SQ vs. Music

Oh, tough one, sort of. Being a musician I tend to hear differently. Different things stick out, different things are less noticed. Being a drummer the rhythm is what hits me, lyrical content, hardly ever. So what I hear is very important to what I enjoy. However, I would say it is ultimately about the music. I like all of the relatively few albums I own, and all were very specially purchased. But, I usually grab the ones that SOUND the best overall. So both for me...

As I am still getting my new system up to it’s potential, it’s about 90% sound quality, now.
The goal is to switch that over to much more music listening.
But for me, the hobby of being an audiophile means taking an active role in making my system sound good, testing it for differences, adjusting it to see what happens. Part of the fun of being an audiophile is that experimental activity.

And a huge part of what’s been of value in listening for SQ is, as Millercarbon says, that I am learning how to listen. That feeds back BOTH into (a) listening for SQ and (b) listening to music. Without listening for SQ at least some of the time, I stop learning how to listen better.

In other words, listening for sound quality is a permanent and legitimate part of what I am doing. The percent of how much I’ll do either remains TBD, but the idea that this hobby is "just about the music" is laughable, for me. I love sound, I love experimenting, and so the music is never going to be the only goal.

That said, I understand why it could be a worry that one is not listening to *enough* music. The "grass could always be greener" compulsion can be like quicksand, and the question of how to avoid it is a very personal, psychological question that reaches deeper into our drives and needs than can be answered by questions bracketed at the level of audio.

Let’s ask the question a little differently:

“When sitting down to listen, what percentage of the time do you FIRST choose the artist (perhaps based on genre) that you want to listen to and what percentage of the the time do you choose an album simply for its ear candy factor, regardless of who the artist is?”

I pick the artist I want to listen to first, almost always. I then pick which album by that artist I want to listen to. Sound quality seldom enters into the decision process. The choice of music wins maybe 95% of the time. However, there are times when I just want to indulge in a “knock your socks off” sonic experience and those audiophile faves, even those with questionable (at best) artistic value come off the shelf. Kind of like that weekly dessert.

I prefer to ask the question this way because I don’t agree that sound quality and appreciation of the artistic merit (the music) are totally inseparable. At least, not to the extent that one needs exceptional sound quality to appreciate the music. Of course, this assumes that the recordings in question are of decent enough quality and better than that of grandma’s scratchy 78’s. We have all heard recordings and/or systems that are so bad that the SQ definitely detracts from the appreciation of the music. However, lets be honest and lets be realistic. For example, the often quoted “revelation” that “I can finally clearly hear that it was an English Horn and not an oboe!” Really? I submit that the difference can clearly be heard on a table radio. The problem is that listener has little experience with live performances.

Of course good sound quality adds to the appreciation of the artistic merit of the recorded performance. However, as soon as the audiophile hat comes off the hook there is a good chance that at least some of the attention will be on the SQ and a little less on the music. For me, it can even become a distraction of sorts, away from the performance. Most of the time I prefer to keep the two experiences at least somewhat separate in my mindset. If a recording that I want to listen to happens to have good sound, that’s great; but the attention is on the performance.

None of this precludes putting a lot of energy into having a great sounding system; nor is it a judgment of how anyone chooses to approach the listening experience. In short, I would say that (for me) good SQ has the potential to enhance the appreciation of the performance (the music) much more than inferior SQ necessarily hinders it.

I have two systems.  The HT system is hooked to my server and has a Sony multi player attached in case I want to listen to a CD.  It’s on at least 40 hours a week.  
When I want to listen with my eyes closed and a smile on my face, I listen to the system in the music room. Probably 20-30 hours a week.

JD

I belong to a group on Facebook that focuses on audiophile recordings. Members suggest recordings that have terrific sound. When I first joined the group, I bought several recordings based on the suggestions. Maybe it wasn’t the genre I usually listen to, but I wanted to hear the sound they were so excited about. I did hear what they heard that prompted their suggestion, but I wasn’t crazy about the music. This made me realize that, while I do enjoy good work on the sound board, I enjoy what is being played by the artists more. There is nothing better for me than to have that great mix of good music and good engineering. Steely Dan is a band I have always listened to, but usually in the car or as background music. Now that I have a decent system and take time to really listen to recordings, I find that Don Fagan has a great feel for what sounds good in a recording. I listen to Steely Dan more now than ever because they hit the right mix of great music and great engineering. Dire Staits is another one, Mark Knopfler knows what sounds good. I love how he has instruments playing far off in the distance and off to the sides and how that sound adds to the feel he wanted in the recording. To sum it up, 98% I listen for the music, if the engineering is there, it is especially sweet. I do take time to listen to recordings for the SQ, Metallic Orbs comes to mind, but only 2% of the time.