How do you know when you are done?

[Ron Resnick]

I guess you could cross the financial barrier like the Federal Government has by spending way more than they can realistically afford.

Doesn't almost everybody do this?

Probably a choice only made by governments and fools. I'll leave it at that.

Uh-oh

 

[cjfrbw]

Here's a very strange discussion popping out of a random listen to a you tube video between Jordan Maxwell (an exotic Woo 'conspiracy theorist') and a religion based host. At about 38 minutes or so into the video, they get into a discussion of tonalities in words and music and eventually start discussing vinyl records vs. digital.

These guys aren't audiophiles, they are philosopher types from a different perspective, yet they think that vinyl is better because of its mechanical vibratory frequency base vs. digital (cyber), which is artificial. They think that digital is dangerous and even destructive to the brain and nervous system.

I have absolutely no idea why they went there from what they were discussing. No, I don't think that digital is dangerous, but their out of left field emphasis and reasoning on natural tonality of the 'mechanical' reproduction of vinyl was kind of interesting, as was the sound reinforcements from environments like cathedrals.

It was interesting to me because these are not specifically audiophiles but come from it from their different direction. (Of course, even a little crazy to some).

 

[Rexp]

Here's a very strange discussion popping out of a random listen to a you tube video between Jordan Maxwell (an exotic Woo 'conspiracy theorist') and a religion based host. At about 38 minutes or so into the video, they get into a discussion of tonalities in words and music and eventually start discussing vinyl records vs. digital.

These guys aren't audiophiles, they are philosopher types from a different perspective, yet they think that vinyl is better because of its mechanical vibratory frequency base vs. digital (cyber), which is artificial. They think that digital is dangerous and even destructive to the brain and nervous system.

I have absolutely no idea why they went there from what they were discussing. No, I don't think that digital is dangerous, but their out of left field emphasis and reasoning on natural tonality of the 'mechanical' reproduction of vinyl was kind of interesting, as was the sound reinforcements from environments like cathedrals.

It was interesting to me because these are not specifically audiophiles but come from it from their different direction. (Of course, even a little crazy to some).

Was the introduction of digital that led to bad sound a cock up or a conspiracy to remove individualism from humans. Certainly musical instrument sales are plummeting and high-end audio is a dead man walking.

 

[cjfrbw]

Was the introduction of digital that led to bad sound a cock up or a conspiracy to remove individualism from humans. Certainly musical instrument sales are plummeting and high-end audio is a dead man walking.

It was kind of strange that audio went from tubes and vinyl until solid state, CD's and digital means of sound manipulation came on the stage, to create a sonic desert for a long time until analog was 'rediscovered' and philes started going back to the record stacks.
Oddly enough, when vinyl started 'competing' again with digital, digital mysteriously got much better sometime around 2010 to the present.

I suppose the conspiracy theorist could say this was purposeful retuning of musicality into something raspier or less natural for the consumer as a form of social disharmony or even psychic damage, barring consumers from a more natural and human experience, as Jordan Maxwell suggests. I don't know that I would go quite that far, though, but it is odd.

Or, it was just a misguided technical evolution that accidentally wasn't so great as it was represented but commercially held sway. I wonder why the 'improved' digital wasn't technically available much sooner as it should have been, or were the industry forces involved purposely steered to substitute a less musical or harmonious mass media product.

 

[microstrip]

Was the introduction of digital that led to bad sound a cock up or a conspiracy to remove individualism from humans.

Surely. In September 1972 the link from Broadcasting House to the Wrotham transmitter was switched to a PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) digital system. Immediately the London and South East England population started hating music and probably the mental health of people suffered ... .

Certainly musical instrument sales are plummeting and high-end audio is a dead man walking.

The reasons for the decline of instrument sales are well studied and are due in large part to budget cuts in music schools, not to digital. School program cuts are the real reason for the loss of interest in orchestral music in many countries. The days when Fermi could ask questions on the number of piano tuners to his students are gone since long.

BTW, forecasts to high-end are promising, although the geographical center of gravity of sales is moving.

 

[Al M.]

It was kind of strange that audio went from tubes and vinyl until solid state, CD's and digital means of sound manipulation came on the stage, to create a sonic desert for a long time until analog was 'rediscovered' and philes started going back to the record stacks.
Oddly enough, when vinyl started 'competing' again with digital, digital mysteriously got much better sometime around 2010 to the present.

I suppose the conspiracy theorist could say this was purposeful retuning of musicality into something raspier or less natural for the consumer as a form of social disharmony or even psychic damage, barring consumers from a more natural and human experience, as Jordan Maxwell suggests. I don't know that I would go quite that far, though, but it is odd.

Or, it was just a misguided technical evolution that accidentally wasn't so great as it was represented but commercially held sway. I wonder why the 'improved' digital wasn't technically available much sooner as it should have been, or were the industry forces involved purposely steered to substitute a less musical or harmonious mass media product.

A few issues with this reasoning:

1. There were major efforts by the high-end industry to improve digital as soon as it was introduced. The effort seemed relatively linear, not with a big jump around 2010. The *result* may have made a big jump by then, but the effort did not, it was continuously evolving.

2. Audiophiles who were vinyl lovers mostly did not abandon the medium but held on to it the entire time. The general public abandoned vinyl for a long time, many audiophiles did not.

3. The vinyl resurgence after 2010 was mainly *not* a resurgence of analog. Most modern vinyl is based on digital sources and thus is not genuinely an analog experience.

Of course there are great all-analog efforts such as The Original Source by Deutsche Grammophon or the Tone Poet series by Blue Note, but in terms of sales these are fringe.

4. Yes, there were commercial forces behind the release of the CD medium, but it did not originate from a conspiracy to release a "worse" medium. On the contrary, recording engineers were genuinely interested in a better -- not just more convenient -- medium than analog. That was the original interest behind digital. This becomes clear once you read up on the history of digital recording.

Sure, mistakes were made in the beginning and commercial interests were laid on top of the effort, but that is human nature.

And don't forget that while audiophiles were reluctant and skeptical, digital would not have become the rousing success that it was if the general public did not perceive it as truly better sound. They did, by a wide margin.

On non-audiophile systems, where you did not hear the digital gremlins and where vinyl was just so-so, digital indeed was better. I had a number of friends and colleagues that clearly were convinced of the sonic superiority of digital at the time, no questions asked, and so was I until I got into audiophilia and was not. I did stick with digital, for a number of reasons -- and now that it has developed to the level it did I am really happy with it.

 

[Al M.]

Your loss.

Tom

Having heard high-end streaming many times in other systems I know what I am missing. For my own personal way of listening, not much.

To each their own. No loss for me.

 

[Al M.]

The reasons for the decline of instrument sales are well studied and are due in large part to budget cuts in music schools, not to digital. School program cuts are the real reason for the loss of interest in orchestral music in many countries.

And young musicians are as good as ever, if not better than ever. See my concert report here (#1090):

Recent Concerts You've Enjoyed

Thought this might be a fun thread and a way to find out about acts on tour. My wife and I saw the Smoke Fairies at the Tractor Tavern last evening as the opening act for Rasputina. The Smoke Fairies are a 'folk blues' duo from Wales and have been described as "Bob Dylan's dream." I thought...

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[wil]

Having heard high-end streaming many times in other systems I know what I am missing. For my own personal way of listening, not much.

To each their own. No loss for me.

Reading this thread and many others on this forum make me reflect on the very name of this place: "What's Best." While I'm sure "what's best" is effective for propagation through the Google algorithms, it strikes a (regrettable) chord which resonates with the human (especially male) need to be "best" or more specifically "better" than... No doubt it's a similar dynamic on car, boat, etc forums.

 

[Zuman]

For me, the "joy of hifi" is primarily comprised of the following factors:
1) Enjoyment - on both a superficial and a deep level - of music
2) Enjoyment of "sound," as in the effect that tones, rhythm, etc., have on me, as facilitated by my sense of hearing (Beethoven enjoyed music after he could no longer hear it)
3) Enjoyment of aesthetics and craftsmanship; the sense of "rightness" of design
4) Satisfaction of ownership - the knowledge that one has acquired something special
5) Pleasure in the creative process of developing a system - the fun of the challenge (assess/plan/act/accomplish).
I've noted before that - in my case - these factors can be trumped by others, such as marriage, children, career, and other priorities that can take precedence. I was willing to give up on the pursuit of most of the above when providing for, raising, and enjoying my daughters was the center of my world. During that time I did not feel unfulfilled due to my lack of a great system or time to listen; my "fulfillment needs" were simply filled by other aspects of life. Similarly, when achieving career goals and mission was all-consuming, I didn't feel much of a hole in my life due to the absence of hifi. I was just "filled-up" with other stuff.
I think that hifi is a "hobby" when it entails pursuit, such as chasing that elusive "absolute sound," not just achieving passive enjoyment. I don't consider just doing things that make one happy to be hobbies.
So...I don't think that I will ever actually know when I'm done with hifi as a hobby. I think that other aspects of life will just begin to take priority at some point.

 

[Elliot G.]

Just curious, you seem to prefer digital demos, not having a turntable would be a good reason.

I made my choice a long time ago. I had over 6000 records , a Keith Monks record cleaner, all kinds of gadgets and stuff, and finally I decided for me that this was not the way I wanted to go. In my experience most records sounded lousy and out of my collection about 10 percent were worthy of playing on my gear. This is my reality. I also have limited time to listen and I want to use that time wisely. I am not saying that CD's were better because at that time I didn't believe that either but it made no sense to me to have all this stuff to compare one format to another. I want to listen to music not the gear and not the formats. You may feel differently and for sure there are many here that like that stuff.
I as you know am a dealer and do a little distribution as well. From my years of making my living doing this I am here to serve those that buy from me. Clients overwhelmingly want ease of use and convenience as well as good sound. Turntables are ( sorry but mostly true) science experiments in many minds. These strange weird art with arms and gadgets and wires and expensive cartridges etc. This is fine if that is what you want, but its not for everyone and in fact the TT situation has gotten really pricey and crazy along the path. To each his own. I have said this many many times and for anyone that has been here or knows me this is my routine. I sit in a comfortable low backed chair, in my treated room ( that I designed) with my cell phone as a Roon remote and a volume control remote for my preamp. I sit on my ass, don't get up, and take my musical mystery tour whenever I am in that space. The lights are out , the door is closed and its cool and dark and quiet and comfortable. I can't do that with any other format other than streaming. I prefer Qobuz BTW. I never know where I will end and sometimes find the beginning difficult as well .
My system is my time traveling device and it takes me wherever I want to go whenever I sit in the chair. This is what I want and many of my clients enjoy taking similar journey's. You can however know that some of them want to play records, like Franz or Mike etc. and I never ever disparage that and when asked will do my very best to help them in that area if I can. I love music and this is what works for me. I took the leap bought the worlds best digital playback system for me and have enjoyed the hell out of it for quite a while. I may sell it sometime or not but for now its the best I have experienced and I am happy, not listening to gear, or A/B stuff . I 'd rather listen and play golf !

 

[Elliot G.]

footnote
Digital is its own kettle of fish and the path to digital nirvana is very different than that of analog. The noise conundrum is something that very few have addressed and many who don't like digital have no understanding or experience in. Not a criticism only the facts. You need to optimise the format that you choose and I see many that like records don't do the same with their digital, Whether this is by choice or not knowing I don't know .
I do find much of the criticism flawed, this applies to almost all audio .

By the way this and other topics that do not address the gear will be part of the HiFi 5 weekly roundtable talk show starting next month live on YOUTUBE

 

[dcathro]

A few issues with this reasoning:

1. There were major efforts by the high-end industry to improve digital as soon as it was introduced. The effort seemed relatively linear, not with a big jump around 2010. The *result* may have made a big jump by then, but the effort did not, it was continuously evolving.

2. Audiophiles who were vinyl lovers mostly did not abandon the medium but held on to it the entire time. The general public abandoned vinyl for a long time, many audiophiles did not.

3. The vinyl resurgence after 2010 was mainly *not* a resurgence of analog. Most modern vinyl is based on digital sources and thus is not genuinely an analog experience.

Of course there are great all-analog efforts such as The Original Source by Deutsche Grammophon or the Tone Poet series by Blue Note, but in terms of sales these are fringe.

4. Yes, there were commercial forces behind the release of the CD medium, but it did not originate from a conspiracy to release a "worse" medium. On the contrary, recording engineers were genuinely interested in a better -- not just more convenient -- medium than analog. That was the original interest behind digital. This becomes clear once you read up on the history of digital recording.

Sure, mistakes were made in the beginning and commercial interests were laid on top of the effort, but that is human nature.

And don't forget that while audiophiles were reluctant and skeptical, digital would not have become the rousing success that it was if the general public did not perceive it as truly better sound. They did, by a wide margin.

On non-audiophile systems, where you did not hear the digital gremlins and where vinyl was just so-so, digital indeed was better. I had a number of friends and colleagues that clearly were convinced of the sonic superiority of digital at the time, no questions asked, and so was I until I got into audiophilia and was not. I did stick with digital, for a number of reasons -- and now that it has developed to the level it did I am really happy with it.

Digital's success inspired the improvement of vinyl replay. The improvement in analog reproduction since the 80's has been dramatic.

 

[microstrip]

A few issues with this reasoning:

1. There were major efforts by the high-end industry to improve digital as soon as it was introduced. The effort seemed relatively linear, not with a big jump around 2010. The *result* may have made a big jump by then, but the effort did not, it was continuously evolving.

For me the big jump was in the middle 90's when Mark Levinson introduced the ML30/ML31 transport and DAC. It opened the digital gate to high-end - it could sit side by side with a top turntable.

2. Audiophiles who were vinyl lovers mostly did not abandon the medium but held on to it the entire time. The general public abandoned vinyl for a long time, many audiophiles did not.

Yes.

3. The vinyl resurgence after 2010 was mainly *not* a resurgence of analog. Most modern vinyl is based on digital sources and thus is not genuinely an analog experience.

The vinyl resurgence is mainly a social and behavior affair, not an analog affair.

Of course there are great all-analog efforts such as The Original Source by Deutsche Grammophon or the Tone Poet series by Blue Note, but in terms of sales these are fringe.

Surely great sounding recordings, but mainly audiophile or collector sales. If the recording companies released the high-rez digital versions of the masters of these recordings we could have the "compares" that some audiophiles love.

4. Yes, there were commercial forces behind the release of the CD medium, but it did not originate from a conspiracy to release a "worse" medium. On the contrary, recording engineers were genuinely interested in a better -- not just more convenient -- medium than analog. That was the original interest behind digital. This becomes clear once you read up on the history of digital recording.

In fact, digital it is considered a better medium. But dependent on implementation, as all other mediums. Most tape sessions I listened were poor - amateur machines with significant scrape flutter and loss of high frequency. But the few times the machine and the tapes were first quality it is a very enjoyable quality experience.

Sure, mistakes were made in the beginning and commercial interests were laid on top of the effort, but that is human nature.

Mistakes and ignorance - a new medium with much higher information capability needed a fresh approach in recording. Most recording engineers were not prepared to handle it.

And don't forget that while audiophiles were reluctant and skeptical, digital would not have become the rousing success that it was if the general public did not perceive it as truly better sound. They did, by a wide margin.

Well, it was an easy win. The pressing quality of most vinyl was miserable by that time. I remember returning the same LP three times and giving up.

On non-audiophile systems, where you did not hear the digital gremlins and where vinyl was just so-so, digital indeed was better. I had a number of friends that clearly were convinced of the sonic superiority of digital at the time, no questions asked, and so was I until I got into audiophilia and was not. I did stick with digital, for a number of reasons.

Shostakovitch complex symphonies pushed me in CD. I started listening to them in the system of an older professor including a Meridiam 508 CD player and Quad ESL63. Once I experienced the whole information I could get from the CDs I found hard to return to the added vinyl artifacts, particularly at the end of the LP sides.

 

[Al M.]

footnote
Digital is its own kettle of fish and the path to digital nirvana is very different than that of analog. The noise conundrum is something that very few have addressed and many who don't like digital have no understanding or experience in. Not a criticism only the facts.

I agree with that and have addressed the noise problem extensively in my system.

You need to optimise the format that you choose and I see many that like records don't do the same with their digital, Whether this is by choice or not knowing I don't know .
I do find much of the criticism flawed, this applies to almost all audio .

Yes, I suspect many just don't have a clue how good digital can sound.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I made my choice a long time ago. I had over 6000 records , a Keith Monks record cleaner, all kinds of gadgets and stuff, and finally I decided for me that this was not the way I wanted to go. In my experience most records sounded lousy and out of my collection about 10 percent were worthy of playing on my gear. This is my reality. I also have limited time to listen and I want to use that time wisely.

when i asked Elliot about how my records sounded when he visited me, he commented they sounded great, but that i only played my good sounding records.

hard to make a case when the mind set has already decided that most records sound lousy. and what your ears tell you gets marginalized.

the facts are that a much higher percentage of my pressings are outstanding than digital discs or files.

For me the big jump was in the middle 90's when Mark Levinson introduced the ML30/ML31 transport and DAC. It opened the digital gate to high-end - it could sit side by side with a top turntable.

it could sit there and look pretty, but not come close to the vinyl performance.

when the ML30/ML31 came out i owned the big boy ML32 pre/ML33 mono blocks. so at my dealer i did listen to the 30/31 a good deal. it was very good. but i preferred the elegant diminutive Linn CD-12 which i bought. later i upgraded to the Emm Labs dac and transport, which was even better.

the big Mark Levinson digital units were beautiful, works of art really. but their performance was merely very good to my ears, just like the Tenor OTL integrated sounding much better than the ML 32/33. YMMV.

My Basis 2500 tt plus Graham arm and Koetsu RSP and Aesthetix Io phono was much better than any of those, then later my Rockport Sirius III tt was much, much better.

The vinyl resurgence is mainly a social and behavior affair, not an analog affair.

ha.

In fact, digital it is considered a better medium.

better for commerce.....maybe.

Once I experienced the whole information I could get from the CDs I found hard to return to the added vinyl artifacts, particularly at the end of the LP sides.

much prefer the more complete lively picture of vinyl. more details too.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Turntables are ( sorry but mostly true) science experiments in many minds. These strange weird art with arms and gadgets and wires and expensive cartridges etc. This is fine if that is what you want, but its not for everyone and in fact the TT situation has gotten really pricey and crazy along the path. To each his own (...)

Touché, as they say in fencing. I really enjoy tuning a turntable like if it was a precision instrument - understanding the why's of each step, looking for a perfect geometry. Tuning each tower of an Oracle to a precise slightly different frequency with the help of an accelerometer and a FFT analyzer and listening for the sound improvements were great times!

 

[microstrip]

(...) the facts are that a much higher percentage of my pressings are outstanding than digital discs or files. (...)

Your pressings were mostly selected or bought from people with proper knowledge ... But I am curious on knowing how you carry statistics in tens of millions files!

it could sit there and look pretty, but not come close to the vinyl performance.

It is not its objective. Apples versus oranges.

ha.

???

better for commerce.....maybe.

Yes, also for commerce.

much prefer the more complete lively picture of vinyl. more details too.

Ok. Not you, but many prefer recordings to live performances. Or vinyl to tape. Vinyl mastering usually enhances reality.

 

[Al M.]

ha.

Are you denying that for the most part the current vinyl resurgence is a digital affair?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Are you denying that for the most part the current vinyl resurgence is a digital affair?

there are many different threads to the vinyl resurgence. not just one, or two, or five. not simple to define.

if you squint and reduce it to pressings based on current digitally recorded pop music then that is one thread. another related thread is pressings based on current high quality jazz digital recordings.

then there are current reissues of analog recordings both current and vintage.

if you go back to the mid 90's and look at many high quality re-issues of still fresh tape based recordings that is another.

if you look at acquisition of golden age pressing collections from the billions of existing pressings that is another.

then you can talk about genres of music and collecting those and each one has different things going on.

so which case are you making? broad brushes are not very accurate.