Distortions that the human ear likes. Are there any ?

@nonoise  interesting stuff.  Yes there does seem to be a prevailing feeling amongst those on the pro side that audiophiles are there to be humoured and tolerated. There there my dear!

Whether we like it or not the most important decisions are made on their side  - not ours. Until perhaps one day we may be allowed digital access to the original tracks to mix them down to our own preferences.

Regarding authenticity, I'd be with the families on that one. I want period sound but in as high a quality as possible and as close to what the artists were hearing as they recorded it. We're talking about historical art in many cases.

Unfortunately I doubt that even in 2019 we're hearing Nat King Cole the same as he heard himself in the Capitol studios way back in the 50s and early 60s.

Al, I think you hit the nail on the head. I believe the engineer was implying " deviation from accuracy ". This makes the most sense, and the dictionary says the same, and not just about audio. Al, I believe the question was answered. T.Y. Always, and Enjoy ! MrD

Room measurements typically exhibit a downward “tilt” from low bass to high treble of 6 up to 15 dB. This is caused by a number of factors including reduced dispersion and greater absorption in the room at high frequencies. Do not attempt to EQ your room measurement completely flat – that will most likely sound overly bright.

This is something all acousticians live by. It isn’t opinion. It’s fact. This is why no auto-eq attempts to implement it. If you look at the Dirac documentations for instance, you'll see this built in.

We are used to seeing close miked, "quasi-anechoic" measurements of speakers and electronics, so we expect speakers to be flat in the room, and god help you if you hear it! :)

Also, this is not new. The B&K speaker curve (which I worship as a god) is what, like 60 years old by now?


Best,
E

OK, here’s the problem with believing anyone who claims audiophiles prefer or like certain types of distortion. Let’s suppose there is a desirable type distortion, or one that some people like, whatever it might be, and I’m not saying there isn’t such a thing or anything like that. The problem is even if there was a “good distortion” it would be drowned in a sea of “bad distortions.” You would be unable to hear the good distortion, it would be much less than the sum of all the bad types of distortion. Hel-loo. So, I’m saying it’s a logical fallacy.

This doesn’t even address noise, which is a different animal than distortion but similar, that also reduces SNR and DR. Signal to (noise + distortion) ratio.

As Shannon Dickson opined in one of his articles in Stereophile back in the late 90s, audiophiles at CES can’t seem to get themselves up out of the noise floor. Take it from me, things haven’t changed much since then. But since audiophiles are generally an adaptable bunch they learn to live with the distortion. The many sources “bad distortion” coming up next, unless somebody beats me to it.

@cd318,
 I agree that there is a certain amount of condensention on the part of some engineers, misguided as it may be.

And, I'd like the ability to hear things as they were performed, as close to an "acoustic" rendition as possible. It would be limited to a small portion of recordings as most studio recordings are, of necessity, required to use some sort of wizardry to accomplish the desired end product. 

As for that authentic sound of yesteryear, in some cases yes, others, no.
After I heard that Nat King Cole CD, going back to the Gold Reissue (both done by Steve Hoffman), it was never the same. 

All the best,
Nonoise