recordings' classical music recordings are considered "audiophile recordings," as the pieces are performed by small or lesser-known orchestras and are recorded using highly-refined audiophile recording techniques.

As much as I love solo female vocals I have never referenced Diana Krall or Rebecca Pidgeon or Nancy Bryan or Patricia Barber or Jacintha or Norah Jones or Anne Bisson or Lyn Stanley.

How does an audiophile recording make a mediocre system sound better? If a poor recording on a mediocre system sounds mediocre, and an audiophile recording on that mediocre system sounds better, wouldn't that audiophile recording also sound better on a good system than would that poor recording on that good system?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Yet the place encourages conflict

I'm pretty sure this is what the Millennials call "gaslighting."

 

[tima]

It's in my signature and I give all the credit to a former member who apparently some people don't like? He couldn't have helped me more and made nothing from it. Just simple solutions for maximum value.

I believe you are referring to @ddk, David Karmelli.

 

[Al M.]

I have no problem if people want to make fun of me over this, but I genuinely like musically the Thelma Houston track "I've Got the Music in Me."

I totally love that track! I think it's fantastic. There's some other great songs on that album, too.

 

[pjwd]

Ih

I'm pretty sure this is what the Millennials call "gaslighting."

It was used so much I looked it up a while ago ... 1930 .. not so new
The term “gaslighting” originates in a British play-turned film from the 1930s. The play was called “Gas Light” and the plot is about a husband who mentally and emotionally manipulates his wife into believing she is crazy by changing the intensity of the gas lamps within their home

 

[Argonaut]

Perhaps Ron was alluding to:

‘Gas lighting is the production of artificial light from combustion of a fuel gas such as hydrogen, methane, or natural gas.’

All of which form consistent parts per 100 produced and expelled as a waste product commensurate with Flatulence in Humans !

 

[Rexp]

For recordings that don't sound good on your rig, Led Zep digital for instance, I find they sound more enjoyable on the car radio or Youtube.

 

[Hear Here]

Ok, I'll try to explain what I mean here...
While I certainly don't have the highest-end system, it's ok and it frequently makes me very happy. I use Roon ROCK on an NUC into a NAD Masters Series M50.2 player/vault connected directly to a NAD Masters Series M32 digital integrated amp. That connects to a pair of CSS Criton 2TD-X towers with upgraded crossovers, which are supplemented by a pair of Taket Live supertweeters and Taket WHDpure "woofer hi-definitioners."
On the analog side, I have a heavily-modified Rega table into a Moon preamp with outboard linear power supply, which goes into a line input on the M32.
Cables are Hapa digital and Audio Art analog.
So...I LOVE the sound I get from well-recorded HD downloads (such as the Nagra 70th Anniversary 2xHD Jazz album and Nuvelle's digital offerings) and when listening to those I have no desire to upgrade any gear whatsoever. But I'm left wanting on many of the non-HD digital recordings I own.
Similarly, UHQR vinyl sounds awesome and inevitably takes me where I want to go, but run-of-the-mill vinyl is often meh.
Is some gear simply too unforgiving with mediocre recordings, and can better gear help me find happiness when the recording isn't great or the digital resolution is lower? Or does better gear inevitably result in dissatisfaction with undistinguished recordings and I would be better off just gradually replacing my entire library with HD music?

The trouble is with mediocre equipment, is you never hear the potential of any recording - good or bad. However with high end equipment, at least you hear the good recordings at their best. You can always pass by the poor recordings.

I see you use the NAD M50.2 and M32 - precisely my setup 3 years ago. I upgraded from M32 to M33, which includes a streamer, Dirac Live and has an even better amp technology.

You seem to have relatively inexpensive speakers, perhaps home built as I see a flat-pack version for a little over £1K. It also seems that you've deemed it advantageous to add a super-tweeter and "woofer hi-definitioners", whatever they are!

By contrast, whereas I have almost identical electronics, I've put far more into my speakers (perhaps too much) with Avantgarde Duo XDs, your speaker investment is small and perhaps rather less than up to the job of matching the potential of your electronics – or the better recordings you play through them!

I hate to criticise vinyl users but I often see a hugely costly playback system (and presumably a costly collection of records) and I wonder how much time is actually spent playing these records. Do most owners listen to streamed music (vastly more choice than even the biggest vinyl collection), or do they get up to put on or change a record every 20 minutes each day? I suspect the former, so I've long since ditched vinyl and more recently effectively ditched CDs although I can still play my stored CDs using the now rarely used M50.2.

I see the point of your question. I think most of your kit qualifies for your "great gear" description, but perhaps I would re-arrange my investment by selling all vinly (hardware and software unless you play it daily and can genuinely believe it sounds better), and significantly upgrade the speakers with ones that don't need super-tweeter or any bass enhancement. Next phase, consider upgrading the M32 for M33 as I did 3 years ago. This is a first-class bit of kit at a genuine bargain price - good enough for Stereophile to award it 3 annual "Best of" awards in one year. If you buy used, both a pair of gutsy speakers and an M33 should be spotted at about half their list prices. Note that NAD has announced the M66 that offers all the M33 does, but better all round, except that it has no power amp - it's a streamer / DAC / pre. This will be my next upgrade if it sounds as good as its spec suggests. Good luck.

 

[Al M.]

The trouble is with mediocre equipment, is you never hear the potential of any recording - good or bad. However with high end equipment, at least you hear the good recordings at their best. You can always pass by the poor recordings.

I see you use the NAD M50.2 and M32 - precisely my setup 3 years ago. I upgraded from M32 to M33, which includes a streamer, Dirac Live and has an even better amp technology.

You seem to have relatively inexpensive speakers, perhaps home built as I see a flat-pack version for a little over £1K. It also seems that you've deemed it advantageous to add a super-tweeter and "woofer hi-definitioners", whatever they are!

By contrast, whereas I have almost identical electronics, I've put far more into my speakers (perhaps too much) with Avantgarde Duo XDs, your speaker investment is small and perhaps rather less than up to the job of matching the potential of your electronics – or the better recordings you play through them!

I hate to criticise vinyl users but I often see a hugely costly playback system (and presumably a costly collection of records) and I wonder how much time is actually spent playing these records. Do most owners listen to streamed music (vastly more choice than even the biggest vinyl collection), or do they get up to put on or change a record every 20 minutes each day? I suspect the former, so I've long since ditched vinyl and more recently effectively ditched CDs although I can still play my stored CDs using the now rarely used M50.2.

I see the point of your question. I think most of your kit qualifies for your "great gear" description, but perhaps I would re-arrange my investment by selling all vinly (hardware and software unless you play it daily and can genuinely believe it sounds better), and significantly upgrade the speakers with ones that don't need super-tweeter or any bass enhancement. Next phase, consider upgrading the M32 for M33 as I did 3 years ago. This is a first-class bit of kit at a genuine bargain price - good enough for Stereophile to award it 3 annual "Best of" awards in one year. If you buy used, both a pair of gutsy speakers and an M33 should be spotted at about half their list prices. Note that NAD has announced the M66 that offers all the M33 does, but better all round, except that it has no power amp - it's a streamer / DAC / pre. This will be my next upgrade if it sounds as good as its spec suggests. Good luck.

Vinyl fans do get up to change sides every 20 minutes. Even though I have just CD playback at home, I very much also enjoy the vinyl experience in audiophile friends' homes, and the sound can be awesome too. I find it a bit questionable to recommend to someone to ditch their vinyl collection and gear, just because you did.

Everyone has their own preferences, priorities and tastes, and these more likely than not don't quite align with those of the next person.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I find it a bit questionable to recommend to someone to ditch their vinyl collection and gear, just because you did.

+1

 

[Gregm]

I vote for mediocre recordings with great gear

The trouble is with mediocre equipment, is you never hear the potential of any recording - good or bad.

Exactly. Since the recording / mastering is all we have, wouldn't it make sense to hear as much of recording / mastering as possible? We (I) are (am) after the music, after all

However with high end equipment, at least you hear the good recordings at their best. You can always pass by the poor recordings.

My library is mainly classical, which obviously includes historical performances suboptimally recorded by modern standards, but impossible to ignore. Much of the time, I listen to such recordings.

Invariably, I find that the better the system, better the sonic result -- I.e with the better gear I hear better what was cpatured in the recording. And I wouldn't want to pass by a Furtwangler / Vienna Beethoven 3rd symphony because the sound ain't all that audiophile

Indeed, I have not found that the best setup systems are "unforgiving" and thereby, render bad recordings unlistenable -- the opposite, if anything. Better resolution and less distortion highlight the music just as much as the weaknesses of the recording, but in extracting more information, these systems bring me closer to the music.

 

[Another Johnson]

Back to Diana Krall … I’d never heard of her, and then someone was downsizing, and he gave me a box of music oriented DVDs.

The box included a DVD of Diana Krall playing a concert in her native Canada. I played it on a basic DVD player and a giant rear projection 4x3 format TV (state of the art for 1999) while riding the stationary bike one morning.

I was singularly unimpressed with the artist and the performance. I remember that my thoughts turned to the idea that she was on a forced march rather than pursuing a passion.

Others disagreed with me. And another downsizing friend gave me five or six of her CDs. I enjoyed the CDs far more. The recordings were far better and there was no distracting visual. With DK you have to realize that she is a pianist first and a vocalist after the fact. Her range is limited, but it works well for her total jazz vamp package.

Eventually I bought many of her vinyl albums. And as streaming quality has increased in my system, I’ve occasionally put her digital albums in the queue. I don’t go to her first, but there are times when I like to listen to her.

Wendell Diller noted in one of his Axpona 2023 interviews that the best way to fill a demo room is to put on someone like Diana Krall. And the best way to empty it is to play classical music.

The market speaks.

 

[Gregm]

Wendell Diller noted in one of his Axpona 2023 interviews that the best way to fill a demo room is to put on someone like Diana Krall. And the best way to empty it is to play classical music.

The market speaks.

At Munich Hi-End, Black Sabbath filled the Thrax room as well as the Constellation room. When I say filled, I mean packed. Mahler 2, 1st movement played loud, filled the Voxativ room as well -- only 3-4 people standing, however.

 

[Another Johnson]

And back to the OP. It is actually pretty difficult to get super SQ from any source.

Streaming is deceptively difficult. It is so simple to get started that Alexa can do it. But getting to the upper levels can be exasperating.

CDs may be the least difficult. You get a decent player and decent interconnects, but the rest of the aggravation is pretty much normal system building.

Vinyl is difficult and expensive. I used to think it was the most difficult, but I’ve changed my mind. Every aspect of vinyl, from the cleanliness to the SRA is logical and in the open. There are far more hidden perils to obfuscate a digital stream from a distant service provider.

As for gear, the more heavily modified your gear is, the less likely it is that anyone can remotely advise you about how to improve it. No one who hasn’t been listening to your modified gear has a clue about how to fix its shortcomings.

 

[Al M.]

At Munich Hi-End, Black Sabbath filled the Thrax room as well as the Constellation room. When I say filled, I mean packed. Mahler 2, 1st movement played loud, filled the Voxativ room as well -- only 3-4 people standing, however.

Exactly. In one demo room at THE Show 2023 in SoCal I asked the exhibitor if I could put in my Black Sabbath CD with 'War Pigs' on it, and cranked up the volume. Before the song was over, the room was packed, and you could see from the faces that everyone enjoyed it (it sounded excellent, too, in that room). The guy next to me did some air drumming.

I guess people are just tired of the typical show music and want to hear something they actually can enjoy.

 

[Kingrex]

As my system improved, recordings that I thought were mediocre turned out to be better and better, with some of them actually turning from "mediocre" to great.

Of course, some really crappy recordings didn't get better in any way or, in rare cases, became more unpleasant.

But that second scenario turned out to be much less frequent than the first one.

I noticed this the other day.
Backing up a little, great media is king of the hill. Crap media is crap.
But, I have a ton of old classical records I thought were OK. Just meee.
FF to last weekend, I had a pair of Found Music Blade amps at my house. Holly mother of god. Those amps stomped the crap out of my Dartzeel. Just a completely different presentation. And what do you know about those old classical records. They became pretty magic in playback. The really good ones I have are over the top great now. But the OK ones really came alive.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

I have a decent system, by no means is it top tier gear. I enjoy well recorded music on my modest system.

 

[PeterA]

It's in my signature and I give all the credit to a former member who apparently some people don't like? He couldn't have helped me more and made nothing from it. Just simple solutions for maximum value.

I think the key is we all hear differently and get different auditory pleasures from different things and my system is dialed into what I like. I think it's the combination of bass reflex studio monitors and SET amplification with a great phono preamp that is the secret combo for me. I listen to all non-Diana Krall related forms of music including gothic apocalyptic folk, rap, trip hop, dance, psych along with a bunch of jazz, country and blues. Vinyl only.

Also, I don't know how to describe garbage.... I don't have the vocabulary. But I know it when I hear it. Mostly I know it because I want to turn it off, whereas generally I can listen to music all day.

Many people contact David Karmeli for advice, and he gives it happily. You have put together an excellent system which must sound wonderful, and I suspect your mediocre recordings sound just fine and are very enjoyable. I first heard a pair of similar Mitsubishi Diatones in Utah. They are superb and a local friend here just got a pair with your same Lamm phono. His system also sounds great.

By "garbage", I suspect you simply mean they sound terrible. They do not make you want to listen. There is no need to elaborate beyond that.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Music Blade amps at my house. Those amps stomped the crap out of my Dartzeel. Just a completely different presentation.

As a tube amplifier person, I would say that tube amps can do that! (Different presentation I can understand; "stomped" on darTZeel sounds like an exaggeration.)