I'll add a few more questions to your query: What is "perfect"?
Why is a verbatim translation of an entirely subjective recording engineer's
idea of what a performance should be supposed to be a 'better' thing than
say, one that is "colored" by a component in a particular way?
Isn't all of it just an interpretation of what supposedly 'happened' in a given
space and time? And in that space and time would another person have
prefered to interpret it a different way? And why then would one of those
person's interpretations of the event be universally 'superior' to the other
person's interpretation? That idea is as ubsurd to me as saying one specific
component is "the best" there is. I submit to you that there is no
such thing as 'perfection', and there is no objective 'best' at any of this. It is
all entirely subjective. From the moment the energy leaves the vocal cords or
the instrument, it is interpretted in infinitely complex ways, and, in the case
of making a recording, there's some human being who has made an equally
infinitely complex set of decisions to interpret how that sound should be
presented judged by his ears and sense of hearing, and tastes and experience
which are as individual as his fingerprints. That in turn is tranformed
mechanically into some spinning plastic disk by yet another series of complex
electro-mechanical processes, all of which strive to some strange objective
interpretation of how they may be translated later on by the system of the
end-user. And onto all of that we add this little system of ours in our
listening rooms (an entirely new acoustic space), and have some kind of
warped expectations of some kind of objective, verbatim translation of the
original event as interpretted by joe shmo who you don't even know. And the
so-called "experts" refer to this as "high-fidelity".
I submit an alternate scenario by which to judge a system or a component
within a system: Does it grab you, engage you, get your toes to tapping,
raise the hairs on the back of your neck, allow you to listen to it for hours on
end and still keep you engaged and energized by the music? If it does those
things, that's really all I need. I don't need any reassurance that the reasons
it may, or may not do that is somebody's opinion about how much coloration
it may add to...well, to what really? To the engineers interpretation of an
event within a space as translated by electormechanical...blah, blah, blah.
And how can anyone possibly get into that engineers head and actually
experience whether or not succeeds in doing just that? Should we just ask
the engineer, and then, if they nod in approval do we then go away satisfied
that our system is "perfect"?! Does that speak at all to the
question of whether you, as an individual, actually like said verbatim
interpretation of the engineers intentions? What if you prefer a bit more
warmth, or the midrange to be a bit more forward? Should you seek out
different music then? It's all subjective. High fidelity is a sham if you take it
to be a generic, objective definition of what is "best" in audio
reproduction. It is like folks who have absolutely no connection with the
visual arts needing some interior designer to pick and choose what is "
good art" to decorate their home to demonstrate their superior taste
(which really isn't theirs at all). Keeeeerist, most of us have got two ears, and
a brain and a heart, and maybe even a soul...use'em for god's sake! You
don't need anyone else telling you what is best for you, nor do you need the
detailed analasys of machines to justify your perosnal choices! WAKE UP
PEOPLE! SEIZE THE DAY!
Marco
