Are You Happy?


On another currently running post a number of people have commented that the majority of their digital music collection is unlistenable. One person said 90% falls into this category. I don't get it! Have these people purposely assembled systems to make their favorite albums sound bad? Do they sit and audition equipment while thinking to themselves "hey, this is great, I won't be able to listen any of my Rolling Stones, but wow does it sound good." Why would someone do this to themselves?

As audiophile we are all a little crazy, but these people, IMHO, have gone one step beyond. Please help me to understand what's going on?
128x128onhwy61
I am quite happy. The recent adition of the Audio Aero Capitole has seen to that. It is an exceptional player that has brought to life CD's, that were previously dismissed to CD purgatory. This fact coupled with the (small, but) growing awareness by records labels that, well recorded music is a good thing, has brought some very good CD's to the market. I love my system, as it currently makes me very happy.
Hi '61; I am totally happy with my all digital system. I Don't want to turn this into a digital versus Analog thread, but I've got to disagree strongly with Sean's characterization of CDs as being "soul-less"-- that observation may be true when the CDs are played on cheap, low-fi systems. See my thread on the Jacintha XRCD2-- that CD is breathtaking, and yes this may be an exception, but there are still many very good CDs available.

Years ago, the same was true with 45s/LPs and cheap TTs and electronics. Of course there are a billion cheap CD players out there, just as there were TTs and records.

'61 is right on in asking "why would people do that to themselves". Every component, wire, and tweak I've kept in my all digital system has been chosen for it's MUSICALITY, and not for prestige, a great review, or other non-musical reason. To answer the question, I don't think many have developed good listening skills and are thus short-term impressed but long-term disappointed (in digital); are swayed by reviews of others; like certain prestige brands, and don't spend the necessary time and thought to put together and tweak for a really satisfying system.

I've sometimes considered starting a thread and asking "Do you consider high resolution the same as high quality music". I think some do, but I don't-- it's only one aspect of really good music, IMO.

GOOD DIGITAL SYSTEMS CAN BE PUT TOGETHER with a lot of care in selecting components, wires, tweaks-- and A LOT OF LISTENING. I've probably said this a hundred times on this forum, when done well, digital can be excellent-- just as when done well analog can be excellent. Please note that Albert Porter does not have a $259. TT including arm and cartridge-- and I don't use a $179. CD player either.

I'd say easily less than 10% of my CDs fall below the "poor-fair" category. Many, while not great, are still very enjoyable to listen to in MY SYSTEM. I'm too damned old to settle for something "soul-less" or unmusical. I'd just add that ZZ Top, George Thorogood, the latest CCR releases sound great on my system-- along with hundres of other CDs. I don't even like most "audiophile" CDs. Cheers. Craig.
Well, since I am one of the ones that thinks 90% of my collection is un-enjoyable I should probably say something...

For one, I have a lot of CDs - at least 3000. About 200 - 300 are audiophile quality. Some of these are duplicates (upgrades) of ordinary CDs (for exmaple, MFSL Moody Blues Threshold of a Dream - talk about a bad original pressing...).

My current system actually plays CDs pretty well now - it is very lacking in bass (which we are addressing by upgrading to the Acapella Campanile speakers) - but I expect the midrange and highs to not ever get much better than this (Levinson 39->Burmester 877 mkII->Levinson 20.6 monoblocks->Extremas through Nordost Quattro fil and SPM speaker).

I think the main problem I personally have now, and maybe others can relate, is that I have heard the CD 'anti-sound' for so long it is hard to listen to any CD anywhere and NOT hear its harshness and glare. I can finally understand why some people over-compensate and go deep into tube territory.

Oh, and why did we buy systems that did not play all of our CDs nicely? Each upgrade played the CDs better, in one or more ways, but our ears got better at hearing the problems the same time! It is a never ending up-hill climb to buy equipment that is better than our ears and quick, enjoy it, before our ears hear all the problems! :-)))
I'm one of the ones with 90% "unlistenable" CDs. But let me qualify the statement. My system is not at fault beyond the fact that it reveals what was probably not meant to be revealed on typical low fi stuff it was recorded for. Imaging, soundstage, depth, proportion, etc., are not a priority in many modern recordings. Since I am sensitive to these things, it bugs me when it's all out of whack. If I am not paying close attention, or playing background music, it is ok. Of course, unrealistic recordings are bad on vinyl too, and SACD, and they bug me too.Maybe I'm nuts, but when I hear a coherent, properly miked, mixed and recorded album I really appreciate it. And my system presents it as it should be. The others are then glaringly deficient. I can't help it. Maybe I should take Valium or something.