Hey lookee there, Charlie made a funny! Your gold star and wax clown lips are on the way in the mail to you now! Congratulations.
C5150 - "100% Truth" is entirely relative. Put 100 people in a room. Play some music on a stage in front. Ask the 100 people to recount what happened, or what it sounded like, or what the people on stage looked like, or what the room was like....you'll likely not get any 100% truth from your queries. So which "truth" should 'audio' be looking to duplicate...whose truth...whose ears? Stand a different spot in the room, sit in a different chair in the orchestra, and the performance sounds different. Peoples hearing is different. What different people pay attention to and recall is different. The "truth on the master tapes? Played through what? In what room, to whose ears? What if you don't like "The Truth"? What if you can't handle "The Truth"?!!! The concept of objective truth is boring and sterile and has nothing to do with music or art. To illustrate that you chould use the film analogy again and look at Andy Warhols documentary of, I think it was the Empire State Building. He put a camera on a tripod and filmed the building from the same vantage point for many hours without moving the camera or tripod. That's the entire film. That's the truth. That's Andy's truth. I doubt many of us would be interested to watch it for very long. What's your truth? What's wrong with a "wild discussion"...it actually makes you think a bit...stretch your imagination...step out of the box.
I agree with you, BTW...seeking 100% truth in audio reproduction is chasing a carrot on a stick attached to your head. An imaginary carrot at that! Seek out what you enjoy the most, and stick with it. If you can manage it, enjoy what you have..that's a real gift! Not too difficult actually.
Ah, but you see I have the whole ensemble; the lips, the round rubber nose, clown shoes....I've got the whole Bozo thing going on! As Tvad indicated, I'm sure folks would appreciate if you had something more to contribute aside from your snide comments. What have you got to say about the subject at hand, besides the fact that you are not a member of the jax2 fan club?
Jax2....let me give you some 100%. You really nice guy you. You, I wish I was there to share my passion . Take that buddy and watch your smile ...
Ok ...100% fact that we are just talking about the subject was my point.
Truth does exist 100% . I bet you can find me a 100% lie. It is relative only because out of the 100 people in a room only 1-2 will look through the lies to uncover the truth. The rest believe that what is .."is" They are happy to take someone elses truth and make thier own. It takes somebody really different to search and search to constantly keep uncovering more truth through the maze of lies. Fear will keep you from moving on.
The reason one cannot handle the truth is a fairly simple one . He is just not aware of it. In order to confront anything you have to know something about it . A very few lead the rest follow. The followers make the most noise I'm afraid...
This has been discussed/argued so many times and there is no resolution. Perception is not reality, and reality cannot be subjective. People too often confuse opinion for fact. Just because 20 people in a room describe an event differently does not change the event. It simply points out the amount of error taking place in peoples minds, and their inability to explain their perceptions. Most of the people in that room will be wrong when they relate their experience. That does not take anything away from the event, it simply proves human fallability.
The big issue arises when people who were not in the room try to explain as authorities what took place there because they heard a recording of the event.
Charlie it might be a step in the right direction. BUT ANYWAY, do you have something to offer to the discussion?
To illustrate that you chould use the film analogy again and look at Andy Warhols documentary of, I think it was the Empire State Building. He put a camera on a tripod and filmed the building from the same vantage point for many hours without moving the camera or tripod. That's the entire film. That's the truth. That's Andy's truth. I doubt many of us would be interested to watch it for very long. What's your truth? What's wrong with a "wild discussion"...it actually makes you think a bit...stretch your imagination...step out of the box.
I'm not tooo fast . but will get there.
I'm so far out of the box that you should stay away.
You see you are absolutely right about my truth, Andy's truh and your truth. So much that when someone says that component A kills B then he is imposing their truth on you . You will never get to the bottom of anything that way.
Making this a wild discussion about the subject ....and not the subject. 100%
Perceptions are reality. Without sight ,smell,touch ......you would not be able to perceive the physical universe which you are supposed to confront. The problem with humans are they don't intrepret thier perceptions right. A computor is said to be smart. Well if i look at it I'm convinced that if I give it a problem that it will give me the right answer. If I ask a human he will probably error.
A human built the computor. A human has a problem and needs a calculator to solve the humans problem . No it's a tool that adds. The human punches up the keys and waits for an answer ...which then human will evaluate and use it. Put in the wrong info you will get the wrong answer. Nothing wrong with human or machine. Human nature is perfect . The guys with the wrong view point are perpetuating errors. In order to fix the problem we must apply and do. We have instead , thought of a better way. Blame the other guy and that relieves us of the responsibilty of putting in ethics to fix our problems. You see everyone is eager to push his reality on the other but won't fix up his own inorder to present it without confusion.
The big issue arises when people who were not in the room try to explain as authorities what took place there because they heard a recording of the event.
Let me give you an example. If real chef looks at a receipe and then watches a tape of beginners he could see the ones that understood the fundemental points of putting a dish together. If you do not preheat the oven ...you will not get the results starting off with a hot oven.
I do not need to be in the room with you. Rambling on about tubes and ss and tt ...is like beef vs veal . Show me how your going to handle and apply the technique. You guys are stuck on canadien vs usa prime vs french. I need to see who will apply the tech of the roasting method.
When I see the set up of some hi-fi then ...how do you know my sound will suck. I apply the tech my friends. Your pictures tell a thousand realities.
Perception is not reality, and reality cannot be subjective. People too often confuse opinion for fact.
Perhaps not, but 'perception' is all any of us have. It is how we experience 'reality'. Absolutely agreed, people frequently confuse their own opinions, but I'm not sure about "fact"...I think they confuse their opinions with opinions that they think everyone should have, or would have given the same experience.
Just because 20 people in a room describe an event differently does not change the event.
No, as above, it shows how strongly we rely on our perception, and how each individuals percetion of an event is entirely subjective. The audio industry is producing this stuff because human beings buy it to reproduce music in their homes...not in order to recreate perfect sine waves. Human beings are the target market, not computers and machines.
As far as there being some objective "Truth" or "Reality", Rene Descartes makes a pretty formidable argument that the concept is not so cut and dry. Since I can only view the world through my own experience, I cannot fathom why I should try to force myself into accepting some other "truth" to be my own, or worse yet, become a machine (impossible anyway, of course - where would the wax clown lips go?) that had no such subjective perceptions as I do as a human.
It simply points out the amount of error taking place in peoples minds, and their inability to explain their perceptions. Most of the people in that room will be wrong when they relate their experience. That does not take anything away from the event, it simply proves human fallability.
And again, my entire point. NONE of those people are WRONG, they presumably relayed the event exactly (or as closely as possible) as they perceived it. It does not even have to be about "fallabilty" or mistakes. From one vantage point in a room even an objective recording machine will record the event differently (it may sound different and appear different) than another machine positioned somewhere else in the room. Mike the event at the source, mike it a few feet out, mike it at the back, or the side of the room, and you have many different sounding recordings. Same thing if a person stands in those places. Ditto they will see the event differently from a different angle.
C5150 - Thank you, I enjoyed your posts as well. My point is there is no 100% truth and 100% lie - it is all entirely relative to the one perceiving it. If there is some "objective truth", I'm not sure why it matters as each of us will have our own version of it anyway...we cannot help it, we are human. How can you say one or the other of us is "wrong" in conveying their experience of something...that's how they perceived it! Then in turn you are saying it is "wrong" to experience the world as a human being, and that we should be more like machines. I do not find that an admirable quality. Good to hear you're out - stay out of the box my friend!
Furthermore; in the case of music it is the vibrations that we are responding to. It is precisely because we are human that we have any response to this stuff at all. We ascribe some meaning to those responses...good, bad, warm, cold, green, blue, mother-in-law, pumpkin. We are reacting to the vibrations of the music and making meaning from that reaction. Each of us responds entirely uniquely to the same set of vibrations/sounds. A machine may react to the music by recording data, or performing some other programed response, but it cannot and will not experience any feelings, or ascribe any meaning to the experience of the music. It will have no desire for more bass. It will not prefer Bach over Greenday. Are audio manufacturers designing for machines or for people? I think the latter as their the ones with the wallets. It's like asking a computer to taste test some wine...I'm sure some geek is working on that angle as well if it hasn't been done already, but really, what real use is it? Perhaps that it may help sell more bottles of some wines because some zombies need to have someone else tell them what they should enjoy, and what they should not.
The problem with humans are they don't intrepret thier perceptions right. A computor is said to be smart. Well if i look at it I'm convinced that if I give it a problem that it will give me the right answer. If I ask a human he will probably error.
There is a WORLD of difference between the answer to a mathematic equation and the feelings a human being experiences when listening to music. In terms of interpreting one's perceptions I say there is no right or wrong. I do not ask another to tell me what I should be feeling or what I should enjoy. It is not the simple solution to an equation. It is infinitely more complex, and layered, and dependent upon variables, both tangible (the space, the intruments, the temperature, etc.) and intangable (the baggage we each come with..the filters through which we perceive the world). It is a sad concept to want to break down those complexities into numbers and some concept of right and wrong.
Re: your example of cooking. Try to get a machine to prepare a gourmet meal. Again, probably someone already working on it, but I doubt it will be as effective as a master chef. Even if it were, and again, I go back to perception, how a group of individuals enjoy the final product (the food in this case) is entirely subjective and individual. There is no right or wrong there either, regardless of technique. Some folks like it, others may not.
Look at this point of view. Who is using the perceptions. When you turn on the "sound " or whatever you are perceiving, You are looking from the point of view of you. med-rare is it. Med-well is good but you would pay a 5 star pro to mess up your choice. Yor reality is your 100% truth. All we need to is to agree somewhat on the function rather then the tools. Then we will all be on the same page without the confusion.
Hey you could walk into a guys room listen and figure ...He's stuck in the 70's with treble on max and the bass 3/4 of the way. Full volume on Zep and have a smile ear to ear. You can never match the reality of the tool (components ) only the function. We do don't boil prime steaks.
I don't know that I agree with your last statement C5150. I'm not sure what your point is there either. I'm not sure that all we need to do is agree on the fucntion. I may prefer a different rendition from a specific album than you prefer...perhaps I like the warmth of tubes and you like the detail and muscle of SS. I don't see either as having anything to do with an objective "truth", either yours or mine. It is simply what either of us prefer in the moment. It may change as well...maybe a year from now I tire of tubes and am swayed by SS. What does that indicate about the "goal of audio" as the original post asks? The "function" of this stuff is to bring music into our homes, and to provide enjoyment for us in doing so. Beyond that, every person has a different set of preferences which may or may not be suited by a given manufacturers answers, no matter how good the manufacturer is. Not everyone strives for the experience of "live music" in their home, while others may think "live" to sound a different way than you or me might. Tubes/SS, Med-Rare/Well Done, crank bass/no tone controls, vanilla/chocolate, Lamm/Pioneer, Dinner at 21 Club /Dinner at McDonalds. No decision is right or wrong or objectively "better" than the other. If there were one singular goal of any of these things, there would be far fewer alternatives and variations available. It is the fact that the world, and the people in it, are so diverse, and so in flux, that creates markets with such a tremendous variety to choose from.
Fire was dicovered and it's function is being and will be used. The atom or the molecule of the discovery of the " what is fire" has nothing to do with it.
Function is superiour to structure. All dicoveries that man made ...electricity ,stereo etc... are more the function then structure.Measuring or knowing the exact hz don't mean a thing as long as i can manipulate it. Knowing an absolute measurement is not of any help.
The stuff that brings the music into the home is structure. Totally useless.
Don't confuse the component with med -rare. Component = meat ...med rare is the function. It is grilled that way.
Take a structure, steak, And grill it ...communication and function. You now have a griiled med -rare.
When we try to say everyone has different tastes and there is no right or wrong . I think what your trying to say is he can boil his steak if he want's to . If it is right for him ..it is. YES. But don't come onto a site that is doing grilling and saying boiled is the same because i have rights.
Hi-fi is a tech ,a methode a right way of obtaining a sound. Buying a $$$$ does not give you that right.
Freedom is one thing ...political correctness is another and hi-fi does have a definition which is very ,very loose .Therefore all this confusion.
I want you to describe the perfect way to grill a steak. 1) best piece of meat. 2) spices 3) hot BBQ.....4) you get the funtion and I can teach most.
Audiogon and structure
Well in order to grill steak. 10 onces...34939429348283939929292 molecules. gravity stable. Born in russia and fed in US. Grain fed and was allowed to "free range" .....who cares. If you can't cook it to perfection . Burned steak is crap.
So THAT's where you've been hiding audio nirvana. And all this time, I've been looking in the wrong place. Charlie101, you gonna join us for a listening session?
Ol' Chuck 101 has clearly been doing some searching for it himself since he's obviously got his head buried deep up his own dark cavity, and has yet to contribute anything here beyond what he's found up there!
If the end result connects me emotionally to the music, and I can transfer the intentions of the composer, musician(s), engineer and producer, so that an honest, accurate, representation of the event, live or otherwise, is conveyed, then the combination of recording, media, system, time, place and mood have achieved their goal, and I am happy.
I know i sound like some machine on a machanical or mathematical end.
Eating boiled steak can emotionally connect you to life too. Grilled steak has a purpose. Boiled has one too,only we are audiophiles who practice hi-fi. Just because you produce sound doesn't make you a practitioner.
To just say conveys 100% emotion. If you don't involve 100% of the art "hi-fi" you won't convey the maximum anything.
This is the equivalent of buying a car and joining the mechanics of Ferrari and all race car drivers site....and asking how do they cope with traffic and do they also put candy in thier ashtrays.
What's all this crap about par-boiled steaks and race car mechanics. Y'er loosing me C5150. Practicioners of the high-art of the kingdom of audiophiledom?! Do I get a gold, jewel-encrusted ring with the seal of the brotherhood emblazoned atop? I tell you, the more I've gotten that far obsessed in this hobby, the more I pity those who actually stay there - at least for me, it takes me so far away from the actual music itself which was the whole reason I got into it in the first place. I suppose there is enjoyment to be had at the level of the gear and tweaking, but for me that pales in comparison to the music. Perhaps for others it is of equal or greater enjoyment. I'd just like to get it out of the way and get on with the music. Still, I have a very low tolerance for mediocrity. I guess I try to keep the former in balance, but every once in a while I notice myself getting obsessed with the minutia and not enjoying the music and I have to go take a cold shower and flog myself with a barbed wire whip, then roll around in rock-salt. Works for me. Perhaps I should follow that all up by getting aged fillet mignon and boiling it till it's grey.
Hey now that i got the pebble in between my teeth....do you want it back
I got into it for the music as well . Then ,as any guy here I started to fool around and tweak and tune and there it was....how to fill your room with so much hollographic music and sound that it just blew my mind.
I used to own a 100k plus system but sold it here on the Gon. You know set up wth all the bells and whistles ,a al hi-fi . Now that I fell into another way of presenting a better sonic "whole" . Nothing to do wih plug and play.
I guess if you own a stereo you qualify ,but why dump on bose then?
I guess if you own a stereo you qualify ,but why dump on bose then?
Touche! I dump on Bose because I know that for the same amount of money you can have a much more rewarding investment. But that's just my opinion, as is everything I'm putting out here. I am not under the illusion that my opinion should be applicable to everyone. Fact is there's nothing really wrong with Bose that a sledgehammer and a dumpster wouldn't fix. Oh damn, there I go again. I didn't learn the lesson you were teaching. Back in the early 80's when I popped my audiophile cherry I had a good friend with a pair of Bose 901's hanging in his Brooklyn loft. Powered, no doubt, by some mass-market SS system. It sure filled the loft with sound, but had no redeaming qualities I can recall other than being capable of playing loudly. Around the same time I was introduced to some modest systems that were probably less expensive than the Bose rig, yet were very memorable. Some I recall to this day with great fondness. I'd like to send them cards and flowers every year, but I've lost their addresses.
On the other hand, my neighbor was showing off an airplane to me that he's building in his workshop . While I was there he had a little boombox thing playing some music. For a garage boombox it didn't sound too bad. Beter than you average boombox. It was a Bose Wave radio. Go figure.
There are a lot of different type of sledge hammers and in my little town there are three companies who can provide dumpsters for bose speakers. Are there any sledge hammers that are better than the others, or is it all height and weight dependant? What color dumpster works best for bose speakers, or is that model dependant? If one speaker is a bigger piece of crap does it require a larger dumpster even though the speaker dimensions are not any larger than those of another speaker? The advice I get on Audiogon is so helpful in so many aspects of my life.
You see ...that's what the thinking is. If someone in the know puts the so so system in an room that is to die for sonicly then we are not talking the same game. Then then the logic is if we spend 100000 in an environment that can do the same for the cheaper stuff then it's the best.
When any engineer ....from cars to hi-fi wants to go to greatness he must forget the logic and and start removing the "mass" ....light and powerful etc. In hi-fi the more we pay to justify our spending the more thing weighs tons. The only field that goes against science. Look at the old type boat anker amps ....sales are dropping. Look at the new "less mass" generation.
From computer to car to homes and ipods ....better lighter engineering. Hi-fi 1000lbs systems are old school.
C5150: you lost me bro'. Sorry but my puny brain can't cope with your exposition on boiled steak.
Hey we're in this particular universe at this time, who knows where or what universe we might end up in the next moment? But art, and especially music, that exists in time, frequency and dynamic range is the most kinetic of all art forms. There is no spatial element to boiled steak, dynamic range and maybe time to chew and injest, but the frequency response is very limited. And one bite may be as boring or exciting as the next.
I don't think one needs to spend $100,000 or even $10,000 to achieve sonic satisfaction, but earbuds with MP3 lossy encoding plain SUCKS and I can hear it and detest it. So don't tell me that your iPOD is nirvana, cause I won't buy it. And I'll tell you something else, when all those kids with their earbuds and iPODs do grow up and realize what they're missing, they'll be stocking up on those horrible boat anchor amps and good speakers simply becuase they SOUND BETTER.
Definitely go for the industry standard green dumpster. 9 out of 10 professional sanitation engineers can't be wrong! You can tenderize your steak before you boil it using the sledge hammer. When it's done, throw it all in there with the Bose speakers and we'll have us a little piece of heaven in a dumpster served-up Audiophile style! 5-star chefs will turn their backs, while Ferarri mechanics try to figure out where the engine is, but we'll all be happy cause we've got everything we need in that green dumpster.
I don't need anyone to tell me what I should like C5150. Specialists, critics, 5-star pros, Oprah, nor the Pope have no clue as to what makes me tick, or what I enjoy...shit, Oprah doesn't even know me, and the last time the Pope was over he fell asleep on the couch and snored all night. If I go out and buy the latest list of Records to Die For from the recent Stereophile I could almost guarandamntee you I'll dislike more than half of them. If I go out and watch all the movies that Siskel and Roper give a thumbs up to...well that'd probably be just about everything they review...there would certainly be quite a few I'd dislike. You may have some magical technique to cook steak, but it ain't necessarily gonna' make everyone happy. Critics may agree....top professionals in the field even...unimpeachable authorities may make declarations to end all declarations...none of it will matter cause you or me or anyone on this list will experience it in a unique way, whatever it may be. Shoot, just take a look at any of the hundreds of threads that ask the question "What is the best __________" and take a gander at the wide variety in the list of answers. I want to start a thread asking simply, "What is the best answer?!"
Agree with Stevecham about the MP3/iPod combo...you can keep it, and better pick up a bottle of Advil if you plan on listening to it for any length of time. The op-amp in iPod leaves much to be desired. Line-out is not nearly as bad - if you go into a good headphone amp, use WAV or Apple Lossless and some good cans, you've got something quite listenable. Still, I'd trade the combo for a nice solid boat anchor with a good DAC and speakers any day. Ahoy matey! Blast yer' scuppers! Haul in the mizzenmast! Weigh anchor, we're off to sea!
I 'm not telling you what you should like guys. I'm telling you should have fun and enjoy your systems . Just don't call it audiophile. It has a definite definition that's all I am saying. You have what is called lifestyle systems. Your living rooms plus a hi-fi set up. Not to be confused with audiophile. It is living room plus cool.
Sorry if you take it wrong.
I hate the ipod too. But it does blow away old generation products ...when comparing apple to apple.
Ok i'll try again steak man.
Do you guys own frying pans. ? Do you own 10$regular or are you the culinary advanced 150$. I know lots of weekend warriors post here. Meaning a great knowledge of food and wine. Well can you fry a great steak in a 10$ pan or is the 100$ dollar pan in the hands of a newbie( burns water) going to give him the edge.
Lets everybody put up the pics of the rooms ...regardless of price of system and we will find newbee city. Everyone talks the talk but the pictures are a horrible presentation of hifi. That's my point .....who cares what you own....your room is a tell tell of how much you are misunderstanding ...yet you offer the advice up.
I 'm not telling you what you should like guys. I'm telling you should have fun and enjoy your systems . Just don't call it audiophile. It has a definite definition that's all I am saying. You have what is called lifestyle systems. Your living rooms plus a hi-fi set up. Not to be confused with audiophile. It is living room plus cool.
Your two statements here contradict one another IMO. Paul Klipsch had a little button he liked to refer people too upon hearing them espouse blather like this. It said simply, in elegant old english lettering, against a bright yellow background; "Bullshit". As far as sticking folks into pidgeon holes, and giving them titles, some of which are solely to elevate or lower their status in one arena or another, well, that'd be my response to you. You can look at my system on my system page and you can make up any old name you like for me like ol' Chuckles101 might. Either one means the same to me: absolutely nothing. Thinking like that is about as tightly packed "in the box" as a person can get. Labels and pidgeon holes are the roots of prejudice, and in the way your are applying them only serve to separate one of us from the other. No fun in that at all.
So, we have the real definition of an audiophile; a man/woman who lists his/her audio/stereo system pictures for others to criticize on Audiogon. I expect that it's also necessary to listen to music occassionally and believe that your system (living room with IPOD) is better than others BOSE or $100,000 equipment filled room or more.
Is that right? Good.
If so, I still am looking to learn about A'goners views about whether live reproduction is the goal of audio in their view.
No, actually the definition you proposed doesn't even come close. But if you did look up the actual definition you may find a more cut and dry answer to your question.
The definition in Meriam-Webster doesn't say anyting about iPods, posting pictures, the price paid for any systems, or whether or not there is a predisposition to disrespect Bose or any other manufacturer. Their definition doesn't even require the individual own an audio system...
Main Entry: au·dio·phile Pronunciation: 'o-dE-O-"fIl Function: noun : a person who is enthusiastic about high-fidelity sound reproduction
Investigate that a little bit further and check out the definition of High-Fidelity:
Main Entry: high fidelity Function: noun : the reproduction of an effect (as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original
So, there you have it. By definition the answer to your question is yes. In actual practice it once again comes down to more relative terms, determined by who's judging what qualifies as "faithful to the original", and we've already been there so I won't digress any further.
Cdc - I enjoyed reading your System description and evolution! A great illustration of how the actual range of what can provide enjoyment in this hobby is vast, and that the magic is in the enjoyment itself, and not in how well it fits within someone's objective definitions and parameters.
hmmm this post got kind of interesting. i think somewhere inthere is identification of the room as a huge factor but since the original post was about system goals.... conveyence of the ENERGY of the live experience is the conclusion i've come to. Does the system successfully convey the feeling that the musician wanted to get across?
I think that in order to get to the point of getting the emotional content across there is a baseline minimum of sonic info that needs to be conveyed and then i'm not sure what happens. I retubed my mono blocks with 6550 power tubes, NOS mullard driver tube and NOS inverter tube because it was getting kind of dead sounding; my old tubes were killed. No break in or anything the system rocked. foot tapping, head banging music was everywhere. i jammed for hours
Day 2: replace all the tubes in my pre with NOS mullards including some that were stupid money (i want to compare them with the $25 a pop reissues but i can't bear the possibility that i just spent way too much). Revisited the tangle of cords and interconnects and got that jungle back under control. i heard things i've never heard before. Background singers were more defined, little details everywhere. I had relocated some vibration control under the pre when i put it back on the rack...first listen i could hear that they needed to go back from where they came. Along with the details the sound stage was a tad flattened...i can live with that. But everything got polite. energy dissapated. no head banging, no irrepresable toe tapping just wonderful audiophile sound. kinda boring actually. I'm giving things a while to settle in and then maybe i'm gonna switch tubes again and sacrifice some details for that energy thing. live music ain't polite
Thanks Jax2, there is some magic to this little system. Great sound, just not much of it. I should quit now before I get myself into trouble. Not that I will, mind you :-).
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
