| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
January 23, 2007 - 7:36am
#1
Music and jaw-clenching....
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
"Very thought-provoking" If you say so. LOL
But seriously ...
Many systems will not appeal simply because, regardless of cost, they sound like crap!... or more diplomatically, they have sonic attribiutes that do not appeal, e.g. if the listener prefers a warm sounding system that forgoes some precision he/she isn't likely going to warm up (pun inteneded) to a system that approaches reproduction from the hyper-detailed perspective.
Now considering the subset of systems that do appeal to a listener's tastes and priorities I would consider those that require of the listener "less" mental energy to fill in the gaps to be the better systems.
BJH I certainly do agree with you, to an extent. I'm simply making the observation that "less" mental energy is actually not as good a thing as it logically seems (at least to me).
As a musician, I am long used to investing myself wholeheartedly in the process of MAKING music; is listening completely dissimilar? I remember all the pianos I've ever played, and it wasn't always the "best" instrument that helped me make the best music. Sometimes, the instrument that makes you work in a different way is the right instrument. Much research has been done on this subject, and conclusions are not easy to come by.
Like Audio systems, if there were one "correct" instrument, there'd be no competition between makers.
Please, no offense to anyone, and anyone's philosophy of how these things work. I'm only speaking of my own experiences, and to ME the subject of the (I think) psychoacoustics involved IS thought-provoking!
Your point that imagination (or memory or whatever) fills in the blanks is one we have all experienced - Mahler on the Tivoli Model 1 for example. The suggestion that we might all be better off with the system that requires the least imagination is also right on the mark.
An interesting extension to your "filling in the blanks" is the hearing of music by those who hear only throught cochlear implants. They recognize a particular piece of music as such if they were familiar with it before they lost the ability to hear. Music which is new to them is "heard" as sonic gibberish.
Could there be a third type of audio system? This would be one that gets out of the way but beckons and entices you to the point where background listening is all but impossible?
This is what I experience with my system daily. It reduces tension especially in my neck and shoulders. It draws me into the music in such a sneaky and insidious way that it has my full attention before I realize it. I now understand how irresistible Shoo-Fly pie is to the flies.
I think I had one just like that...Acoustat 2+2's with a very interesting hybrid tube amp that just pumped out great gobs of current. It passed the LIAR test with flying colors: friends would sit in worship of the Monoliths for hours. (In that tiny sweet-spot of course!)
Sadly way too large a system for my present house:-(
What just fascinates me is the number of aural pathways to the listener's ear. I once heard about a few hundred thousand dollars worth of speakers AB'd in a large showroom: all I remember is they all sounded wonderful, but completely different. I'm sure we've all experienced the same phenomenon - after a few minutes of listening to A, and enjoying the hell out of it, we hear B: first it sounds maybe deficient or bloated or something else, and then we settle back....until C!
How interesting. I use Acoustat speakers and hybrid amplification! As for the LIAR test, when I go to the WC (on my second floor) the real factor is unbelievable. It sounds like I'm upstairs from a club.