Vote

It's a difficult thing to quantify, but it seems that we've made at least some progress. Besides, is "closer to the real thing" really what we should be looking at? The experience of listening to hi-fi is fundamentally different from listening to a live performance, and will always remain so. What we should be looking at is whether our enjoyment of our systems has increased over the years, and I think there has definitely been some progress there.

Although digital technology has allowed us to indefinitely archive "noise-free" music, it still needs tuning to bring out the smooth qualities desired by audiophiles. I'm actually surprised that it has taken so long for the CD format to evolve into something approaching the warm seamless nature of vinyl minus the noise.

I believe some areas have improved: cartridges, tonearms, cables, digital, and speakers. There has been minimum improvement in amplification and turntables.

The only improvement I've seen is in the ability of the wire and interconnects industry to separate money from wallets. It's pretty amazing!

High end was pretty darn good and pleasureable in the 70's. I find far more variability today.

Just listen to LPs and hear the 'major' improvements: software, somewhat; hardware, lots.

I believe the industry tries hard but in some areas they try hard to seperate us from our money and deliver little if any improvement. Here is my example: I put together a smallsystem based around the Quicksilver Mini Mono amp and for $5000 I can listen to music without wondering what I should buy next to improve the sound. I wory more about what music to listen to next.

Love my Martin Logans but I still miss my old JBL L200 studiomasters. Can anyone say "new" tube preamp/amp

Well for one thing the highs are better ( or is it that my hearing just getting better ).

Now that we are beginning to get past "Perfect Sound Forever" with SACD and DVD-A, there is some improvement.

It seems that every single tweak . . . cables, backlight, green pen, vibra-whatevers, dedicated electrical lines, separate ground wires, well you get the ideaect$. ect$. ect$.) plus the original investment . All in an effort to tame the harsh sound of CD,s. What a sales job & man were we screwed.

Audio has improved, but it is only a matter of degrees. I remember listening to music through really good audiophile stereos in college & these aren't too different from the best available today (they were somewhat cheaper, though). Several friends have preserved their thirty year old Mac equipment and it still sounds good. I think the major difference is that the sound quality is so much more important today, due to the development of CDs & really good turntables and, as a result, in some circles, the music has become less important than the sound. I can remember listening to records & not caring that there were some scratches, unless the music was really bad. It was the music that predominated . . . Today, in many cases, the recording is paramount and many of the audiophile recordings are first rate recordings of second rate groups. Merely sounding better on a technical level does not enhance the music.

SACD, nuff said.

Not far enough, if we still think the best audio sound comes from a device that drags a diamond stylus over a three dimensional groove embedded in a flat platter of vinyl.

digital is great, along with multi speaker system

There's an entire "gold wheels and trim on a Lexus" genre of components that doesn't sound very special.

There has been a dramatic improvement in audio reproduction since the late 80s. Good recordings have improved dramatically, especially recordings of classical music. Audio equipment can now offer whatever flavor you like, depending on how you put a system together. You can have bell bottom tube gear or skinny tie solid state. Both types of gear can now reproduce music in a way that sounds natural without sacrificing sonic details. Thanks to SACD, you can even hear what you've been missing since the LP putsch of the 80s.

After listening to some previously unplayed 78's on my 1939 Farnsworth radio/turntable console I came to the realization that, although resolution and range have been improved the musical presentation has not; I am astonished at the "lifelike" presentation the "old" stuff is capable of projecting. Musically, I don't believe we've come as far as technology would have us believe(and I say that in comparison to my main system, which is primarily A and B Stereophile-rated equipment).

SACD has saved the digital format, but I still prefer good old vinyl.

The systems of the 70s and early 80s sounded like krap!! It has been only in the last 10 years that things have gotten good, and in the last three that things have gotten to the point where it is almost worth spending the money. Viva Van Alstine!! Long live the hybryd.

Two major steps backward: 1. Solid state circuitry. 2. CD sound. It has taken twenty to thirty years for solid state sound to approach the musical truth achieved by affordable tube gear readily available in the 60s & 70s. CD sound is so sadly midfi for the most part, that audiophiles & music lovers are constantly tweaking their sound systems in an effort to connect with the emotional impact of the music. SACD & DVD-Audio do fulfill the promises originally claimed for the CD. CD sound could never have hoped to achieve the musical impact imparted by a decent analog setup. SACD & DVD Audio "get there." There is, as yet, not enough software available in either format. If neither one of these formats succeeds in the marketplace, the future of audio will not be very bright.

I am always surprised that your letters and reader opinions are so negative -- including the current state of the music poll. Every day, I enjoy my stereo more and expand my listening to areas I would not normally explore without a decent system

Re-phrase the question: Do we have a better understanding of how to reproduce music, etc? I think that we have made great strides in manufacturing better equipment, and exctracting more information and presenting it better -- vinyl. We have also made great leaps backwards with digital formats.

We are still buying mostly thirty year old gear, no?

CERTAINLY IMPROVEMENT HAS BEEN MADE, BUT IN AUDIO ONLY FIELD YOU STILL CAN LISTEN TO HIGH END QUALITY PUMPING FROM 20 YEARS OLD EQUIPMENT POWERED BY VACUM TUBES AND MAGNETIC REEL TAPE - NOWADAYS REVIVAL. AWESOME AFTER MEN IN SPACE SHUTTLE AND YEARS LATER.

With the re-appearence of tube audio and speaker technologies music has never had it so good.

Since I still listen to my wife's 20-year-old Pioneer receiver, as well as to my Accurus amp/preamp setup, I'm qualified to comment. There is a little tiny difference and I like the sound of the Pioneer better. Speakers, however, are a different story.

For the classical music lovers who can't afford more than $700-$800 for a CD player, I don't think there has been enough improvement. You still have to spend between $2000 to $4000 to really enjoy the sound.

With the aid of computer design, advances in electronics, and with the CD, DVD,and SACD formats, audio has clearly taken giant steps. It has also opened up the enjoyment to others at a lower cost for quality equipment.

The compact disc has been a tremendous breakthrough despite all the negatives written. We all now have the chance to hear exactly what the recording engineer wanted. Good or bad