Does 'Accuracy' Matter or exist ?


In the realms of audiophilia the word 'accuracy' is much-used. The word is problematical for me.

In optics there was once coined a descriptor known as the ' wobbly stack', signifying a number of inter-dependent variables, and I believe the term has meaning to us audiophiles.

The first wobble is the recording, obviously. How to record (there are many microphones to choose from...), what kind of room to record in (an anechoic recording studio, live environment etc), where to place the chosen microphones, how to equalize the sound,
and, without doubt, the mindsets of all involved. This is a shaky beginning. And the ears and preferences of the engineers/artists involved, and of course the equipment used to monitor the sound: these too exert a powerful front-end influence. Next comes the
mixing (possibly using a different set of speakers to monitor), again (and of course) using personal preferences to make the final adjustments. My thesis would be that many of these 'adjustments' (EQ, reverb etc) again exert a powerful influence.

Maybe not the best start for 'accuracy', but certainly all under the heading of The Creative Process....

And then the playback equipment we all have and love.....turntables, arms, cartridges, digital devices, cables, and last but never least, speakers. Most, if not all, of these pieces of equipment have a specific sonic signature, regardless of the manufacturers' claims for the Absolute Sound. Each and every choice we make is dictated by what? Four things (excluding price): our own audio preferences, our already-existing equipment, most-importantly, our favorite recordings (wobble, wobble), and perhaps aesthetics.

Things are getting pretty arbitrary by this point. The stack of variables is teetering.

And let us not forget about the room we listen in, and the signature this imposes on everything (for as long as we keep the room...)

Is there any doubt why there's so much choice in playback equipment? To read reports and opinions on equipment can leave one in a state of stupefaction; so much that is available promises 'accuracy' - and yet sounds unique?

Out there is a veritable minefield of differing recordings. I have long since come to the conclusion
that some recordings favor specific playback equipment - at least it seems so to me. The best we can do is soldier on, dealing
with this wobby stack of variables, occasionally changing a bit here and there as our tastes change (and, as our Significant Others know, how we suffer.....).

Regardless, I wouldn't change a thing - apart from avoiding the 'accuracy' word. I'm not sure if it means very much to me any more.
I've enjoyed every one of the (many, many) systems I've ever had: for each one there have been some recordings that have stood out as being
simply Very Special, and these have lodged deep in the old memory banks.

But I wonder how many of them have been Accurate........
57s4me

Showing 8 responses by charles1dad

Unsound,
No one here is disregarding accuracy, but merely pointing out the obvious truth that no standard has been(can be?) establish. People often site warm/musical,rich etc. as looking thru "rose colored lens" while ignoring the other spectrum of coloration/aberation i.e. thin,lean,bleached,flat,whitish etc. As if these somehow represent accuracy, no way jose. For me ,the quest has been toward what sounds natural and realistic(personal preferences no question).
2nd request, would someone from the"accuracy" camp kindly give us an example of a suitably accurate component or system that satifies their requirements?
Shadorne,
There`s no absolute standard to judge accuracy in home audio systems/components for the very reasons mentioned in 57s4me`s fine post. Far too many variables and manipulations are involved in the sound reproduction chain to declare anything as accurate. By it`s very nature the performance of audio components is relative, subjective and just based on individual perception(which is just fine with me). Measurements are woefully inadequate(here we go again!) when trying to explain what it is we hear and respond emotionally to(music afterall is an artform that people connect to). What measurements are you aware of that provide indisputable standards for accuracy? When all is said and done the vast majority of music lovers/ audiophiles will rely on their ears, as they should.
Jax2,
Thanks for the compliment.
Your example of SET amps is right. After owning various SS and PP Tube amps, I settled down with an SET amplifier simply because it sounds closer to the live jazz acoustic music I adore. I don`t doubt that it would measure worse than any of my previous amps at all.
Unsound and Shadorne,
Could you two give us examples of the accurate components you`re referring to,much appreciated.
Thanks,
Onhwy61,
He has A very nice system, as do many of the other posters on this fun thread. But what makes his system anymore "accurate" than the others?
Learsfool,
Well said indeed, my only point with the accuracy via measurements position is that over reliance on measurements rather than one`s ears is folly. Measurements certainly have a contribution, but pale in comparision to what one can hear(the obvious end result). There are no measurements I`m aware of that when met will reliably ensure good sound. At this point in time our ears are superior to a lab or test bench.