Which is more accurate: digital or vinyl?

I sincerely don't get you when you say...

"My personal timbre (again, this is a separate thing from style) will come through, no matter which instrument I am playing on, despite the difference in the timbres of each individual horn. " ????

I can answer this one- I am often amazed how different one of my flutes sounds when someone else plays it- its like its a different instrument! IOW 'personal timbre' is maybe not the best expression but it is very real and easy to hear!

Atmasphere,

I don’t know if 'personal timbre’ is the right word either, I always call it ‘tone’. But you’re so right. To me, it’s a quality that is most conspicuous among trumpet players. From Harry, Louis, and Al to Miles, Chet and Freddie, each achieved a very unique and easily identifiable tone; and I believe that, even taking into account that they weren’t playing the exact same trumpet.

Learsfool...

Thank you very much for the book recommendation! I will seek it out at my local library. It sounds very interesting. Either way, I have enjoyed/am enjoying our discussion. RE ***I sincerely wish you joy in your listening. *** thank you. The same to you.

Atmasphere, Hi! The correct context of that question is this...Can the way a person PLAYS an instrument change that instrumentsTIMBRE? My answer to that would be an unequivocal ...No! Here's why...The materials and how they are executed in that instrument set the boundaries and limitations of the variable ways it can potentially sound but no player can ever play outside of those boundaries. I understand the concept that different musician's have different styles that wasn't the problem i had, the problem i have is if someone claims "musicianship can alter an acoustic instruments timbre"! One might think it sounds like (emphasis on "like") a different instrument but the reality is...it is the same instrument and therefore the same timbre of that instrument. What you are hearing when it sounds different is a new variable within that instruments limitations compared to your previous understanding of those boundaries but nevertheless that potential was always available just not realized. So, the truth is...the musician is the source of the change and not the instruments timbre. In other words musicians change but not the timbre of that instrument.If players could make a harmonica sound like a piano, or a trumpet sound like a tuba because of their playing style then i would reject what i just said as being untrue. But, yes, i know what you are saying...its LIKE its a different instrument!

Hi Lacee...

RE***I have a decent stereo, in fact I've had several cutting edge systems since the mid 80's,and I have a friend with a system that is not just as expensive as a couple of new homes, but also sounds very realitsic,but the owner ,an avid concert goer, says that even this is nothing close to what he hears in a live event.***

Because i have never heard that system i really can't comment on how good it sounds or doesn't sound. It would be very telling... to play back "sittin' on top of the world" Bob dylan good as i been to you LP (often used as my reference for Hohner marine band harmonica timbre) on his system, then i could comment on how it compares to my playback of the same song in my rig. First i would like to say, that i would love the opportunity to be able to experiment with a scarletti cd player! and that for me too...this is way out of my budget. The other thing that came to mind as i read your post was it has been my experience and you will probably agree, that there isn't always a direct correlation between big buck rigs and stellar hi fidelity. I also don't equate expensive rig owners with people who have heard everything that is possible from hifi. (re read that last statement) This is often a mistake made in audiophile circles. So, while i have argued in the past that the state of the art of hifi systems today is not what it was 5 years ago (and expensive is kinda the way you need to go), i want to qualify that statement by saying there is another factor/other factors that i believe to be equally or more important and that factor is... synergy. The third factor...(the hifi trinity for stereo system building? (haha) is...being a discerning listener.

The interesting thing about synergy is nobody in all of hifidom can guarantee you where you will find it! WE! have to find it ourselves. Synergy is "dollar signs blind" (if you will) Finding synergy takes alot of work. Well, i should say, finding the LEVEL of synergy so as to make your stereo playback of a Hohner marine band harmonica sound absolutely real will take alot of work. It's not turn key at all and the bad news is...you might spend years trying to dial in, nail, timbres so they are spot on. You might never find it even. Or someone out there might get lucky and have just the right mix of cables and components in a short amount of time. What am i saying? I'm saying that if you are trying to say that the timbre playback of my marine band harmonica can't sound real because your friend has a rig expensive as houses and his doesn't sound real then therefore neither can mine...then i would have to disagree with you for the above named reasons. Since there are other contingencies that account for good or bad playback. If i read between the lines wrong , i apologize in advance.

I once heard a rig that, new, would have retailed for between 200 and 300 thousand dollars. I feel like my rig of about 20,000 used sounds better? Go figure. I want to qualify that i am not saying my system is perfect, or that it always sounds real. I am not saying it can reproduce perfectly the dynamics of every instrument out there flawlessy every single time. I am not saying my system plays below 25hz. I am not saying my system can produce the perfect timbre of a vocal passage, piano and stand up bass all at the same time, all the time and with every recording. Just the opposite. What i am saying is there are certain tracks, of certain instruments, of certain vocals, of a certain type of recording where something stunning happens and it mimics a real vocal or a real harmonica. I can't say i have ever heard my system reproduce the timbre of a piano to where i cannot distinguish it from real. Same goes for stand up bass, loud drum sets, violin, and a plethora of other instruments. What i am saying is...if all attributes of an instruments timbre are faithfully reproduced and are present and present all at the same time then it sounds real. I'm saying the potential is out there and that its possible but only with the conditions i've mentioned above.

If and when my system sounds real its usually vocals, harmonicas and brass instruments.(if the recording is "right" and on a few recordings)

This to me is farther then i've ever progressed and i would say i am working on trying to get ALL facets to be right on a consistent basis. I'll try but without consistently better recording methods i am skeptical as to the degree to which i will succeed. Direct to disc live recordings hold alot of promise, i think but unfortunately alot of past music wasn't recorded that way. It's not a big deal to me really, as i said before, live, recorded its not that big a deal to me. As long as i get a kick out of trying to make it sound real then i'll keep going and i can enjoy poorly played back songs too.

I think the subject of timbre/tone, personal or otherwise, deserves a more-in-depth discussion. Vertigo, I have recovered (somewhat), so I will give it a shot :-)

The term "timbre" is often used to describe the sound of a particular type or family of instruments- "the timbre of a saxophone vs. that of a piano" for example. The term "tone" is often used to describe something more personal, like the sound that a particular player produces- "Chet Baker's tone" for example. But, the fact is that the two terms are synonymous. They both describe the characteristic sound produced by an instrument, voice, or anything else capable of producing a sound. The two terms are interchangeable.

As Learsfool pointed out, and Atmasphere corroborated, there is such a thing as a "personal timbre". This is a very real phenomenon, and one that players on every instrument deals with. It is important to consider that there are several things that contribute to the final sound produced by a player/instrument, and the relationships between these is complex and don't lend themselves to "black/white" explanations; there is a lot of gray. 

First let's consider the instrument. Each individual instrument has a built-in "timbre". There are "brand" similarities, but within brands there are differences among individual samples. For instance, Yamaha saxophones are, as a rule, brighter and less complex sounding than Selmer saxophones (although they have other traits that are advantageous). Similar tone distinctions can be made of just about any brand of instrument. There is a built-in "leaning" towards a particular sound signature within each brand. Of course, there are many exceptions having to do with the vintage of a particular instrument, but that's a different discussion. 

Likewise, every player has a built-in "personal timbre". This has nothing to do with playing style, although the two intertwine (gray). The incredulous (Vertigo) will say "How is this possible?". Think of the explanation in audio terms: Why does a turntable sound different when placed on a maple platform than it does placed on granite? Taken a step further: Why does granite give ALL turntables placed on it (regardless of brand) an identifiable sonic quality vs. that of maple? The answer is that the platform becomes an extension of the turntable, and maple and granite each have distinct resonance characteristics. Likewise, the musician's body with it's unique shape, weight, and size of vocal cavity, chest, and fingers become an extension of the instrument. A good player can control the sound produced by any instrument to better suit his/her style, but not completely. There will always be a limitation to how much control over the sound there will be because of the built-in sound of the instrument and the player's "personal timbre". This is not necessarily a liability, but a potential asset in artistic expression. It is true that the stronger the musician's musical personality is, the more he can overcome a particular instrument's propensity  for a certain sound; that is, if the musician wants to.

Atmasphere was surprised at how different one of his flutes sounds when someone else plays it. Consider this: among wind players it is a well known phenomenon that if a player loans his instrument for any length of time to a player with a drastically different approach to tone production, the instrument will feel very different to it's owner afterwards, and will need some time to settle back to it's familiar feel.

I think the parallels to things audio are many and obvious. There are many things about music's production and reproduction that we simply don't fully understand. Personally, I think that's part of the beauty and magic of it all.

"The materials and how they are executed in that instrument set the boundaries and limitations of the variable ways it can potentially sound but no player can ever play outside of those boundaries.”

Maybe we should think of it this way: "Boundaries and limitations" suggest that their is a range of timbers and that timber is only realized when the instrument is played. Therefore, musician+instrument= timber. And since ‘musician’ is a variable...well, you get the point.