What do you choose first SOUND or MUSIC?


Hi folks,

We all like music otherwise we wouldn't spend bucks to listen to it's best. I have a friend who has a very decent inexpencive high-end setup and he mostly sacrifices the music he likes to a beeter recorded albums. Another words does that make a sence to listen to the music that is only good recorded to get the best from your stereo system in sacrifice to what you realy like to listen? I love Jethro Tull and I know that most of its albums very poorly recorded. On the other side most of Frank Sinatra's albums are very well mastered but whenever I would play Sinatra is just for the sport to test my stereo.
128x128marakanetz

Showing 1 response by fatparrot

I have noticed that as my audio system has improved, certain music that used to sound great on my "lesser system" seems to be lacking as upgrades are made. As an audiophile (what ever that means!) I feel that sonic quality AND music should be mutually inclusive (why bother to listen to music that sounds not much different on a $199.99 "Aardvark" mini-system than on a $50,000.00 "Primo-Gonzo" rig? On the other hand, do you REALLY want to listen exclusively to nothing but Audiophile test recordings on your big rig?) An advantage of CD's is that you may be able to find a better quality of pressing than on vinyl ( has ANYONE EVER found a decent pressing of Jethro Tull's "Too old to Rock & Roll..." on vinyl? If you like Tull find a copy of "Warchild" on MFSL Gold Utradisc. Happy Tunes!