2. best-of
  3. 1025872581

Is it possible for something to be the best?

Since there really is not difinative standard when it comes to musical reproduction, is it possible for a piece of equipment to be the best. Or will there ever be "the best system"?
Live music is the sound we are trying to reproduce but even that varies from venue to venue. I'm guessing not many people have actually had a live band/orchestra play in their listening room so to what are we comparing our systems? Can we trust our memory to acurately remind use what a concert we heard several hours, days, or years ago sounded like? Is it realistic to compare my listening room to a $50,000,000 dollar theater designed specificly for the arts?

I'm obviously not suggesting we quit trying but is this hobby/obsession an exercise in futility?
I've been wondering for a long time if the best componant in a great system isn't the listeners imagination. Any comments?
128x128nrchy

Showing 6 responses by nrchy

nrchy's avatar
nrchy OP
2,124 posts
 
Marty, you're God's too small. You need an upgrade!
nrchy's avatar
nrchy OP
2,124 posts
 
Sean, if I asked every maker line level pre-amps which is best each one will have a reason why theirs is it.
I didn't start this thread to make a mockery of all the equipment out there or marginalize everyones system. I just wonder if it's possible for anything to really be the best. As an example; SETs measure badly but sound great, at least to their buyers. If both of those statements are true can SETs ever be considered to be the best?
It has been said that pursuing sensation dulls the feelings. Is pursuing the best system actually dulling our ability to enjoy listening to music?
nrchy's avatar
nrchy OP
2,124 posts
 
I guess the question I was getting at is: can the best still be the best if "best" is subjective. To use the example of AlbertPorters wife. If she is the best wife, she would be the best wife for all of us. Albert can be as fond of her as possible, but does that mean that someone else wouldn't say her bottom end is too loose, or her treble is too shrill, or her midrange is bloated. Is it possible that she is still the best inspite of any one of these other statements also being true.
Does it mean anything if listener #1 says Krell sounds like crap while listener #2 says tubes are just too slow? Speaking in absolute rather than objective terms, of course.
Does the best exist in the real world???
No disrespect to albertporters wife but she was as good an example as was handy at the moment.
nrchy's avatar
nrchy OP
2,124 posts
 
I have been trying to get people to think in absolute terms when they refer to their systems rather than the subjective whims they currently use to describe their obsession. I love to see/hear people actually think. Many of these threads are so meaningless. It's fun to engage in some intelligent intercourse via AudiogoN.
So there is no best pre-amp, or amp, or turntable? What about the Rockport turntable? Does that mean Monet was not the best impressionist painter or Greene and Greene were not the best architects of the prairie/mission style. Can't there be a mathmatical equation to determine the best interconnect?
It just seems as though something must be the best at any given time. Am I wrong again?!?
nrchy's avatar
nrchy OP
2,124 posts
 
HiFifarm; The issue here though is not what I think is the best wine or sex, or system. The issue is what is the best regardless of my opinion. Just because I think something is the best doesn't mean it is. There is a huge difference between my subjective opinion and supported fact.
nrchy's avatar
nrchy OP
2,124 posts
 
Thanks for the input. This was really an interesting discussion. I am delighted to know that I have the best system and the rest of you will have to catch me even if your system is more expensive and measures better. Oh well, I gotta go there's a beautiful woman singing across the room who deserves my attention.
More to discover