Audiophile listening

 

Gold Member
Username: Sploosh56

Ohio

Post Number: 1642
Registered: May-04
Over the past few years my focus on sound quality has dramatically increased. Long gone are my vast collections of cruddy sounding mp3 files, which have been replaced by flac files and even real CD's.

Skipping on to my question, how many of you have heard imperfections in the recordings, such as vibrations in the recording studio, or instruments that you never knew were in the song. Does anyone have a few to share?
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15195
Registered: Jan-08
Jazz at the Pawnshop recorded live
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15197
Registered: Jan-08
Here a sample:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dRer4TEOYg
 

Silver Member
Username: Kbear

Canada

Post Number: 794
Registered: Dec-06
Not sure about studio vibrations, but I do like to hear lots of musical detail and separation. Basically where all these little details are rendered and they all sound so clear and distinct. Because these sounds are a part of the music I think it's preferable to hear them - but at the same time they have to work together as a whole. Some systems have great detail but they don't sound very musical; the integration or tone or whatever just isn't right. Obviously it is better to have that musicality at the expense of ultimate detail, but it's great if you have both. I think I've got both now, but eventually I'm going to get a tube amp - I may lose some detail, but if tube fans are to be believed it will sound so smooth, wide open, and effortless that any loss of detail won't matter much.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15204
Registered: Jan-08
Dan

We can hear the sound stage vibration then many thing with this great music!

I was a tube guy before but I have a Solid that I modified which sound like a Tube amps without the heat and poor reliability, Yes It's possible!

Tube is a fashion, many good solid state can beat tube amps!
 

Gold Member
Username: Nickelbut10

Canada

Post Number: 3248
Registered: Jun-07
Clipping in the recordings on pretty much any Metallica album after 2001.
 

Gold Member
Username: Arande2

Rattle your ... Missouri

Post Number: 3027
Registered: Dec-06
Nick,

I don't find the clipping subtle in the newer Metallica albums. I find it conspicuous, even on a cheap-o pair of earbuds with 256kb/s Mp3s from an iPod (and no, the equalizer is not engaged).

When I look at these songs in a waveform editor, the waveform is mostly amorphous. Usually I can see transients in a waveform, including a lot of aggressively mixed/mastered metal/rock. I do not see transients in the newer Metallica albums. The peaks are all at the same level, meaning no sudden transients, small crest factor.

As for recordings where I never noticed a certain element of a song until I got a focused listen on a respectable setup, there are a few.

Closer by Nine Inch Nails has a lot of subtleties and elusive parts that I never noticed until I got a detailed listen. Except for the newest one, Korn's more recent albums are layered and I notice something new every once in a while due to the high amount of production.

There is some material where there are subtle voices and instrumentation which surprise me. Disturbed's newest album Asylum has several examples of this.

As for imperfections, I'll have to listen for that. I'm normally focused on the general effect of the music (non-audiophile listening, in other words). Those times that I'm intently listening with a quality setup are when I notice these things, of course, because the goals of those sessions are to have maximum concentration (110% attention) put on the music.

Another thing that is related is background noise. Air conditioning, a fan on a component, a spinning drive, a truck driving by outside - these all severely compromise perceived detail, just like frequency imbalance and phase problems in the setup will cause masking of those minute details which are the topic of this thread.

I may not notice background noise at all until it goes away ("don't know what you got 'til it's gone") and then it's like a veil is lifted from the music that was covering up all those details.

Yaaaay.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15415
Registered: May-04
.

Not trying to throw a wet blanket on the discussion but I always feel wary when someone starts to discuss "vibrations in the recording studio, or instruments that you never knew were in the song". Transparency to the source is the overall goal of high fidelity yet room sounds and the like can become addictive to the point they become the end and the music is no longer even the means. For years reviewers, most especially those writing for TAS, were overly obssessed with the extaneous sounds captured on live recordings in various concert halls. The sound of the HVAC system switching on or off, the rumble of a subway train beneath the venue or, with Jazz at the Pawnshop, the number of voices and glasses which could be counted and where they existed in space. To be fair many of these remarks were a comment on the sorry state of most "modern" multi-mic'd, overdubbed and wholely studio created crap which passed for "albums". Many if not all of the recordings used as references for such comments were the end result of an entirely different mindset in capturing the live event as minimalist recordings were being rediscovered in both vintage and the then current fad of direct to disc.

The danger soon became every audiophile was ignoring the music and paying attention for those moments when things unrelated to the artistry of the players could be noticed. This quickly led to the final separation of "audiophile" and "music lover" where the audiophile never played an album through both sides but picked and switched to those cuts where their system played tricks like a trained dog.

Manufacturers were not in the dark about such things and quickly there was a proliferation of products which played to the "detail retrieval" aspect of owning a high end system. The original Wilson Watt was a perfect example of this approach to audio. With JATP you could detect which brand of cigarettes were being smoked at each table by the detail sound of the package being oprened but, did the music catch your attention? Not really.

Just last week I heard a similar system which was simply uninteresting other than the "vividness" of the recording which the system reproduced with astonishing clarity and focus. I had no desire to ask for yet another album to be played since the first three hadn't made me pay attention to the music or want more music. Justified as being "accurate" by the salesperson I had to laugh knowing just how uneven is the response of the speakers and that room. "Accurate" vs "musical" has long been the stopping point for many discussions between those who buy pricey components with the "accurate" folks deriding the "musical" folks as just wanting colorations. IMO, if the music and the performances don't make me want to stay up all night listening to more, you can keep your "accurate" system - which really isn't.

All this is to say, while the "new tricks" a system can play for your delight are at times worthy of the money - no one wants their system not to sound as close to the original as possible - be careful what you wish for. Recognize what
"transparency" really means and that this hobby has its roots in the source - the music. Without the music there'd only be those sounds of subway trains and cocktail glasses to play. How impressed would your father in law be when you told him how much you spent to hear that?


.
 

Gold Member
Username: Stu_pitt

Stamford, Connecticut USA

Post Number: 4044
Registered: May-05
Good post, Jan. It seems like there's too many people out there who buy music to listen to their system, rather than buying a system to listen to their music.

I guess everyone's entitled to enjoy whatever they have. I just think they're missing the true (or maybe purest is more appropriate) intent of it all.
 

Gold Member
Username: Stu_pitt

Stamford, Connecticut USA

Post Number: 4045
Registered: May-05
Maybe I'm being too critical or stereotyping too much, but when someone describes themselves as an audiophile, I think of a person who loves their stereo and not necessarily a person who loves their music.
 

Gold Member
Username: Nickelbut10

Canada

Post Number: 3251
Registered: Jun-07
I love Music first, love gear second. I got into this hobby for the music, but at the same time enjoy swapping gear as I am also a tech geek, and/or gear head as well. I love both avenue's of this hobby, which makes it all that much more fun for me. But boy oh boy do I love music.lol. If I couldn't enjoy the music on my system then what good is it. Same goes for anyone in the hobby I would hope.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15266
Registered: Jan-08
Good post Jan!

Jazz at the Pawnshop was a 80's reference in Hi-fidelity recording, I like this CD in audiophile version.

Today recording like you say are made with multi microphones then we lost the real space between each instrument as well that spacial room effect.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15417
Registered: May-04
.

They've mostly been made that way since the 1960's and we have Les Paul to thank for this "innovation".

If you're after real "room sound" try playing a mono recording made prior to 1959. Honestly, its something you should know about before you begin searching for all this stuff in today's recordings.


.
 

Silver Member
Username: Kbear

Canada

Post Number: 795
Registered: Dec-06
I like hearing all the details within the music, rendered with great clarity and separation. I couldn't care any less about hearing things like an HVAC system or a guitarist's pick hitting the ground after he dropped it. I see a big difference between the two, though the degree to which one is present is almost certainly positively correlated with the other. And so are the tradeoffs, I'm sure.

With that said, I simply have not heard enough systems with different approaches to design to know what I'm missing. I'm prepared to give up detail to gain more musicality, if it's possible to do so. And it probably is. My system sounds incredibly detailed to me, and very musical too. But I don't pretend to think it's the best at either.

You are right Jan...the best feeling is listening to music and not wanting to stop. I just need to listen to one more song - wait, that was about 10 songs ago! When I'm not feeling this while listening to my system then what I am inevitably feeling is frustration. It's one or the other.

One of the unfortunate things is that before getting into this hobby you can listen to a boombox and get lots of enjoyment from it. You listen to the music, you don't think about what is playing it. Once hi fi sucks you in it's very easy to start obsessing over the gear, and it's easy to make mistakes in crucial areas like matching components and system set up. The more revealing gear reveals these problems. Like Nick I enjoy trying new gear, and probably always will, but it's close to the time where I intend to slow things down a bit.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Nuck

Post Number: 15502
Registered: Dec-04
Try a recording of 'The Million Dollar Quartet' (sun records), and tell me that any definition is too much.
 

Gold Member
Username: Soundgame

Pickering, Ontario Canada

Post Number: 1198
Registered: Jun-08
Had to look that one up Nuck...got me interested.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Nuck

Post Number: 15520
Registered: Dec-04
It is a great story there, George.
I picked up the recording on the first day released, from Sun records in Memphis, no less!
Happened to be there...
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us