Just some of my random thoughts on the subject- If reproduction was nothing more than an exact science, there would only be a need for probably 5 audio companies making only different price points.
Optical lens manufacturers (which require science to balance out distortions, chromatic abberrations, etc) balance science with aesthetics. They choose how their different products will reproduce reality.
I have posted this before, but I have friends who often host parties where they invite talented bluegrass musicians over to jam. They even have a stand up bass in the apartment since that is a bit hard to lug over.
So I often can tune my ears to the sound of acoustic music in a space much more similar to most of our homes than clubs or theaters.
I listen from close range (2-4 feet) as well as far back. It is quite interesting to hear the room colorations on live instruments, similar to hearing them on stereo gear when I'm further back in the room. I often close my eyes and pretend I'm just sitting at home listening, which helps remove the visual sense and excitment of being in the presence of live performers.
Now I'm not saying my system at home is 100% accurate in any sense, but what I hear live from close range is really not that far off from what I am getting at home. There is not as much detail at home, but obviously the recording process can't capture all the detail of the original waveform.
Sure there are additional colorations in my system (or recording) but the live instruments really sound like perhaps just the model or two up from my system, not a pale comparison.
I think getting the gestalt of live music is they key. Sure we may be missing some detail, a bit of air, the staging might be off or completely different, but at least for the type of music I listen to (smaller acoustic rock/jazz/vocals) realistic reproduction is possible within the limits of current recording technology.
Hi fi has never been better than it is today. The level of fidelity I am getting was simply unobtainable when I first started out in this hobby in the late 80's.
Interesting about the BBC dip reffered to. Didn't MFSL create a peak in the upper midrange to get more presence in their 80's remasters?
Optical lens manufacturers (which require science to balance out distortions, chromatic abberrations, etc) balance science with aesthetics. They choose how their different products will reproduce reality.
I have posted this before, but I have friends who often host parties where they invite talented bluegrass musicians over to jam. They even have a stand up bass in the apartment since that is a bit hard to lug over.
So I often can tune my ears to the sound of acoustic music in a space much more similar to most of our homes than clubs or theaters.
I listen from close range (2-4 feet) as well as far back. It is quite interesting to hear the room colorations on live instruments, similar to hearing them on stereo gear when I'm further back in the room. I often close my eyes and pretend I'm just sitting at home listening, which helps remove the visual sense and excitment of being in the presence of live performers.
Now I'm not saying my system at home is 100% accurate in any sense, but what I hear live from close range is really not that far off from what I am getting at home. There is not as much detail at home, but obviously the recording process can't capture all the detail of the original waveform.
Sure there are additional colorations in my system (or recording) but the live instruments really sound like perhaps just the model or two up from my system, not a pale comparison.
I think getting the gestalt of live music is they key. Sure we may be missing some detail, a bit of air, the staging might be off or completely different, but at least for the type of music I listen to (smaller acoustic rock/jazz/vocals) realistic reproduction is possible within the limits of current recording technology.
Hi fi has never been better than it is today. The level of fidelity I am getting was simply unobtainable when I first started out in this hobby in the late 80's.
Interesting about the BBC dip reffered to. Didn't MFSL create a peak in the upper midrange to get more presence in their 80's remasters?