GMG Classical Music Forum

The Music Room => General Classical Music Discussion => Topic started by: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM

Title: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM
I don't want to instigate a forum section dedicated to how the quality of posters home audio systems dictates the validity of critiques given here but there are a few simple questions I'd like to ask.

1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?
2: Do posters think accurate observations of recording quality can be made with something like a mobile ( cell phone in the US) through ear buds?
3: Should we accept evaluations of something like the tonal richness, dryness, sharpness etc of a recording without knowing how it was heard?
4: Does any of this matter to any of you?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: The new erato on November 30, 2019, 09:45:06 PM
Yes, No. No. Yes.

AS for artistic quality I"l happily listen to medio re sound.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on November 30, 2019, 11:06:00 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM


1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?


Yes obviously so for acoustic instruments, because the equipment changes the sound. Second rate equipment, for example, will not correctly reproduce the harmonics correctly, and may well be voiced incorrectly. The capacity of the listener to detect the emotional content of the performance supervenes on the sound, so yes, obviously.

Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM

2: Do posters think accurate observations of recording quality can be made with something like a mobile ( cell phone in the US) through ear buds?



No not substantial accurate ones, for above reasons

Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM

3: Should we accept evaluations of something like the tonal richness, dryness, sharpness etc of a recording without knowing how it was heard?



No, and a serious reviewer would listen on several good systems, at several different times, having eaten several different lunches. In my experience the same recording can sound quite different through different amplification and speakers, and indeed in different rooms, and after different types of food and wine.


Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM

4: Does any of this matter to any of you?

Yes very much so. For years I used to go to concerts of acoustic music and come away frustrated because when I played music at home, it didn't sound as good as live.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on November 30, 2019, 11:21:38 PM
As to question 2, it depends very much on the quality of the equipment (just as it would with any other kind of equipment).

I still remember when I first got better earbuds to pair with my iPhone at Christmas. What's wrong with the ones Apple give you, my sister asked? Then she tried my new Sennheisers and soon found out.

As to question 1, my bigger beef is with people who listen to lossy formats like mp3 and then comment on the quality of the recording. You might think this would never happen but I've certainly experienced it in pop music world, with people commenting on flat production with no insight into the sonic detail they have lost because they're listening to a shitty download.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on November 30, 2019, 11:30:20 PM
As to question 3, I would argue a qualified yes because if someone is consistently using the same equipment then it's most likely that the RELATIVE qualities of what they are hearing from one recording to the next are maintained.

A particular system might make everything sound a bit dry, but it's most unlikely it will make recording A sound drier than recording B unless recording A sounds drier than recording B on pretty well all systems. So remarks that recording A is drier than average are probably valid.

Whether that is too dry or not, well that's going to depend on the individual and their system and their tastes. Frankly most people who care about these things will have picked a SYSTEM in line with their own tastes anyway.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 01, 2019, 12:04:02 AM
Quote from: The new erato on November 30, 2019, 09:45:06 PM
Yes, No. No. Yes.

AS for artistic quality I"l happily listen to medio re sound.
Medio is a new word to me. A combination of mediocre with audio?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Jo498 on December 01, 2019, 12:25:57 AM
1. Barely. Certainly one could think of setups so wretched that they seriously interfere but I think this is more rare than certain types of audiophiles believe and want us all to believe. (Totally screwing up sound quality does work with some mp3 soundbits. I remember that online soundbits of harpsichord recordings over computer speakers did sound unlistenable despite the actual recordings sounding good or very good on fairly standard hifi equipment.)
2. Doubtful, although I personally have no experience with cellphone and earbuds.
3. No
4. very little. Even with equipment most people would find decent, there will be fairly large differences in reproduction and perception of sound and different preferences among listeners. So judgements would have to be taken with more than a grain of salt in any case. The fact that some people listened with portable boomboxes 30 years ago and with mobiles today are only the extreme cases but it doesn't change the general problem. So only trust you own ears. Actually, I don't even trust my own ears. There are some things I apparently can "tune out" easily even in mediocre or bad sounding (often historical) recordings and other things that mostly spoil an otherwise decent sounding recording to me. And I usually cannot name these things in the general and abstract, certain distortions don't matter, others are grating.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: The new erato on December 01, 2019, 12:49:47 AM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 01, 2019, 12:04:02 AM
Medio is a new word to me. A combination of mediocre with audio?
No. A combination of a cell phone keyboard and Some thing...
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 03, 2019, 02:18:33 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on November 30, 2019, 11:06:00 PM
Yes very much so. For years I used to go to concerts of acoustic music and come away frustrated because when I played music at home, it didn't sound as good as live.

I've always had the opposite experience.  The concert-hall experience has enough disadvantages** that I greatly prefer playing recordings at home.

** inferior sound (since I would never pay for a 'best' seat).
** uncomfortable seating, temperature etc.
** the need to be on best behaviour in polite company.
** distractions.  (OK, these can happen at home too, but at least they don't include the conductor.)

It's a bit different with jazz.  I have one double-CD recording of a gig I was present at (Stan Tracey Quartet, at Ronnie Scott's), and, well, I guess you had to be there.  The CD is dull, the night was memorable.

In answer to the OP,
1. No;   2. 'accurate' no, 'meaningful' probably;  3. Trust no-one!  (I often take 'anti-recommendations' from this forum - I know that if certain posters like a record, I won't - and vice versa.)
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: andolink on December 03, 2019, 02:48:43 AM
Quote from: aukhawk on December 03, 2019, 02:18:33 AM
I've always had the opposite experience.  The concert-hall experience has enough disadvantages** that I greatly prefer playing recordings at home.

Exactly!

I've always had that view too.  Excellent recordings typically put the home listener in an idealized perfect seat; indeed, a perspective not possible at the actual venue due to mike placements (frequently above the performers).  And, of course, there are all those distractions at a live event you mention too.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 03:06:23 AM
I always get the best seat.

What I find is that second rate hifi equipment doesn't reproduce well many of the resonances caused by the hall, resonances which contain important spacial, imaging, information. And of course the equipment isn't so good at voicing instrumental harmonics.  All this can make music at home sound smooth, flat and grey and lifeless. The problem is exacerbated in many studio recordings, which often engineer away asperities to produce a more anodine experience.

And so for me the live experience in a bad seat is better than the home experience with second rate equipment.

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 03, 2019, 04:51:31 AM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM
I don't want to instigate a forum section dedicated to how the quality of posters home audio systems dictates the validity of critiques given here but there are a few simple questions I'd like to ask.

1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?
2: Do posters think accurate observations of recording quality can be made with something like a mobile ( cell phone in the US) through ear buds?
3: Should we accept evaluations of something like the tonal richness, dryness, sharpness etc of a recording without knowing how it was heard?
4: Does any of this matter to any of you?
1. No. Even with bad equipment, I think you can detect it, if it's there to be found.
2. Yes, though it depends quite a bit on the quality of all the pieces from recording to ear. SO sometimes no, but it is possible.
3. Meaningless question for me. Or perhaps I just don't understand what you are asking.
4. Not a whole lot.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 03, 2019, 11:57:03 AM
Generally, I hope an orchestral piece is at least in Stereo ... beyond that, it has no bearing on my enjoyment.  I'm interested in the quality of the playing and the spirit and intelligence of the performance... The greatest recording and playback set-up devised by mankind will never make Simon Rattle into Fritz Reiner ... if you can't listen to Reiner doing Zarathustra or Szell doing Don Juan or Munch doing Daphnis and Chloe, Bernstein doing Romeo and Juliet etc etc because you don't like the sound enough, you can't see the forest for the trees

Piano?  Forget it... as long as you can differentiate all the notes being played, it's fine by me, mono or stereo.  Imagine depriving yourself of peak Richter live or Casadesus or Rufolf Serkin or Rubinstein etc because you want it to sound like the piano is in your living room... absolute madness having practically nothing to do with music
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 03, 2019, 12:18:02 PM
Quote from: Madiel on November 30, 2019, 11:30:20 PM
As to question 3, I would argue a qualified yes because if someone is consistently using the same equipment then it's most likely that the RELATIVE qualities of what they are hearing from one recording to the next are maintained.

A particular system might make everything sound a bit dry, but it's most unlikely it will make recording A sound drier than recording B unless recording A sounds drier than recording B on pretty well all systems. So remarks that recording A is drier than average are probably valid.

Whether that is too dry or not, well that's going to depend on the individual and their system and their tastes. Frankly most people who care about these things will have picked a SYSTEM in line with their own tastes anyway.

Precisely
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: André on December 03, 2019, 12:29:23 PM
Question 1: As I'm writing this, I'm listening to a 1950 recording of Beethoven's 9th from the Leipzig radio. In the first movement the conductor (Hermann Abendroth) unleashes volleys of thundering timpani that overload the sound image and cause distortion. Some quiet pizzicati in the Adagio are heard as if played next to me. Then horns and winds enter and the sound coarsens. I know exactly what sonic limitations there are and am not in the least influenced by them in my appreciation of the emotional content of the performance. Listening to it on a system 10 times more expensive than mine would only make technical issues clearer, it would not make them vanish.

So, no, the equipment I listen to at home has no influence on my appreciating the emotional content of the music/performance.

Question 2: I don't own a cell and if I did would never listen to music on it. I have a tablet and listen to youtube rarities now and then.

Question 3: why not ? I trust others' ears more than their good taste, after all :D.

Question 4: very little. I meet with a group of friends every 6-8 weeks and we listen to our music in 3 different locations and sound systems. There are obvious differences but my ears adjust. It's actually interesting to have a different sonic perspective, just like having different seats in a hall.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 01:10:07 PM

Quote from: André on December 03, 2019, 12:29:23 PM
Question 1: As I'm writing this, I'm listening to a 1950 recording of Beethoven's 9th from the Leipzig radio. In the first movement the conductor (Hermann Abendroth) unleashes volleys of thundering timpani that overload the sound image and cause distortion. Some quiet pizzicati in the Adagio are heard as if played next to me. Then horns and winds enter and the sound coarsens. I know exactly what sonic limitations there are and am not in the least influenced by them in my appreciation of the emotional content of the performance. Listening to it on a system 10 times more expensive than mine would only make technical issues clearer, it would not make them vanish.






I remember years ago when I first started to post here, I argued that I could get a lot out of historical recordings because I could listen imaginatively, I could imagine what sort of sound the musician was making, I was talking about Cortot I think, and suggesting that the 1950s  recordings helped me to use my imagination when I listened to the 1930s recordings. Someone immediately jumped down my throat and started barking, saying this isn't possible.


I don't know whether this is along the lines of what you meant.

Music is sound. You can either hear it or use your imagination. I don't see that there's another way.


Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 01:12:38 PM
Quote from: San Antone on December 03, 2019, 01:08:33 PM
1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?

the difference is one of kind (to a live performance) rather than degree (which is the case with different quality systems).



Maybe you could say more about that.

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Irons on December 03, 2019, 01:12:58 PM
Generalisations do not work in my opinion. Our needs are different, musicians do not need expensive systems as sound itself is not important, they derive as much pleasure from reading a score as listening to it. I have had no musical training so the mechanics of music do not interest me but the emotional content does, and for this sound is important which follows I own the best system I can afford. But even here "good sound" is a generalisation, I can listen to a mono recording from the 1950's and marvel at the immediacy. Sometimes I find modern recordings so perfect they are dull and boring - the baby has been thrown out with the bath water.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 01:13:42 PM
Quote from: Irons on December 03, 2019, 01:12:58 PM
Generalisations do not work in my opinion. Our needs are different, musicians do not need expensive systems as sound itself is not important, they derive as much pleasure from reading a score as listening to it. I have had no musical training so the mechanics of music do not interest me but the emotional content does, and for this sound is important which follows I own the best system I can afford. But even here "good sound" is a generalisation, I can listen to a mono recording from the 1950's and marvel at the immediacy. Sometimes I find modern recordings so perfect they are dull and boring - the baby has been thrown out with the bath water.

Music is sound.

Quote from: Irons on December 03, 2019, 01:12:58 PM
Sometimes I find modern recordings so perfect they are dull and boring - the baby has been thrown out with the bath water.

This is the mastering in the studio. Some people think that smoothing out all asperities of "real" music making, making a beautiful smooth, polished sound, is the aim of mastering.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 01:55:50 PM
Quote from: San Antone on December 03, 2019, 01:23:26 PM
When you are listening to a live performance the music is coming to you unfiltered by any electronic device(s).  All recordings are filtered and degraded to some degree by the process of recording the sound and its later reproduction (difference in kind).  While higher quality audio equipment tends to diminish the distortion, there is still a filtering of the sound, both at the front end (during the recording) and the back end during the playback (difference in degree).



Yes, this is one of the reasons why good kit matters -- to minimise crossover distortions, intermodulations etc.

Quote from: San Antone on December 03, 2019, 01:23:26 PM


This is also not to account for the intangibles present at a live performance which can enhance the experience that are not there when you listen to a CD on your home system.

Yes. You have a group of musicians in different places, one behind a pillar, one at the back of the stage. These things are hard to capture on a recording and hard to reproduce, but I think with good equipment you can do well, for small scale acoustic music at least.

But there's something else which may be insurmountable. In the concert, each time you move your head you change your perspective on the sound. I think that is probably why a live music feel is probably unattainable, and why, as you suggested, recordings are different "in kind."
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Daverz on December 03, 2019, 02:11:21 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM
I don't want to instigate a forum section dedicated to how the quality of posters home audio systems dictates the validity of critiques given here but there are a few simple questions I'd like to ask.

1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?
2: Do posters think accurate observations of recording quality can be made with something like a mobile ( cell phone in the US) through ear buds?
3: Should we accept evaluations of something like the tonal richness, dryness, sharpness etc of a recording without knowing how it was heard?
4: Does any of this matter to any of you?

I usually don't think about what they are listening on when people give their opinions on recordings.  I even think it's a bit rude to ask, and tends to be to exclude people from the conversation.

That said, it's not expensive to put together a really excellent head/ear phone system.  You could start by replacing your earbuds with IEMs.  If you don't like sticking things in your ears, look for a combined DAC/headphone amp with bluetooth and good headphones or consider also replacing the phone with a different source.  A good site with reviews is ASR:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/master-index-of-audio-hardware-reviews.8184/





Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: André on December 03, 2019, 02:34:35 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 01:10:07 PM

I remember years ago when I first started to post here, I argued that I could get a lot out of historical recordings because I could listen imaginatively, I could imagine what sort of sound the musician was making, I was talking about Cortot I think, and suggesting that the 1950s  recordings helped me to use my imagination when I listened to the 1930s recordings. Someone immediately jumped down my throat and started barking, saying this isn't possible.


I don't know whether this is along the lines of what you meant.

Music is sound. You can either hear it or use your imagination. I don't see that there's another way.



Yes.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mirror Image on December 03, 2019, 06:14:30 PM
1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?

Absolutely not. Equipment doesn't truly hinder your enjoyment of a piece of music unless you have two speakers that are out. ;)

2: Do posters think accurate observations of recording quality can be made with something like a mobile ( cell phone in the US) through ear buds?

I don't know really. I don't use ear buds. I do think, with the right headphones, and if the quality of audio is good, then the music can be enjoyed on a cellphone.

3: Should we accept evaluations of something like the tonal richness, dryness, sharpness etc of a recording without knowing how it was heard?

I think the music is of utmost importance. Everything else is mere icing on the cake.

4: Does any of this matter to any of you?

I do think audio quality is important, but it's not so important that it dictates how I feel about whatever piece of music I'm listening to.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Irons on December 03, 2019, 11:04:35 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 01:13:42 PM
Music is sound.



And there is good sound and bad sound which is influenced by recording engineers and what you are listening on.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 04, 2019, 02:19:56 AM
I'm fascinated by all these people who essentially say sound quality makes no difference to them. I know we're talking about the quality of the equipment rather than the recordings, but still. Having bought a new CD player this year it was painfully obvious to me in the shops that there are real differences between units (and also that the middle has virtually fallen out of the market). I took a cluster of discs with me to the shops so that I could try them out, and reproduction varied considerably.

Sound quality definitely does make a difference to me. I have a supposedly fabled recording of Gieseking playing Debussy preludes, and I just could not warm to it because of the sound. Until I did a common trick of mine, which is listening from around the corner in my kitchen. This got rid of enough of the background distraction that I could get a bit more out of the recording. But I still didn't love it.

Certainly with popular music, it can be extremely obvious when a recording has been poorly produced and the life and energy of the performance has been sucked out of it. For me I don't think classical is any different. Emotion can only be conveyed by the sounds you can actually hear being reproduced, and if for whatever reasons (including age) the recording did not capture as much then to me it's inevitable it can't convey as much, even if one is not entirely conscious of this. And if it's the equipment that isn't capable of reproducing the sound, similar things will happen. Turning the sound up high can show up differences between units' ability to cope for example.

The CD player I ended up buying, one of the things it keeps surprising me with is it's good reproduction of bass. I'm hearing things low down in recordings, including classical ones, that I haven't noticed before.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 04, 2019, 04:28:14 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 03, 2019, 03:06:23 AM
I always get the best seat.

If I did that I'd be chafing too much about the money I'd spent, to even hear the music !   ;D
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 04, 2019, 04:48:04 AM
Quote from: San Antone on December 03, 2019, 01:23:26 PM
When you are listening to a live performance the music is coming to you unfiltered by any electronic device(s).  All recordings are filtered and degraded to some degree by the process of recording the sound and its later reproduction (difference in kind).  While higher quality audio equipment tends to diminish the distortion, there is still a filtering of the sound, both at the front end (during the recording) and the back end during the playback (difference in degree).

This is all true but I'd replace your word 'degraded' with 'altered'. 
Certainly any alteration means you are not getting the highest of fidelity - but in most cases perfect fidelity would not be a good thing - for example  an accurate reproduction of a concert grand in my living room would be completely intolerable.  Most good sound engineers know this, although they also know it is bad PR to discuss it with audiophiles.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 04, 2019, 07:43:36 AM
My suspicion is that some people just listen for the tunes, if they can hear all the tunes then they think they're listening to all that matters, and that's all they need from their hifi.  Linn used to sell hifi like this, they priced themselves on the idea that their equipment would let the listener follow all the tunes, the salesman called this Tune Dem.

https://www.linn.co.uk/tunedem

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 04, 2019, 07:45:15 AM
Quote from: aukhawk on December 04, 2019, 04:48:04 AM
This is all true but I'd replace your word 'degraded' with 'altered'. 
Certainly any alteration means you are not getting the highest of fidelity - but in most cases perfect fidelity would not be a good thing - for example  an accurate reproduction of a concert grand in my living room would be completely intolerable.  Most good sound engineers know this, although they also know it is bad PR to discuss it with audiophiles.

You have a volume control, I don't see what's intolerable about having the sound of a concert grand in your living room if you can adjust the volume.

I've heard of said that piano is particularly hard for hifi because of the percussive attack, I'm not sure this is true, but I have heard it said (apparently Yamaha speakers, their top of the range, are successful with piano, if I cared more about piano I'd check it out.)
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Irons on December 04, 2019, 08:15:02 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 04, 2019, 02:19:56 AM
I'm fascinated by all these people who essentially say sound quality makes no difference to them. I know we're talking about the quality of the equipment rather than the recordings, but still. Having bought a new CD player this year it was painfully obvious to me in the shops that there are real differences between units (and also that the middle has virtually fallen out of the market). I took a cluster of discs with me to the shops so that I could try them out, and reproduction varied considerably.

Sound quality definitely does make a difference to me. I have a supposedly fabled recording of Gieseking playing Debussy preludes, and I just could not warm to it because of the sound. Until I did a common trick of mine, which is listening from around the corner in my kitchen. This got rid of enough of the background distraction that I could get a bit more out of the recording. But I still didn't love it.

Certainly with popular music, it can be extremely obvious when a recording has been poorly produced and the life and energy of the performance has been sucked out of it. For me I don't think classical is any different. Emotion can only be conveyed by the sounds you can actually hear being reproduced, and if for whatever reasons (including age) the recording did not capture as much then to me it's inevitable it can't convey as much, even if one is not entirely conscious of this. And if it's the equipment that isn't capable of reproducing the sound, similar things will happen. Turning the sound up high can show up differences between units' ability to cope for example.

The CD player I ended up buying, one of the things it keeps surprising me with is it's good reproduction of bass. I'm hearing things low down in recordings, including classical ones, that I haven't noticed before.

I agree with this. As my priority is vinyl I owned a CD player (Denon) purchased second-hand on eBay believing the mantra - all CD players sound the same. That can be put to bed, because they most certainly do not! Since upgrading (Quad) the leap in quality of sound over the old player is astonishing.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 04, 2019, 08:17:35 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 04, 2019, 02:19:56 AM
I'm fascinated by all these people who essentially say sound quality makes no difference to them.
I don't think that is what they are saying. Is there a particular post that gives you this impression?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 04, 2019, 12:05:16 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 04, 2019, 08:17:35 AM
I don't think that is what they are saying. Is there a particular post that gives you this impression?

Exactly.  Nobody said it doesn't matter at all
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 04, 2019, 12:52:41 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 04, 2019, 08:17:35 AM
I don't think that is what they are saying. Is there a particular post that gives you this impression?

I won't bother requoting all the people that said no to question 1.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 04, 2019, 12:59:17 PM
It's a weird question, frankly

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 04, 2019, 01:34:41 PM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 04, 2019, 12:59:17 PM
It's a weird question, frankly

Why? I think it's quite interesting that there are differences in the way different listeners cope / don't cope with variations in sound.

Not just sound. I can think of another context or two where my parents and I are completely different in terms of what we require for enjoyment.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 04, 2019, 02:31:21 PM
It's the idea that "emotion" is more detectable in high definition sound... just seems like an odd adjective
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: André on December 04, 2019, 02:45:11 PM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 04, 2019, 02:31:21 PM
It's the idea that "emotion" is more detectable in high definition sound... just seems like an odd adjective

Spot on.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 04, 2019, 03:37:30 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 04, 2019, 12:52:41 PM
I won't bother requoting all the people that said no to question 1.
The question does not ask about general quality making a difference, rather it is more specific in asking if it "influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music." Aren't these two totally different things?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Ratliff on December 04, 2019, 10:47:39 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?

A very loaded question, with all the assumptions about "detecting" "emotional content" of music. When I listen to music enjoyment is contingent on me being able to ignore the technical artifacts and feel as though I am listening to a actual performance, rather than a recording per se. I don't require perfect equipment or a perfect recording, but something good enough that I can imagine I am there. It is just as much a matter of the recording engineer's craft as of the technical quality of the equipment. There are old mono recordings that sound great. Good equipment certainly helps. The issue is whether there is enough there for my imagination to latch on to.

Quote
2: Do posters think accurate observations of recording quality can be made with something like a mobile ( cell phone in the US) through ear buds?

The earbuds that came with my phone certainly have poor frequency response and are not particularly satisfying for listening to music. I can't imagine that I'd be able to judge recording quality with them. My phone sound just fine when I use it with appropriate headphones.

Quote
3: Should we accept evaluations of something like the tonal richness, dryness, sharpness etc of a recording without knowing how it was heard?

Probably not. I often don't agree with views I see expressed about recording quality. I see recordings I consider superb trashed, and recordings that I don't like praised. People have different criteria for what constitutes a good recording.

Quote
4: Does any of this matter to any of you?

No.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 05, 2019, 01:50:00 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 04, 2019, 03:37:30 PM
The question does not ask about general quality making a difference, rather it is more specific in asking if it "influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music." Aren't these two totally different things?

I don't think so, no. It's fairly obvious that unless one is listening through tin cans, hearing the correct notes played is not going to be an issue.

Mind you, I'm not sure I want to get into another one of those conversations where we end up debating what the entire point of listening to music actually is and whether we're actually hearing "emotional content" when all that a sound system can literally do is reproduce frequencies.

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: steve ridgway on December 05, 2019, 03:51:38 AM
1. I enjoy my iPod tower for non-classical music but have switched to my portable music player and headphones for classical, the dynamic range is too much for it. I get more feeling for the music with the headphone system so I suppose it influences my ability to generate emotion although whether that's the same emotion intended by the composer is debatable.

2. The earbuds I've tried all lack bass. The Sennheiser in ear ones are better but only for as long as they take to work loose after ramming them in my ears and any movement of the wires is audible.

3. Listeners wanting superb audiophile quality probably need to hear about it from reviewers with appropriate systems.

4. I'd choose a better sounding remaster over an original release but wouldn't go for a cleaner but less engaging performance, the musical content is more important.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 05, 2019, 04:10:50 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 05, 2019, 01:50:00 AM
I don't think so, no. It's fairly obvious that unless one is listening through tin cans, hearing the correct notes played is not going to be an issue.

Mind you, I'm not sure I want to get into another one of those conversations where we end up debating what the entire point of listening to music actually is and whether we're actually hearing "emotional content" when all that a sound system can literally do is reproduce frequencies.


Well, I don't either. Having said that, I am understanding the first question in a completely different way.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 05, 2019, 04:27:48 AM
Well, what is it that you think better sound quality does for you? If you think that sound quality matters, but that it doesn't matter for "detecting the emotional content", you must have something else in mind that it does matter for.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 05, 2019, 05:27:01 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 05, 2019, 04:27:48 AM
Well, what is it that you think better sound quality does for you? If you think that sound quality matters, but that it doesn't matter for "detecting the emotional content", you must have something else in mind that it does matter for.
Sound quality isn't all that important for detecting emotional content (in my opinion). Sure, better sound quality could open more doors. But this is about detecting emotional content, not the best version of that content. This is a far cry from saying sound quality makes no difference to me.

SO I can take a recording of Toscanini from the 30's (or take Caruso from way earlier), for example, and I can hear the passion and quite nuanced emotions that appear to be going on. Perhaps you think that some emotional moments are not detectable due to poor sound (in other words, covered up)? I suppose that is possible.  I guess what I am driving at is that the sound quality (as long as it isn't too degraded or prevents hearing enough of the music) isn't the prime driver of conveying emotion. It's the performance. Sound quality can make it more effective and more immersive (and maybe even bring out small details). But I don't think it is the prime factor for detecting it, and likely a non-factor in many cases.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 05, 2019, 05:37:54 AM
So basically this just comes down to how you and I are interpreting what "detecting" means. You read it as a binary can/can't detect. I read it as a question of degree.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 06:39:42 AM
What exactly does "emotional content" sound like?

Can we have an example of a particular piece where one recording has this quality and another doesn't and with sufficient evidence that the reason is down to good engineering and not the actual musicians performing?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 05, 2019, 06:44:40 AM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 06:39:42 AM
Can we have an example of a particular piece where one recording has this quality and another doesn't and with sufficient evidence that the reason is down to good engineering and not the actual musicians performing?

The Philips transfer of Enescu's recording of the Bach solo violin music versus the Forgotten Classics transfer.
The Lennick/Salerno transfer of Daniel Ericourt's Debussy versus the LPs, or my amateur transfer of them (which I can let you have.)
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 05, 2019, 08:29:48 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 05, 2019, 04:27:48 AM
Well, what is it that you think better sound quality does for you? If you think that sound quality matters, but that it doesn't matter for "detecting the emotional content", you must have something else in mind that it does matter for.

For me, as a listener to recordings almost exclusively (I last went to a concert or jazz gig over 30 years ago) the sound quality of the recording is an important part of the package, and I like my equipment to be good enough to make the best of the recording.

Listening to music is a time-consuming business, and I wouldn't want to waste any of my time listening to anything that was less than 'very good'.  How can I put it?  If I award 'Excellent' a score of 3, 'Very good' = 2, 'Good' = 1 and anything less than good = 0  - and then score each of the three fundamental elements of a recording on those lines, that is the music itself (according to my preferences), the performance, and the sound quality - if the accumulated score is under 6 then I'm not interested.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 01:43:08 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 05, 2019, 06:44:40 AM
The Philips transfer of Enescu's recording of the Bach solo violin music versus the Forgotten Classics transfer.
The Lennick/Salerno transfer of Daniel Ericourt's Debussy versus the LPs, or my amateur transfer of them (which I can let you have.)

So I gave a listen to the first pair you mentioned... one is a bit cleaner, less hiss, fuller dynamic range... a better transfer

What does that have to do with "detecting emotion"? 

One wasn't any more "emotional" than the other because it's the same performance
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 05, 2019, 01:48:16 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 05, 2019, 01:50:00 AM
I don't think so, no. It's fairly obvious that unless one is listening through tin cans, hearing the correct notes played is not going to be an issue.

Mind you, I'm not sure I want to get into another one of those conversations where we end up debating what the entire point of listening to music actually is and whether we're actually hearing "emotional content" when all that a sound system can literally do is reproduce frequencies.
All that a sound system can do is reproduce frequencies? If it was that easy we'd all be enjoying Bose crap going fizz, fizz, fizz from somewhere up near the ceiling and oomph, oomph, oomph from under your sofa.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 05, 2019, 02:16:47 PM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 01:43:08 PM
So I gave a listen to the first pair you mentioned... one is a bit cleaner, less hiss, fuller dynamic range... a better transfer

What does that have to do with "detecting emotion"? 

One wasn't any more "emotional" than the other because it's the same performance

It's to do with hearing more of the sound, in particular the lower frequencies in that recording. You just can hear more of what Ensescu was doing with the fiddle. Given that music is sound then it follows that the way the music makes you feel is partly due to the sounds you hear. And if the recording doesn't let you hear all those sounds correctly, there may well be consequences for your responses emotionally. I mean, even if we don't agree about the Enescu it would a priori be surprising if there weren't examples of the thing you're looking for.

With hifi I've had lots of experiences -- where improving the amplification seemed let me hear the music very differently from an emotional point of view. I think this is partly to do with image, with a good amp you can sense more clearly how singers are relating and responding to each other. I had exactly this experience recently with a recording of music by Busnois by Cantica Symphonia when I bought a Radford amp. Before Radford, the recording felt like totally grey and lifeless note spinning. After Radford it feels like  living breathing music making.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 02:35:34 PM
That's valid testimony, for sure and I can respect that POV

Though I don't see it the same way, myself as emotions in music to me are more a combination of A) the intent of the performer, B) performance choices, techniques and articulation that may evoke a response of sadness/happiness/anger/etc and C) the sequence of notes and voicings as written/improvised (major vs minor, diminished vs augmented, etc)

The love theme in Tchaikovsky's Romeo and Juliet would sound decidedly less romantic played Presto by a quintet of bassoonists ... same tune but now the meaning completely altered by choice of voice and tempo

As a musician, I think the emotional response an individual has to music has more to do with the writing and execution than the stereo it's played back on
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 05, 2019, 03:48:33 PM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 02:35:34 PM
As a musician, I think the emotional response an individual has to music has more to do with the writing and execution than the stereo it's played back on
My last remark on this as such discussions often get out of hand. Consider two things. Is there any difference between a Stradavarius and a child's first cheap violin?
Musicians are gifted with something many of us mere mortals lack. The ability to read a score and simultaneously 'hear' the music and 'fill in the gaps' in an inferior recording or playback system.

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 04:11:36 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 05, 2019, 03:48:33 PM
My last remark on this as such discussions often get out of hand. Consider two things. Is there any difference between a Stradavarius and a child's first cheap violin?
Musicians are gifted with something many of us mere mortals lack. The ability to read a score and simultaneously 'hear' the music and 'fill in the gaps' in an inferior recording or playback system.

Some of the greatest musicians alive can't sight read music at all, for the record

Sure there's a difference between a Stradivarius and a really cheap kid's violin ... the difference between a Stradivarius and a really high end violin made last month is another matter altogether and the reverence for the former merely proves that being a musician doesn't preclude one from being irrational even on the subject of sound
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 04:38:21 PM
And for the record, if I put on Charles Munch and the BSO doing Daphnis et Chloe from 1955, there's no gaps to fill in... all the same notes as somebody else in 2015 ... it's the playing, the interpretation that makes it special. 

I can't sight-read well enough to sit there and follow along with a score even if I had any desire to do so.  The score is the score no matter who's performing the work.  The performance is what makes a record/concert good or not.  The "performance" can entail a lot of different qualities.  Leonard Bernstein and George Szell might give you two totally different takes on the same piece of music.  Both might be amazingly enjoyable for none of the same reasons.  One is hyper-emotional and less of a perfectionist so maybe one or two of the horns are a smidge late but he's a storyteller and wants to get those big climactic moments ... the other gets a miraculous ensemble balance, no one is ever late and the reigns are held tight with tension the key to the narrative arc.  Drastically different approaches.

There's a lot of ways to give a great performance.  A great performance might have zero mistakes or it might have 100.  Same with a poor performance. 

Every performance is an interpretation no matter how in denial of that inescapable reality some musicians insist on being.  As soon as you raise the baton, put your fingers to the keys, put your bow on the strings, fingers between the frets, etc you are involved.  If you weren't, everybody's Eroica or Tannhauser would sound exactly the same to the letter.  "Strictly by the score" is for computers, not humans. 
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 05, 2019, 10:34:03 PM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 02:35:34 PM

The love theme in Tchaikovsky's Romeo and Juliet would sound decidedly less romantic played Presto by a quintet of bassoonists ... same tune but now the meaning completely altered by choice of voice and tempo

As a musician, I think the emotional response an individual has to music has more to do with the writing and execution than the stereo it's played back on

Yes I understand but my point is that sometimes the reproduction equipment obscured the execution, not at the level of tunes, but at the level of second and third harmonics, for example, or the use the performer makes of hall reverberations.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Irons on December 06, 2019, 12:20:19 AM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 04:38:21 PM
And for the record, if I put on Charles Munch and the BSO doing Daphnis et Chloe from 1955, there's no gaps to fill in... all the same notes as somebody else in 2015 ... it's the playing, the interpretation that makes it special. 



No it's not. That is one of the finest examples of the renowned "Living Stereo" RCA recordings from the "golden age". In my opinion would trouch a modern recording for sound alone.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:43:26 AM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 05, 2019, 01:48:16 PM
All that a sound system can do is reproduce frequencies? If it was that easy we'd all be enjoying Bose crap going fizz, fizz, fizz from somewhere up near the ceiling and oomph, oomph, oomph from under your sofa.

I didn't say all sound systems reproduce frequencies with equal fidelity. But reproducing frequencies is, in fact, the sole function of a sound system, yes.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 01:44:16 AM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 04:38:21 PM
And for the record, if I put on Charles Munch and the BSO doing Daphnis et Chloe from 1955, there's no gaps to fill in... all the same notes as somebody else in 2015 ... it's the playing, the interpretation that makes it special. 

I can't sight-read well enough to sit there and follow along with a score even if I had any desire to do so.  The score is the score no matter who's performing the work.  The performance is what makes a record/concert good or not.  The "performance" can entail a lot of different qualities.  Leonard Bernstein and George Szell might give you two totally different takes on the same piece of music.  Both might be amazingly enjoyable for none of the same reasons.  One is hyper-emotional and less of a perfectionist so maybe one or two of the horns are a smidge late but he's a storyteller and wants to get those big climactic moments ... the other gets a miraculous ensemble balance, no one is ever late and the reigns are held tight with tension the key to the narrative arc.  Drastically different approaches.

There's a lot of ways to give a great performance.  A great performance might have zero mistakes or it might have 100.  Same with a poor performance. 

Every performance is an interpretation no matter how in denial of that inescapable reality some musicians insist on being.  As soon as you raise the baton, put your fingers to the keys, put your bow on the strings, fingers between the frets, etc you are involved.  If you weren't, everybody's Eroica or Tannhauser would sound exactly the same to the letter.  "Strictly by the score" is for computers, not humans.

I'm in complete agreement with all of the above.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:46:16 AM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 05, 2019, 04:38:21 PM
And for the record, if I put on Charles Munch and the BSO doing Daphnis et Chloe from 1955, there's no gaps to fill in... all the same notes as somebody else in 2015 ... it's the playing, the interpretation that makes it special. 

I can't sight-read well enough to sit there and follow along with a score even if I had any desire to do so.  The score is the score no matter who's performing the work.  The performance is what makes a record/concert good or not.  The "performance" can entail a lot of different qualities.  Leonard Bernstein and George Szell might give you two totally different takes on the same piece of music.  Both might be amazingly enjoyable for none of the same reasons.  One is hyper-emotional and less of a perfectionist so maybe one or two of the horns are a smidge late but he's a storyteller and wants to get those big climactic moments ... the other gets a miraculous ensemble balance, no one is ever late and the reigns are held tight with tension the key to the narrative arc.  Drastically different approaches.

There's a lot of ways to give a great performance.  A great performance might have zero mistakes or it might have 100.  Same with a poor performance. 

Every performance is an interpretation no matter how in denial of that inescapable reality some musicians insist on being.  As soon as you raise the baton, put your fingers to the keys, put your bow on the strings, fingers between the frets, etc you are involved.  If you weren't, everybody's Eroica or Tannhauser would sound exactly the same to the letter.  "Strictly by the score" is for computers, not humans.

There seems to be a false dichotomy at play here, as if the question is whether it's the performance that matters or the recording.

Saying that the recording matters is in no way a claim that the performance doesn't. Whereas you seem to be intending now to declare the performance is all, and bugger the recording.

Personally, I can't escape the conclusion that your ability to conclude that a great performance WAS a great performance, if you weren't personally present at the time, necessarily involves a recording engineer having done a good enough job of giving you a decent impression of what was going on. The performance matters AND the recording matters.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 06, 2019, 01:57:40 AM
'Living Stereo' in 1955 ?  Was it taped in stereo at that date - the first practical stereo released on vinyl was 1958 - but they may have used existing tapes.

Quote from: aukhawk on December 04, 2019, 04:48:04 AM
Certainly any alteration means you are not getting the highest of fidelity - but in most cases perfect fidelity would not be a good thing - for example  an accurate reproduction of a concert grand in my living room would be completely intolerable.  ...

Quote from: Mandryka on December 04, 2019, 07:45:15 AM
You have a volume control, I don't see what's intolerable about having the sound of a concert grand in your living room if you can adjust the volume.

I've heard of said that piano is particularly hard for hifi because of the percussive attack, I'm not sure this is true, but I have heard it said (apparently Yamaha speakers, their top of the range, are successful with piano, if I cared more about piano I'd check it out.)

If you take a (hypothetical) perfect solo piano recording and then turn the volume down to make it listenable, then you no longer have the highest of fidelity.  Most of the music would sound too quiet and some of it (the tails of sustained notes) would become inaudible, which is a serious loss of fidelity.  For this reason even pianophile labels don't attempt to supply such a perfect recording, even if their publicity suggests that they do.

The problem with a piano specifically is that a large part of the available dynamic range is taken up by the percussive attack of any fff or ffff chords.  These moments are rare - possibly as little as 1% of the total duration of the music.  By using a volume control to accommodate them the other 99% of the music is compromised. 
Hence the judicious use of compression by the recording engineers.  Obviously that is a compromise - if you are lucky to have a very quiet listening environment you would prefer less compression, whilst listening in the car you would prefer more - and everyone has different requirements here.
A much better approach would be zero compression as recorded, and the necessary compression applied 'to taste' by means of a variable control at the listening end.  But, for whatever reason, audio reproduction hasn't evolved like that.

If it were a lute, not a piano - then yes, the ideal would be a (again hypothetical) perfect recording, played back at a natural level.  Some lute recordings are very good indeed and so can be intensely pleasurable to listen to on a good system, in a way that (IME) a piano can't.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Biffo on December 06, 2019, 02:33:59 AM
Quote from: aukhawk on December 06, 2019, 01:57:40 AM
'Living Stereo' in 1955 ?  Was it taped in stereo at that date - the first practical stereo released on vinyl was 1958 - but they may have used existing tapes.


RCA started experimenting with 'binaural' sound in the early 50s. Most of the recordings they made in 1954 were in true stereo on two-channel tapes. Later they switched to three-channel tapes. By the time stereo vinyl LPs came along in 1958 they had an extensive catalogue of 'Living Stereo'  recordings to release.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 02:59:52 AM
Quote from: aukhawk on December 06, 2019, 01:57:40 AM
'Living Stereo' in 1955 ?  Was it taped in stereo at that date - the first practical stereo released on vinyl was 1958 - but they may have used existing tapes.

If you take a (hypothetical) perfect solo piano recording and then turn the volume down to make it listenable, then you no longer have the highest of fidelity.  Most of the music would sound too quiet and some of it (the tails of sustained notes) would become inaudible, which is a serious loss of fidelity.  For this reason even pianophile labels don't attempt to supply such a perfect recording, even if their publicity suggests that they do.

The problem with a piano specifically is that a large part of the available dynamic range is taken up by the percussive attack of any fff or ffff chords.  These moments are rare - possibly as little as 1% of the total duration of the music.  By using a volume control to accommodate them the other 99% of the music is compromised. 
Hence the judicious use of compression by the recording engineers.  Obviously that is a compromise - if you are lucky to have a very quiet listening environment you would prefer less compression, whilst listening in the car you would prefer more - and everyone has different requirements here.
A much better approach would be zero compression as recorded, and the necessary compression applied 'to taste' by means of a variable control at the listening end.  But, for whatever reason, audio reproduction hasn't evolved like that.

If it were a lute, not a piano - then yes, the ideal would be a (again hypothetical) perfect recording, played back at a natural level.  Some lute recordings are very good indeed and so can be intensely pleasurable to listen to on a good system, in a way that (IME) a piano can't.

That's interesting. The speaker that a friend of mine who likes piano music told me was by far the best at capturing the resonant clang and tintinnabulation of modern piano is Yamaha NS 5000 - Yamaha of course have a lot of in-house experience with piano. However I'm not enough of a fan of piano music to investigate them, and anyway the price is formidable.

https://www.hificorner.co.uk/yamaha-ns-5000-standmount-speakers.html
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 05:12:35 AM
Quote from: Irons on December 06, 2019, 12:20:19 AM
No it's not. That is one of the finest examples of the renowned "Living Stereo" RCA recordings from the "golden age". In my opinion would trouch a modern recording for sound alone.

What do you mean "no it's not"? 

That's insane
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 05:17:11 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:46:16 AM
There seems to be a false dichotomy at play here, as if the question is whether it's the performance that matters or the recording.

Saying that the recording matters is in no way a claim that the performance doesn't. Whereas you seem to be intending now to declare the performance is all, and bugger the recording.

Personally, I can't escape the conclusion that your ability to conclude that a great performance WAS a great performance, if you weren't personally present at the time, necessarily involves a recording engineer having done a good enough job of giving you a decent impression of what was going on. The performance matters AND the recording matters.

George Szell's Allegretto in Beethoven 7 utterly trounces every other version I've heard (which has got be 100 of them) and the recording quality is not particularly good

artists make art
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 06:44:16 AM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 05:17:11 AM
George Szell's Allegretto in Beethoven 7 utterly trounces every other version I've heard (which has got be 100 of them) and the recording quality is not particularly good

artists make art

And recording engineers make it possible for you to hear them. Your willingness to denigrate the hard work of the technical people who make this art POSSIBLE is frankly unedifying.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: relm1 on December 06, 2019, 07:03:24 AM
1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?

Yes, the quality of the equipment is only as good as the weakest element.  I went through an audiophile phase and still have all the equipment but not the environment to enjoy it.  But when I had it and it was finely tuned, the results were stunning and the pleasure I derived from listening was sublime and I haven't had that since.  Not only do you need very high end gear but your home needs to have good acoustic treatment too.

2: Do posters think accurate observations of recording quality can be made with something like a mobile ( cell phone in the US) through ear buds?

Impossible.  Sound needs air to move which you get through molecules moving air and don't get that with ear buds.  In addition, you don't have sympathetic vibrations that happens in large acoustic spaces (the way the sounds interact with the environment).

3: Should we accept evaluations of something like the tonal richness, dryness, sharpness etc of a recording without knowing how it was heard?

You can learn to understand what your sound system is capable of doing even if it isn't accurate.  For example, some audio engineers can get really good results with sub par equipment because they understand the equipment very well and know what it is doing and what it isn't doing so can understand how something really sounds even though their equipment is limited.

4: Does any of this matter to any of you?

Yes but it is a connoisseur's obsession much like fine wine.  I don't know much about wine.  I couldn't tell the difference between a $10 bottle of wine and a $7,000 bottle but a connoisseur would care about it and also understand exactly how to experience fine wines.  99% of people are satisfied with never going over a $50 bottle of wine but that small group who does care, really cares about the region, the grape, the year, the technique, the storage material, the wine master, but to most people they won't notice any difference.  I think high fidelity is like that, most are fine with ear buds and for 99% of people that will do all they will ever need musically and some of us are fanatically obsessed with achieving an unattainable experience of auditory perfection.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 07:15:28 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 06:44:16 AM
And recording engineers make it possible for you to hear them. Your willingness to denigrate the hard work of the technical people who make this art POSSIBLE is frankly unedifying.

You're missing the point entirely.  Szell's 7th is not, in fact a particularly well-engineered recording.  There's got to be 100 others that have superior fidelity.  But none of them match the allegretto's ensemble performance and interpretation. 

Credit for that goes to Szell and his band
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Irons on December 06, 2019, 07:35:28 AM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 05:12:35 AM
What do you mean "no it's not"? 

That's insane

The last time I looked I wasn't insane, but you never know. ???

You said: "it's the playing that makes it special".

I said: no it's not it's the sound that makes it special.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 07:44:10 AM
Quote from: Irons on December 06, 2019, 07:35:28 AM
The last time I looked I wasn't insane, but you never know. ???

You said: "it's the playing that makes it special".

I said: no it's not it's the sound that makes it special.

So the only thing that separates that rendition of that work from literally any other one is recording engineering?  Is that your take here? Because yeah, it's pretty insane since it is objectively 100% false.  Munch and Boulez give markedly different readings of this same work, for example. 

Musicians make the sounds you hear, not recording engineers.  Their job is to try the best they can to make sure you can hear clearly what the musicians are doing. 
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 08:49:03 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 06:44:16 AM
And recording engineers make it possible for you to hear them. Your willingness to denigrate the hard work of the technical people who make this art POSSIBLE is frankly unedifying.

I think you're being too harsh on him. If I understand him correctly, he says that it's possible that an older, sonic-wise imperfect recording be superior in "emotional content" to a modern, SOTA-sound one. And I can only agree. For instance, Bronislaw Huberman's performance of Beethoven's VC, recorded in 1932 (I think), with Vienna PO under Szell's baton. The sound is, well, noticeably 1932. Yet this is THE most passionate and intense performance I've ever heard of this work, and imho the "emotional content" of this recording is far above that of many modern ones whose sound is far better. I know you're not into historical recordings but give this a try, if only for the sake of refuting my point.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 08:56:14 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 08:49:03 AM
I think you're being too harsh on him. If I understand him correctly, he says that it's possible that an older, sonic-wise imperfect recording be superior in "emotional content" to a modern, SOTA-sound one. And I can only agree. For instance, Bronislaw Huberman's performance of Beethoven's VC, recorded in 1932 (I think), with Vienna PO under Szell's baton. The sound is, well, noticeably 1932. Yet this is THE most passionate and intense performance I've ever heard of this work, and imho the "emotional content" of this recording is far above that of many modern ones whose sound is far better. I know you're not into historical recordings but give this a try, if only for the sake of refuting my point.

Precisely ^

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 09:33:03 AM
You know how there are some people who think that restoring a fresco to it's original state, with its original colours etc, ruins it, that the dirt and grime tone it down, make it less vulgar and gaudy, that the decayed fresco is more beautiful than the original? Chartres Cathedral is a well known example and Venice itself is a bit like that, the feeling of decay and the palpable sense of something precarious and old adds to the magic of being there.

Well I wonder if it's possible that the pleasure of Huberman playing a Beethoven concerto is enhanced by the ropy sound, that if we heard it in glorious phase 4 living stereo it or if we were at the concert, it would sound less magically romantic.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Ratliff on December 06, 2019, 09:40:23 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 09:33:03 AM
You know how there are some people who think that restoring a fresco to it's original state, with its original colours etc, ruins it, that the dirt and grime tone it down, make it less vulgar and gaudy, that the decayed fresco is more beautiful than the original? Chartres Cathedral is a well known example and Venice itself is a bit like that, the feeling of decay and the palpable sense of something precarious and old adds to the magic of being there.

Well I wonder if it's possible that the pleasure of Huberman playing a Beethoven concerto is enhanced by the ropy sound, that if we heard it in glorious phase 4 living stereo it would sound less magically romantic.

Yes, it is everything, the nuances of performance, the engineering, the playback, your state of mind when you listen. In olden times I'm sure they played differently in sessions so that it would come across on a shellac disc. As I said somewhere above, the key is whether the whole thing clicks and allows me to "enter" the performance in my imagination. Adequate playback equipment is part of it.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 09:47:19 AM
Quote from: Ratliff on December 06, 2019, 09:40:23 AM
In olden times I'm sure they played differently in sessions so that it would come across on a shellac disc.

That's a thought I've never come across before.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 10:13:45 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 09:33:03 AM
You know how there are some people who think that restoring a fresco to it's original state, with its original colours etc, ruins it, that the dirt and grime tone it down, make it less vulgar and gaudy, that the decayed fresco is more beautiful than the original? Chartres Cathedral is a well known example and Venice itself is a bit like that, the feeling of decay and the palpable sense of something precarious and old adds to the magic of being there.

Well I wonder if it's possible that the pleasure of Huberman playing a Beethoven concerto is enhanced by the ropy sound, that if we heard it in glorious phase 4 living stereo it or if we were at the concert, it would sound less magically romantic.

I didn't say "romantic", I said "passionate and intense". The two (three, actually) notions are not interchangeable. Nevertheless, this is a thought-provoking post. Very much so, actually. Please allow me some time to ruminate on it.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Ratliff on December 06, 2019, 10:16:41 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 09:47:19 AM
That's an thought I've never come across before.

Seems obvious, to me at least. Given the noise level of a 78 rpm shellac disc the dynamic range we hear on modern recordings would cause soft passages to disappear entirely into the surface noise.

I remember reading that during in the old days Mercury Living Presence producers would work with the conductor to manage dynamics so as not to exceed the limits of the technology (as opposed to Decca and others who would solve the same problem by gain-riding).
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 06, 2019, 10:23:54 AM
Quote from: relm1 on December 06, 2019, 07:03:24 AM
1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?

Yes, the quality of the equipment is only as good as the weakest element.  I went through an audiophile phase and still have all the equipment but not the environment to enjoy it.  But when I had it and it was finely tuned, the results were stunning and the pleasure I derived from listening was sublime and I haven't had that since.  Not only do you need very high end gear but your home needs to have good acoustic treatment too.
I wonder how much of this is in your mind and how much you actually hear. There is a psychological element here that you KNOW the equipment is better. Thus, you also have the pleasure of knowing that and enjoying that, which may make the impact even more. Am I making sense to you?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 10:53:49 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 06, 2019, 10:23:54 AM
I wonder how much of this is in your mind and how much you actually hear. There is a psychological element here that you KNOW the equipment is better. Thus, you also have the pleasure of knowing that and enjoying that, which may make the impact even more. Am I making sense to you?

Same thing happens in taste tests ... tell somebody the wine is $5000 per bottle and they'll treat it differently than the exact same liquid they're told is $10

Now obviously, a stereo recording made in 2018 will almost certainly have more fidelity than a mono recording from 1953, I'm not suggesting otherwise
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 06, 2019, 10:23:54 AM
I wonder how much of this is in your mind and how much you actually hear. There is a psychological element here that you KNOW the equipment is better. Thus, you also have the pleasure of knowing that and enjoying that, which may make the impact even more. Am I making sense to you?

You are certainly making sense to me.

I have never ever been able to tell the difference between mp3 and flac on any of the equipments I've ever used. Granted, they have always been low end, yet somehow I have always been able to "detect the emotional content" of any given piece I listened to and this makes me think that "emotional content" is much more dependent on performance than on recording.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Irons on December 06, 2019, 11:31:55 AM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 07:44:10 AM
So the only thing that separates that rendition of that work from literally any other one is recording engineering?  Is that your take here? Because yeah, it's pretty insane since it is objectively 100% false.  Munch and Boulez give markedly different readings of this same work, for example. 

Musicians make the sounds you hear, not recording engineers.  Their job is to try the best they can to make sure you can hear clearly what the musicians are doing.

No, I don't think that. But Szell is a much better example to support your argument then Munch. That recording by Munch is legendary as far as sound is concerned it also happens to be a good performance. Of course good sound enhances the enjoyment of music, and of course a performance can be so good that it transcends poor sound. To talk about anything being 100% in a discussion such as this is what I would call "insane".
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 11:58:06 AM
Quote from: Irons on December 06, 2019, 11:31:55 AM
No, I don't think that. But Szell is a much better example to support your argument then Munch. That recording by Munch is legendary as far as sound is concerned it also happens to be a good performance. Of course good sound enhances the enjoyment of music, and of course a performance can be so good that it transcends poor sound. To talk about anything being 100% in a discussion such as this is what I would call "insane".

Why is why I was stunned by your initial remark in the first place

The only absolutists seem to be the audiophiles in the discussion
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 12:06:28 PM
Quote from: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 11:58:06 AM
The only absolutists seem to be the audiophiles in the discussion

I wouldn't put it that radically.

I'd say that the audiophiles are as entitled to their opinion as the non-audiophiles, as long as they acknowledge that what they claim is personal experience, not fact.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:08:43 PM
Not one of the audiophiles has said the performance is irrelevant as far as I can see.

Half the problem now is that people want to compare an old performance with a new one WHEN THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT PERFORMANCES. I made the point several days ago that the only kind of comparison that's actually a proper consideration of sound quality is 2 different listening experiences of the same performance.

Telling me repeatedly how Szell is the best ever conductor of a piece is trying to a large extent to defeat a straw man. That's not the issue. The issue is whether listening to Szell on better equipment or with improved "remastering" (that may not be exactly the technical term, I'm not fully up on the technical terms) will get you a better emotional experience than listening to Szell on a pair of earbuds you got at the $2 shop.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:15:26 PM
And saying that musicians make the sounds, not recording engineers, is misconceived. When you listen to a recording rather than a live performance, you are NOT listening to the sounds the musicians made. They have not been miniaturised and put in suspended animation inside your equipment. You are listening to the COMBINED result of the work of both people who initially generated a sound and people who did the work of capturing a likeness of that sound in a reproducible form. Not to mention the people who worked on your individual reproduction unit.

Not understanding this and acting as if you are just hearing the musicians is a bit like thinking that you could take a poster of Rene Magritte's famous pipe and use it to smoke.

You are listening to a product. You are doing that on your own personal equipment. It's perfectly possible there will be different versions of the exact same musical product, and indeed these days record companies try to make money by creating new versions of the same product. I mean... exactly how many different versions of this Szell performance are there? How many times has it been repackaged and tinkered with?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 01:21:29 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:08:43 PM
The issue is whether listening to Szell on better equipment or with improved "remastering" (that may not be exactly the technical term, I'm not fully up on the technical terms) will get you a better emotional experience than listening to Szell on a pair of earbuds you got at the $2 shop.

I think  you stated the issue accurately. And my answer is NO.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 01:23:08 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:15:26 PM
And saying that musicians make the sounds, not recording engineers, is misconceived. When you listen to a recording rather than a live performance, you are NOT listening to the sounds the musicians made. They have not been miniaturised and put in suspended animation inside your equipment. You are listening to the COMBINED result of the work of both people who initially generated a sound and people who did the work of capturing a likeness of that sound in a reproducible form. Not to mention the people who worked on your individual reproduction unit.

Not understanding this and acting as if you are just hearing the musicians is a bit like thinking that you could take a poster of Rene Magritte's famous pipe and use it to smoke.

You are listening to a product. You are doing that on your own personal equipment. It's perfectly possible there will be different versions of the exact same musical product, and indeed these days record companies try to make money by creating new versions of the same product. I mean... exactly how many different versions of this Szell performance are there? How many times has it been repackaged and tinkered with?

Fair enough. Really.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:30:47 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 01:21:29 PM
I think  you stated the issue accurately. And my answer is NO.

You keep saying you can always hear the emotional content.

This is actually the wrong test. The test you need is to find examples of where you can't, quite, until you shift to better equipment or a better version, and it makes a difference to how you feel.

Recordings that already really do it for you aren't the test. The test is recordings that only kind of do it for you.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 01:39:03 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:30:47 PM
You keep saying you can always hear the emotional content.

This is actually the wrong test. The test you need is to find examples of where you can't

I haven't found such examples yet.

And I will probably never find them.

Can you guess why?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 02:19:10 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 01:39:03 PM
I haven't found such examples yet.

And I will probably never find them.

Can you guess why?

Yes, because it's pretty much impossible to actively look for them, and you wouldn't have any inclination to consciously do so even if it was feasible.

Actually knowing that you're missing out on something you're not experiencing is not possible, unless you live in a constant fear of missing out which I would not recommend.

The label "audiophile" has been thrown around. I don't think I'm an audiophile. The system I bought this year is still fundamentally at the cheap end of the spectrum. I'm just conscious that I do have some minimum standards, and that's simply because I do remember the relatively rare occasions that I've EXPERIENCED a direct comparison and I remember the lessons learned.

I don't buy mp3s because of the experience of hearing the exact same album on mp3 and CD. I bought my CD player and not an even cheaper one because of the experience of hearing how much clearer the same music was.

I don't spend every day fretting over the question of sound quality. I just know that it can make a difference to what I can hear. And I can't emotionally respond to something in the music that I can't actually hear.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 02:19:10 PM
Yes, because it's pretty much impossible to actively look for them, and you wouldn't have any inclination to consciously do so even if it was feasible.

Wrong and disappointing answer. Really.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 03:01:57 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 02:39:21 PM
Wrong and disappointing answer. Really.

You really shouldn't ask me things if your expectation is that I either read your mind or ignore my own. You've been doing that on 2 threads.

I am neither psychic nor here to stroke your ego.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: ChopinBroccoli on December 06, 2019, 03:44:39 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:08:43 PM
Not one of the audiophiles has said the performance is irrelevant as far as I can see.

Half the problem now is that people want to compare an old performance with a new one WHEN THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT PERFORMANCES. I made the point several days ago that the only kind of comparison that's actually a proper consideration of sound quality is 2 different listening experiences of the same performance.

Telling me repeatedly how Szell is the best ever conductor of a piece is trying to a large extent to defeat a straw man. That's not the issue. The issue is whether listening to Szell on better equipment or with improved "remastering" (that may not be exactly the technical term, I'm not fully up on the technical terms) will get you a better emotional experience than listening to Szell on a pair of earbuds you got at the $2 shop.

You are aware Szell's records have been remastered quite a few times?

Take, for example his Wagner Ring music album from 1968 ... it's one of my favorite records in any genre of music... First bought it on cassette of all things 23 years ago in the CBS "Great Performances" format (older collectors will remember these as they looked like the front page of a newspaper) ... fell in love with it immediately.  A year later I decided I should get it on a proper CD.  So I got the Sony Masterworks remaster which eliminated some of the hiss from the older one but also took a little bit of the high end treble away, leaving a dryer sound so you gain but you also lose ... still, easily adjusted to the change in a matter of minutes because it's the same performance with just a minor difference in overall sound.  Years went by and I saw there was another remaster (an album with the ludicrous title Wagner Without Words) that purported to restore some of the lost treble while still producing far less hiss than the original I had on cassette... and, yes it was true.  It was a somewhat clearer sounding recording.  Finally, they gave it a further upgrade when the big Szell box came out.  This was the clearest one yet.  Very nice and I was happy. 

What never actually changed though was that the overwhelming reasons the record remained a desert-island disc had almost nothing to do with any of this thoughtful tinkering (which I'm fine with, I think the remasters sound great and I'm glad they exist) and had everything to do with the music itself.  The ensemble playing on that record is outrageously excellent; the secondary voice clarity and sectional articulation is a miracle and the interpretive tension-and-release is thrilling ...

if nobody had ever bothered remastering that record and it still sounded exactly the same as it did on cassette, it would still be on my short list of desert island discs ... the improved fidelity and suppression of hiss is a nice bonus, but the art/emotional/intellectual content, whatever you prefer to call is the reason the album is what it is
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 04:39:29 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 12:06:28 PM
I wouldn't put it that radically.

I'd say that the audiophiles are as entitled to their opinion as the non-audiophiles, as long as they acknowledge that what they claim is personal experience, not fact.
May I suggest you acquaint youself with the vast body of empirical research and testing that's underscored so many improvements in the reproduction of music over the last several decades? It's not based on superstition or 'personal experiece'.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Daverz on December 06, 2019, 04:47:22 PM
"This revision brings new science-based perspectives on the performance of loudspeakers, room acoustics, measurements and equalization, all of which need to be appropriately used to ensure the accurate delivery of music and movie sound tracks from creators to listeners."

[asin] 113892136X[/asin]
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 04:55:11 PM
Which leads to another contentious subject. The number of men who cave in to their female partners and compromise on the accurate reproducion of recorded music in the home in the interests of 'décor'. The industry itself though is in part to blame for pushing absurdly ugly and oversized gear onto the market. Bose figured this out a long time ago and has made millions extruding a plastic tizz, fizz, fizz treble from up near the ceiling accompanied by a fat, none too deep bass, going Phoomph, Phoomph from under the sofa. OK, if people enjoy such compromises. Lets not pretend it has much to do with the reality of live music, especially the acoustic kind.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 06:33:40 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on November 30, 2019, 07:02:59 PM
1: Do posters think the equipment they listen to music on at home influences their ability to detect the emotional content of recorded music?

I'd just like to point out at this juncture that the chosen word was "influences".

Not "determines".
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 08:37:03 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 06:33:40 PM
I'd just like to point out at this juncture that the chosen word was "influences".

Not "determines".
I'd like to add another simple question to that. Do  micro and macro dynamic contrasts add anything to the expressive power of music, live or recorded?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Daverz on December 06, 2019, 08:47:05 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 08:37:03 PM
I'd like to add another simple question to that. Do  micro and macro dynamic contrasts add anyting to the expressive power of music, live or recorded?

Made up audiophile jargon.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 08:54:17 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 02:19:10 PM
Yes, because it's pretty much impossible to actively look for them, and you wouldn't have any inclination to consciously do so even if it was feasible.

Actually knowing that you're missing out on something you're not experiencing is not possible, unless you live in a constant fear of missing out which I would not recommend.

The label "audiophile" has been thrown around. I don't think I'm an audiophile. The system I bought this year is still fundamentally at the cheap end of the spectrum. I'm just conscious that I do have some minimum standards, and that's simply because I do remember the relatively rare occasions that I've EXPERIENCED a direct comparison and I remember the lessons learned.

I don't buy mp3s because of the experience of hearing the exact same album on mp3 and CD. I bought my CD player and not an even cheaper one because of the experience of hearing how much clearer the same music was.

I don't spend every day fretting over the question of sound quality. I just know that it can make a difference to what I can hear. And I can't emotionally respond to something in the music that I can't actually hear.
I may be somewhat obsessed with the quality of the gear I listen to music in the home with. certainly over the decades I've spent obscene amounts of money on it. However audiophiles drive me insane. It's almost a defining quality of audiophiles that they'll talk whilst listening to music and interupt a track half way through to play the same damned thing with another $5000 crartridge or on another $10,000 CD player. I ceased inviting these creatures for musical evening a long time ago.
On the other hand if a friend has acquired a new, say, amplifier and wants to hear how it sounds on my junk I'm happy to oblige so long as they understand the rules. I listen to nothing less than entire tracks at the volume I prefer and there's no talking. Talking's OK now and again though if it's a party with a room full of stoned geriatric hippies.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 09:06:11 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 12:06:28 PM
I wouldn't put it that radically.

I'd say that the audiophiles are as entitled to their opinion as the non-audiophiles, as long as they acknowledge that what they claim is personal experience, not fact.
A great deal of what so called audiophiles claim to hear can be proven with scientific evidence. Macro & micro dynamic contrasts, tonal accuracy, separation of individual elements within a performance etc. However, wealthy (usually elderly) audiophiles I've known can be significantly deluded about their perceptions. Take, per example, ultra expensive moving coil cartridges. Many of these have a profoundly exaggerated upper treble which happens to compensate for their diminished (aged) treble hearing.
Speaking of objective scientific tests there's one area where the opportunity for objectivity is almost totally absent in the audiophile world. High-end ( read silly money)  audio reviewers never accompany their evaluations with the results of their clinical hearing tests .  On the other hand I've known a number of middle aged and up organists whose treble sensitivity is atrocious. Some however are aware of this and will ask a younger organist or organ pupil to listen to their choice of stops from the body of the church rather than at the console.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 01:39:03 PM
I haven't found such examples yet.

And I will probably never find them.

Can you guess why?

Because you only have crap hifi
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 11:19:35 PM
Quote from: Daverz on December 06, 2019, 08:47:05 PM
Made up audiophile jargon.
Micro and macro dynamics can refer to live music performance without ever needing to be used as audiophile jargon. With all due lack of respect, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 07, 2019, 12:32:18 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 06, 2019, 09:52:21 PM
Because you only have crap hifi

I have what I can afford. And I'm perfectly happy with that.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 07, 2019, 02:07:53 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 07, 2019, 12:32:18 AM
I have what I can afford. And I'm perfectly happy with that.
This hints at the worst claims made by so called audiophiles. There is no need to spend a fortune to obtain an absolutely brilliant home audio system.
In fact the higher you get up the cost scale the more you hit the law of diminishing returns. Granted it takes more money than most people are willing to splurge to get near the best but compared to some of the other domestic expenditures today such as wall to wall video screens, networked systems in every room of the house and home automation it's nothing. All a matter of priorities. My addiction to decent hi-fidelity started when, at age 16, I inherited my late uncles system which at the time was near state of the art. Studying the pipe organ at the time it was a real thrill to be able to reproduce a 16Hz organ note at home. My parents weren't quite as overcome with glee, neither was the cat who become so upset at the noise I was generating urinated up against a speaker.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: relm1 on December 07, 2019, 06:50:52 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2019, 11:08:16 AM
You are certainly making sense to me.

I have never ever been able to tell the difference between mp3 and flac on any of the equipments I've ever used. Granted, they have always been low end, yet somehow I have always been able to "detect the emotional content" of any given piece I listened to and this makes me think that "emotional content" is much more dependent on performance than on recording.

Yes, makes sense to me but I'm one of those who can always tell the difference between mp3 and flac even after arguments with other sound professionals.  They tell me to take one of those online A/B tests and I do and score above 80% each time.  The differences are very subtle but that was my point, most people don't care for which is better, it isn't worth the marginal improvements but the connoisseur will.  I also don't think the psychology of thinking its better because of the expense is the case with me because first of all, some of this is objective.  Frequencies ARE lost in mp3.  If they sound identical, that just means the loss of frequencies doesn't have a big impact to you but it is objectively inferior to flac (I'm talking about all else being the same, same recording, etc...not fair to compare something like a 1950 flac and a 2019 mp3 recording for example).  Additionally, audiophiles frequently have a sense that the audio isn't good enough because it is only as good as the weakest element.  That is why in some cases we get in to power supplies, vacuum tubes, cables, etc.  Not just very high end speakers but you realize there is something lacking, it isn't as good as it should be and you work to improve the next weakest aspect in the workflow of sound production. 
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: relm1 on December 07, 2019, 06:55:35 AM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 09:06:11 PM
A great deal of what so called audiophiles claim to hear can be proven with scientific evidence. Macro & micro dynamic contrasts, tonal accuracy, separation of individual elements within a performance etc. However, wealthy (usually elderly) audiophiles I've known can be significantly deluded about their perceptions. Take, per example, ultra expensive moving coil cartridges. Many of these have a profoundly exaggerated upper treble which happens to compensate for their diminished (aged) treble hearing.
Speaking of objective scientific tests there's one area where the opportunity for objectivity is almost totally absent in the audiophile world. High-end ( read silly money)  audio reviewers never accompany their evaluations with the results of their clinical hearing tests .  On the other hand I've known a number of middle aged an up organists whose treble sensitivity is atrocious. Some however are aware of this and will ask a younger organist or organ pupil to listen to their choice of stops from the body of the church rather than at the console.

Yes, exactly.  I am an audiophile and a music professional spending a lot of time mixing and engineering and agree with your point.  I realize I am not representative of 99.9% of listeners.  That is true with any connoisseur in any other field too.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: André on December 07, 2019, 09:24:44 AM
Quote from: relm1 on December 07, 2019, 06:50:52 AM
Yes, makes sense to me but I'm one of those who can always tell the difference between mp3 and flac even after arguments with other sound professionals.  They tell me to take one of those online A/B tests and I do and score above 80% each time.  The differences are very subtle but that was my point, most people don't care for which is better, it isn't worth the marginal improvements but the connoisseur will.  I also don't think the psychology of thinking its better because of the expense is the case with me because first of all, some of this is objective.  Frequencies ARE lost in mp3.  If they sound identical, that just means the loss of frequencies doesn't have a big impact to you but it is objectively inferior to flac (I'm talking about all else being the same, same recording, etc...not fair to compare something like a 1950 flac and a 2019 mp3 recording for example).  Additionally, audiophiles frequently have a sense that the audio isn't good enough because it is only as good as the weakest element.  That is why in some cases we get in to power supplies, vacuum tubes, cables, etc.  Not just very high end speakers but you realize there is something lacking, it isn't as good as it should be and you work to improve the next weakest aspect in the workflow of sound production.

One of the friends I regularly listen to music with is an audiophile - a card carrying member of such a club actually. A few years ago he had a separate electrical outlet installed just for his sound system in order to have a steady signal. Cost him a few thousand bucks. I'm no electrician and I'm not sure I'm describing it correctly but anyhow, he assured me that proper electrical feed made a difference.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Irons on December 07, 2019, 12:55:04 PM
Quote from: André on December 07, 2019, 09:24:44 AM
One of the friends I regularly listen to music with is an audiophile - a card carrying member of such a club actually. A few years ago he had a separate electrical outlet installed just for his sound system in order to have a steady signal. Cost him a few thousand bucks. I'm no electrician and I'm not sure I'm describing it correctly but anyhow, he assured me that proper electrical feed made a difference.

He could, and maybe did, invest in a couple of Nordost mains cables. One to the CD player, and the other to the preamp at £4,850.00 each. The price of perfection does not come cheap.  https://www.analogueseduction.net/mains-cables/nordost-valhalla-2-mains-cable.html
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 07, 2019, 01:10:50 PM
Quote from: André on December 07, 2019, 09:24:44 AM
One of the friends I regularly listen to music with is an audiophile - a card carrying member of such a club actually. A few years ago he had a separate electrical outlet installed just for his sound system in order to have a steady signal. Cost him a few thousand bucks. I'm no electrician and I'm not sure I'm describing it correctly but anyhow, he assured me that proper electrical feed made a difference.
Proper electrical feed for massive power guzzling amplifiers is only logical.Try and get an electrician to install an electric range top/oven at the end of a lighting circuit and see what they say. Your insurance company would have a lot to say too. Actually, not a lot "Your policy does not cover the usage of such appliances on a lighting or lower amperage circuit" Then we have that other thorny issue, filtering out digital noise generated back into the mains by who knows how many shonky digital devices. Granted competently designed audio gear should have it's own filtering circuitry as part of it's internal power supply but it's surprising how even  some ultra expensive audio gear omits this.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Daverz on December 07, 2019, 01:31:48 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 06, 2019, 11:19:35 PM
Micro and macro dynamics can refer to live music performance without ever needing to be used as audiophile jargon. With all due lack of respect, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Define it the terms in a meaninful way, then.  And really, lack of respect?   Your such a jackass.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 07, 2019, 02:37:42 PM
Quote from: Daverz on December 07, 2019, 01:31:48 PM
Define it the terms in a meaninful way, then.  And really, lack of respect?   Your such a jackass.
It's turtles all the way down.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 05:01:31 AM
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/37175f_b23e96d0f4264cc19b771208f6a8936c~mv2_d_1425_1425_s_2.png/v1/fill/w_800,h_800,al_c,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/37175f_b23e96d0f4264cc19b771208f6a8936c~mv2_d_1425_1425_s_2.png)

I just wanted to point to another recording which, in my experience, demands excellent hifi to be appreciated, in a second rate system, the voices will not separate enough to let the polyphony be heard in an effective way, and the hall ambience caught by the recording engineers will not come across well. The music making will sound grey and lifeless. This and the Busnois below are two of the main reasons why I think anyone reviewing a recording seriously needs to have outstanding hifi, and indeed hifi which can fill a room with a full range of frequencies, and form a large and stable aural image with all the details of the sound accurately reproduced and clear to hear like they would be in a live music experience. More than one system too IMO, the Gombert works best on one of my systems, the Busnois on another, for reasons I'm not clear about. Neither are state of the art recordings either, certainly not the Gombert.


(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71y9aCNb%2BVL._SX355_.jpg)

As far as the above discussion about cost is concerned, good new hifi is very expensive, prohibitively so for me. There are still bargains to be had in the used market, in Europe at least, but the fact remains that hifi is a luxury item.

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 08, 2019, 05:41:44 AM
Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 02:19:10 PM
The label "audiophile" has been thrown around. I don't think I'm an audiophile. The system I bought this year is still fundamentally at the cheap end of the spectrum. I'm just conscious that I do have some minimum standards, and that's simply because I do remember the relatively rare occasions that I've EXPERIENCED a direct comparison and I remember the lessons learned.

I don't buy mp3s because of the experience of hearing the exact same album on mp3 and CD. I bought my CD player and not an even cheaper one because of the experience of hearing how much clearer the same music was.

Trust me, you're an audiophile.  Though in my book that's not a derogatory term.  Not in the least.


Quote from: Madiel on December 06, 2019, 01:08:43 PM
Not one of the audiophiles has said the performance is irrelevant as far as I can see.

Well - I would say that of the three pillars of the listening experience - that is, the music itself, the performance, and the recording/reproduction - the performance is the least important to me of those three.
* If it isn't music I like, I won't be listening at all - so that comes first.
* Then I want to hear good or very good recorded sound, well reproduced.
* In this list of priorities, something has to come last - and so for me it is the performance (though I still consider it important).
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 12:53:00 PM
Let me clarify my position lest I be misunderstood.

I've been in love with, and listening to, "classical" music for more than 30 years (I'll turn 47 on coming December 13th), and it was love at first sight hear). Yet my equipments --- all of them --- were never high-end. Actually, the first "classical" music I've ever heard was on a mono radio set when I was about 13  --- yet it got me hooked and transfixed (go figure, it was a potpourri of, among others, Tchaikovsky and Grieg PC and A Rhapsody in Blue --- but at the time I had no effing idea about that). Next, upon my insistent request, my parents bought me a stereo turntable "Made in GDR" (ie, the defunct German Democratic Republic) and I started amassing a collection of over 500 LPs (I think) --- which might, indeed does, seem a trifle, but given that we were then living in the Socialist Republic of Romania, was no small feature for a teenager under 18.

After 1989, I turned to CDs but my equipment was still low-end (I could not afford better) yet my library and taste expanded greatly.

After 2010, I turned to digital but my equipment was still low-end (I could not afford better) yet my library and taste expanded exponentially.

Today I'm married and have a 6-yo son to raise so 99% of my listening time is late at night, using a Philips Go Gear mp3 player (which doesn't play flac at all and whose battery is so badly worn out that I must back it up with a power bank) through cheap, no-name earbuds. (I hope, and am confident, to be able to replace it with a Fiio m3k equipment playing both mp3 and flac before 2019 ends).

Bottom line, I've never had, and I'll probably never have, enough money to spent on high-end equipments yet I've been passionately in love with "classical" music ever since I've first heard it, on the crappiest of the most crappy equipments. Be it as it might, I've always been able to "detect the emotional content", or "lack thereof", of any piece of music I've ever listened to.

So bottom line, to borrow and correct aukhawk's terminology, there are not just three "pillars of listening experience", ie music in itself, performance and recording, but four: the three above plus the equipment. And based on my experience I feel that the least important to me is the latter.

Please note "my experience" and "I feel" and "to me". I do not claim that my personal, limited experience is the universal yardstick by which all and sundry experiences should be measured.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: premont on December 08, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 05:01:31 AM
As far as the above discussion about cost is concerned, good new hifi is very expensive, prohibitively so for me. There are still bargains to be had in the used market, in Europe at least, but the fact remains that hifi is a luxury item.

Which cost levels are we talking about? Can you acquire a reasonably good stereo system (CD deck, Amplifier(s), Floorspeakers, cables) from new for about 10.000 £ ? Or must we spend three or ten times as much?

With "reasonably good" I mean a system which reproduces the music so well, that we are able to say something about the recording quality and the interpretation.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 12:57:23 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
With "reasonably good" I mean a system which reproduces the music so well, that we are able to say something about the recording quality and the interpretation.

How much does "reasonably good" mean for you in terms of Euro?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: premont on December 08, 2019, 01:35:41 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 12:57:23 PM
How much does "reasonably good" mean for you in terms of Euro?

10.000 £ is about 13.500 Euro's. But this arbitrary amount is only meant as a point of departure for Mandryka as to the question I pose to him.

My own opinion is, that a reasonably good system, which allows us to say something more or less definitive about the recording, can be had for less than 1000 Euro's.

Like Aukhawk I think the music has got the first priority. But contrary to him I value the interpretation much higher than the reproduction. A first class reproduction can't rescue a bad interpretation, but a good interpretation can be appreciated despite a maybe less than first class reproduction. With recordings dating later than 1935 it is only rarely, that the reproduction is so bad as to spoil the musical experience.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 01:39:47 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Can you acquire a reasonably good stereo system (CD deck, Amplifier(s), Floorspeakers, cables) from new for about 10.000 £ ?

Well, tell you what: 10.000 £ means 12.000 Euro, ie 1000 Euro a month, ie what I and my wife cumulatively earn a month.

I simply can't afford to be an audiophile. And I'm not sure I'd be one even if I could afford it.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 01:41:35 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Which cost levels are we talking about? Can you acquire a reasonably good stereo system (CD deck, Amplifier(s), Floorspeakers, cables) from new for about 10.000 £ ? Or must we spend three or ten times as much?

With "reasonably good" I mean a system which reproduces the music so well, that we are able to say something about the recording quality and the interpretation.

I can only speak from my limited experience here.

I don't know anything about CD players, and I use cheap cables.

Second hand you could buy wonderful speakers for around £500 -£800  (I'm thinking Spendor SP1 or BC1s, Rogers Studio 1 - though not floor standing speakers, you'd need stands) and good power amps for even less than that (I know someone who's selling a Leak stereo 20 for £450, refurbished for example.  In fact,  I think the Quad 306 is an outstanding amp and you can pick one up for less than £300 often.) If you didn't want to play recordings of enormous cathedral organs then I think you could pay even less for your speakers (I'm thinking JR 149s -- which with the right amp, are unbelievably good.) The trick is to be patient, and only buy good clean models.  I'm a great believer in no preamp (if you have digital volume control and just one source) or passive preamps for around £300.

I have three systems I'm really pleased with.

System 1 (This is the one for big organs!)

Quad ESL 63 -- £600 about 10 years ago, though at some point they will need servicing which will be more than £1K
Gradient subs and a rather good crossover -- £500 second hand
Krell KSA 50 -- about £1400 including a rebuild cost, I was lucky to find this amp very cheap. It was broken when I bought it (for £200) so I had it completely rebuilt
Quad 520 for the subs -- £200
Museatex DAC £400


System 2

Rogers JR 149 -- £300
Radford STA25 MK3 -- £1200
Theta DAC -- £350


System 3

Spendor SP1 -- £350 (noone else bid on ebay!)
Electrocompaniet ECI -2 -- £600
Deltec DAC £250

All the sources are rasberry PIs costing about £70 each altogether.

New is an area I haven't explored enough to comment with confidence really.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 01:43:23 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 01:35:41 PM
10.000 £ is about 13.500 Euro's. But this arbitrary amount is only meant as a point of departure for Mandryka as to the question I pose to him.

My own opinion is, that a reasonably good system, which allows us to say something more or less definitive about the recording, can be had for less than 1000 Euro's.

Like Aukhawk I think the music has got the first priority. But contrary to him I value the interpretation much higher than the reproduction. A first class reproduction can't rescue a bad interpretation, but a good interpretation can be appreciated despite a maybe less than first class reproduction. With recordings dating later than 1935 it is only rarely, that the reproduction is so bad as to spoil the musical experience.

Yours is Naim isn't it. I'm sure it's very good.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 08, 2019, 01:43:54 PM
My system is worth roughly 500 euros or 400 pounds.

This is pretty much why I'm saying I'm not an audiophile. We're now talking about speakers that are worth more than my entire unit. Although half the point was that my unit was far, far better in my view than anything else in the price range.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 01:58:07 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 01:35:41 PM
A first class reproduction can't rescue a bad interpretation, but a good interpretation can be appreciated despite a maybe less than first class reproduction. With recordings dating later than 1935 it is only rarely, that the reproduction is so bad as to spoil the musical experience.

Amen to both sentences above!
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 02:02:02 PM
This idea that acquiring anything like revealing, musical and transparent audio gear means you have to have a Rolls Royce parked in the drive is a nonsense.
The following list of randomly ( although carefully)chosen gear will take you 95% the way to what audiophiles pay silly money for. It's that 'law of diminishing returns' again. To acquire the absolute best stupid amounts of money are required. Also, at the level described as 'high-end' some manufacturers are guilty of adding zeros to the end of their prices. Many so called audiophiles are aware of this game and avoid playing it.

Now, some junk that gives musical thrills and a close approach to the original recordings :-

Axiom Audio M3v3 ~ $348:  Pro-Ject Debut III ~ $379:
Sennheiser HD 555 ~ $130:Onkyo M-282 ~ $200:
Prices in US dollars new.

I need to add that if your room acoustics are crap nothing is going to sound decent. This takes us to the often ultimate cost of hi quality music in the home, divorce by she who must be obeyed in matters of décor.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 02:17:51 PM
I'm not claiming that audiophiles waste their money --- God forbid! I'm a "live and let live" guy in this respect (and in many others).

Moreover, I am sure that there is a difference between mp3 and flac which can be objectively measured by scientific equipments. It's just that I am not able to detect it.

My bottom line is this: let everyone listen to "classical" music on whatever equipment they can afford.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 02:21:24 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 02:02:02 PM
I need to add that if your room acoustics are crap nothing is going to sound decent.

May I ask what is your minimal requirement for a non-crap room acoustics?

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 02:21:48 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 01:41:35 PM
I can only speak from my limited experience here.

Your list speaks of more than limited experience.
You should have warned the innocent they won't enjoy running a Krell KSA 50 in summer and if they're residents of the European Union most insurance companies won't cover you if it burns the house down. Gorgeous sounding amp but mine was so dangerous I learnt to turn it on with a long stick from the other side of the room.
Traded it in on an Audio Research D70 MkII which behaved the same way although with the 'charming' addition of the output tubes glowing a fetching purple before exploding. Wandering off topic here but I'm sure you'll understand my concerns in this. A negative aspect of the 'audiophile press' is reliability of equipment they review seldom if ever being mentioned. I'm lucky, my ex husband is an audio repair technician and keeps me in touch with the latest bombs coming onto the market. And there are lots of them.

QuoteSystem 1 (This is the one for big organs!)

Quad ESL 63 -- £600 about 10 years ago, though at some point they will need servicing which will be more than £1K
Gradient subs and a rather good crossover -- £500 second hand
Krell KSA 50 -- about £1400 including a rebuild cost, I was lucky to find this amp very cheap. It was broken when I bought it (for £200) so I had it completely rebuilt
Quad 520 for the subs -- £200
Museatex DAC £400
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 02:31:06 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 02:21:24 PM
May I ask what is your minimal requirement for a non-crap room acoustics?
Sit yourself where you'd normally listen to music. Clap your hands and listen to what the room feeds back to you. If there's too much (sorry,I have to get technical here) slap echo or if more than a few people talking in that room sounds unpleasant your listening room in a noise box.
There's no need to invest in silly money acoustic treatments though. Simply have carpet or a rug between you and the speakers, cover large areas of window glass with soft curtains and avoid very low ceilings. And whatever you do don't allow she who must be obeyed to become dictatorial in this.

Some things aren't cheap to fix such as wobbly floor boards or thin plywood walls that resonate out of time with the music.
The cheapest way to solve all these issues is something like a good pair of earphones. (see above)
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 02:52:41 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 02:31:06 PM
Sit yourself where you'd normally listen to music.

I normally listen to music while reclining in my bed late at night.

QuoteClap your hands and listen to what the room feeds back to you.

If I clapped my hands I'd be listening to my wife feeding back to me a yell, "Just shut up!"

QuoteIf there's too much (sorry,I have to get technical here) slap echo or if more than a few people talking in that room sounds unpleasant your listening room in a noise box.

I have no listening room. I'm a regular, family, dull, straight guy. Nobody's perfect.

Quote
Some things aren't cheap to fix such as wobbly floor boards or thin plywood walls that resonate out of time with the music.
The cheapest way to solve all these issues is something like a good pair of earphones. (see above)

That's true, a good pair of earphones I'm interested in.

Any recs?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Madiel on December 08, 2019, 02:58:42 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 02:52:41 PM
If I clapped my hands I'd be listening to my wife feeding back to me a yell, "Just shut up!"

:laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: André on December 08, 2019, 03:09:24 PM
Very interesting details, Mordentroge, thanks.

One question: what about cables ? My friend who spent a fortune on his electrical installation thinks one should spend about the same amount on them vs the cd player or the amplifier. My amp is a Naim NAIT 5 si and the cd player is also a NAIM, 5 si. I'm not sure I'd spend that kind of money on cables. What do you think?

One of the reasons I won't invest too much on my equipment is that the listening room does not have a good layout.  Although decent-sized (20ft x 13 ft), the speakers are located on the long wall and about 2/3 of the way toward the right. I have no possibility of moving them to the short wall with me sitting a the other end. Sound waves do not move in an optimal way, I'm afraid.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 03:11:23 PM
Quote from: Madiel on December 08, 2019, 02:58:42 PM
:laugh: :laugh:

I knew you'd appreciate my humour.  8)
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 03:25:12 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 02:52:41 PM
That's true, a good pair of earphones I'm interested in.
Any recs?
First off we need to know if the wife is going to be annoyed if you use open back earphones as she'll be able to hear them from the other pillow.
Then we have the question of can you comfortably wear over the ear phones in bed or are you willing to compromise with in ear phones. ( don't care what anyone claims, all in ear phones are a compromise although some can sound surprisingly musical.)
My recommendation would be along the lines of a pair of wireless phones. You'll avoid getting tangled up with wires if things get amorous, you fall asleep, or both.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 03:25:12 PM
First off we need to know if the wife is going to be annoyed if you use open back earphones as she'll be able to hear them from the other pillow.

A few days ago I was listening to this on earbuds:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51-lvCWd2dL._SX355_.jpg)

My wife told me: "There's something jolly going on, I can hear it!"

Oh, Mozart, you punch lover! Here's a glass of red wine to you!

Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 03:38:22 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 03:33:41 PM
A few days ago I was listening to this on earbuds:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51-lvCWd2dL._SX355_.jpg)

My wife told me: "There's something jolly going on, I can hear it!"

Oh, Mozart, you punch lover! Here's a glass of red wine to you!
Unless we're talking of something like his Requiem or the Queen of The Night aria, JOLLY is a perfect term for most of Mozart.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 03:44:47 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 03:38:22 PM
Unless we're talking of something like his Requiem or the Queen of The Night aria, JOLLY is a perfect term for most of Mozart.

Glad you agree! So did Tchaikovsky, ie one of your own!
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: premont on December 08, 2019, 03:48:23 PM
Quote from: André on December 08, 2019, 03:09:24 PM
One question: what about cables ? My friend who spent a fortune on his electrical installation thinks one should spend about the same amount on them vs the cd player or the amplifier. My amp is a Naim NAIT 5 si and the cd player is also a NAIM, 5 si. I'm not sure I'd spend that kind of money on cables. What do you think?

These were the Naim components I owned at an earlier stage. I was persuaded to upgrade the cables for about 500 Euro's. There was a marked difference to the better, but the general rule must be: Listen and judge for yourself.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 04:13:36 PM
Quote from: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 03:44:47 PM
Glad you agree! So did Tchaikovsky, ie one of your own!
You mean neurotic, temperamental and a drama queen?
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Florestan on December 08, 2019, 04:25:39 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 04:13:36 PM
You mean neurotic, temperamental and a drama queen?

No, not at all!



Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: André on December 08, 2019, 05:13:32 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 03:48:23 PM
These were the Naim components I owned at an earlier stage. I was persuaded to upgrade the cables for about 500 Euro's. There was a marked difference to the better, but the general rule must be: Listen and judge for yourself.

Thanks, that gives me a working figure!
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 08:18:17 PM
Off topic but I have a great fondness for this cartoonist's take on audiophile madness.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 09:38:11 PM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 02:30:47 PM
Yes it is, at least I imagine, that I am able to say something about the recordings as well as about the interpretations. It is one of Naim's middle sized HIFI systems, well scaled for my listening room which measures 13 square meters. So the size of the room definitely puts a limit to how much effect I can let out into it. But to get a larger room is practically impossible and also financially prohibitive for me. And no matter how large one's listening room and HIFI system is, the listening to musical reproduction will always include a large amount of mental abstraction compared to a concert experience and the acoustics in a concert hall or a church.

Ah yes, 13m square is very small, but fine for some speakers. You should try Rogers JR 149s, especially if you can see one in Ebay where they'll let you return if you don't like them, they don't cost much anyway. They were made for close listening, and IMO they are a wonderful speaker.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 09:44:40 PM
Andrei, re room acoustics, the old studio trick is to make sure that where you have two flat surfaces facing each other, one of them has something to scatter the dispersions. So, in practice in a domestic setting it means that the floor has some sort of rug or carpet near the speakers, and that one of each pair of facing walls has some books or something.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 09:46:02 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 09:38:11 PM
Ah yes, 13m square is very small, but fine for some speakers. You should try Rogers JR 149s, especially if you can see one in Ebay where they'll let you return if you don't like them, they don't cost much anyway. They were made for close listening, and IMO they are a wonderful speaker.
I'll second that but don't try to run them with underpowered valve amps. They were originally sold with a matching sub-woofer which can still be picked up on eBay.
They need solid stands and you should check that the tensioning bolts underneath are tight and the driver surrounds intact.

They're actually a 're-packaged' form of the respected BBC LS 3.5a ( I'm getting too esoteric for Glassical Music Forum)
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 10:31:06 PM
Quote from: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 09:46:02 PM
I'll second that but don't try to run them with underpowered valve amps. They were originally sold with a matching sub-woofer which can still be picked up on eBay.
They need solid stands and you should check that the tensioning bolts underneath are tight and the driver surrounds intact.

They're actually a 're-packaged' form of the respected BBC LS 3.5a ( I'm getting too esoteric for Glassical Music Forum)

Touch wood on Monday next week some builders will be working in the room with the Krell. I'll use the opportunity to try the Krell with the 149s.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on December 08, 2019, 10:37:05 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 10:31:06 PM
Touch wood on Monday next week some builders will be working in the room with the Krell. I'll use the opportunity to try the Krell with the 149s.
Your builders are audiophiles or lovers of organ music? If the later you'll need sub-woofers otherwise you'll blow the JR's trying to get there.
Remember, the JR's are based on the Rogers LS3.5a which was designed for close field monitoring in BBC outside broadcast vans.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 09, 2019, 12:39:28 AM
Quote from: (: premont :) on December 08, 2019, 01:35:41 PM
My own opinion is, that a reasonably good system, which allows us to say something more or less definitive about the recording, can be had for less than 1000 Euro's.

I would agree with that. 
My own system cost a lot more (though like Mandryka I bought my 'expensive' power amp 2nd-hand) but if I were starting afresh I could assemble a speaker-based system I'd be completely happy with and which might well be better than what I have now, for under £1000 (Euros not much difference now  :( ) and using all new components - add £200 for a good pair of heaphones. 
That is assuming files and/or streaming as the source (saving the cost of a CD player).  I still buy some (used) CDs but I just rip them, throw away the case and store the disc and booklet, I don't have a CD player.

Personally I don't think it's necessary to spend anything out of the ordinary on cables - put it this way, I know someone who connects his speakers using orange lawn-mower cable - it certainly 'makes a statement'.

Regarding acoustic room treatment - room correction (hardware or software) inserted in the digital chain is a game-changer and a relatively cheap way to make massive improvements.  I use this (http://www.dspeaker.com/en/products/20-dual-core.shtml) black box which does source switching, room correction, DAC and pre-amp all in one.  Admittedly this one's bit outside the budget I outlined above - but it can be done much cheaper.
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: premont on December 09, 2019, 01:47:54 AM
Quote from: aukhawk on December 09, 2019, 12:39:28 AM
Personally I don't think it's necessary to spend anything out of the ordinary on cables - put it this way, I know someone who connects his speakers using orange lawn-mower cable - it certainly 'makes a statement'.

What I achieved with better cables was improved sonic solution resulting in a better definition of the stereo soundscape. In this case my former inferior cables was a "weak point" in the system. But everyone may decide for himself, if the improvement justifies the cost as everywhere where HIFI acquisitions are planned.   
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: aukhawk on December 09, 2019, 01:51:09 AM
For my own part, I recently replaced my audiophile speaker cables (that I've used for over 30 years) with cheap standard twin wire - and got a marked improvement that way.

Quote from: Mandryka on December 08, 2019, 09:38:11 PM
Ah yes, 13m square is very small ...

13 square metres is quite small, but 13m square is HUGE  </pedant>  ;D
Title: Re: Home audio and classical recording evaluation
Post by: premont on December 09, 2019, 02:15:52 AM
Quote from: aukhawk on December 09, 2019, 01:51:09 AM
For my own part, I recently replaced my audiophile speaker cables (that I've used for over 30 years) with cheap standard twin wire - and got a marked improvement that way.

Sure?

https://www.thomann.de/dk/shure_eac64bk_cable.htm