Vote

The problem is not one of reproduction, but of recording. The weakest link in the entire recording-playback chain is the microphone, with its tiny, lossy, and lousy transducer. Now if recording transducers were the size of Maggie 20.1s, for example, we might get be able to capture the music properly!

a nice pair of maggies and a audio aero cd player should do the job.

The acoustics in the typical home will simply not support true low frequency waves. The sound of a timpany or contrabass at low amplitude can not be recreated in a residential environment -unless we're talking Bill Gates or the Queen of England.

Is there anything in the world that is perfect? And could we ever agree on what perfection means in something so subjective as music?

Once we can bypass our ears and connect audio directly to the brain, then we will have better than real-life audio. Young or old, it won't matter—we'll always have perfect "hearing."

Physics. Can't be done. Yet, if the music purveyors don't ruin the media, the "hardware" will get forever close.

Only if you get the room with the stereo.

Why bother? Going to listen to a real jazz quartet is a bargain compared with all the money you'd have to spend on high-end thingamabobs just to get something close, but not equal to, the actual experience. The audiophile obsession trying to be "even better than the real thing" sounds rather futile to me.

You need to pay through the nose for such a system that approaches the real thing. Each year systems get better and the improvements trickle down to less costly components. But, things like room dynamics and one more great paradigm shift in technology needs to be done to get us there.

There is always the engineer between you and the event. His or her interperation of the events what we hear. With 25 years of interpersonal communications experience I know people know what they thought they heard. I respect the results of these professional but they are still telling us what they heard I am not even sure what "perfect reproduction is or if I want to think I have heard it.

You would have to define what "perfect" means for each listener (many already believe they have it) and even for each kind of music or recording technique since they vary wildly. I believe that multiple monitors and recording data encoded in the media will be in the solution, maybe also some chip in the playback equipment that will evaluate the listener's room and adapt the signal accordingly. Some of the things I mention are already a reality but they would have to be affordable and transparent to the end user if they are to become a reality. This brings a question, say you play some classical music that was recorded in an acoustically-ill venue, perfect reproduction means you will hear the flaws of the venue, so, is this desirable?

Never say never when dealing with technology. Science has a way of proving people wrong when someone says something is impossible. Usually sooner rather than later.

Maybe when the playback device interfaces directly to our brains.

Never. It is not possible to recreate an event in its entirety. We can strive to continue towards that ideal, but it is not possible to fully reproduce a specific moment in time.

With the advances in technology we will soon be able to really put the band in our living rooms.

you gotta be kiddin me.

The mere idea of perfection is preposterous in the context of audio reproduction.

Of course you could always pay to have the Jazz Quartet in your living room!

After qualifying "perfect" as being indefinable and as fickle as an individual's taste, it would appear that today's best technology could achieve a certain standard based on a version of reality. That said, it will get down to what the human ear can detect, since a reproduction, by definition, cannot be the true equal of an original, and our ears and minds have a great track record of uping the ante beyond every technical improvement. The key may be the mind and the suspension of disbelief.

Recorded music will never be the equal of a live performance, It will never have the human element, the connection of people in the audience to the preformers. ,

We are already very close. But it is kind of like "absolute zero"—getting to the end-point may be impossible.

Never. We'd need to agree on what perfect audio reproduction is first. Maybe we could consult with JGH for a definition.

First we have to define what "Perfect Audio" is. Then we can move continue to move towards that reference. We all have different levels of perfection.

Impossible to re-create the exact sound emanating from an entire orchestra, choir, or even duo using fewer recording devices and fewer transducers, and using a different venue. That doesn't mean its bad now, or can't improve.

there is far to many variables involved. Starting with the recording equipment used by the engineers, and ending with the room in your home. Its too long a journey to ever expect perfection.

Perfect audio reproduction doesn't happen in your home, it happens in your head! So enjoy your perfect sound and I'll enjoy mine.

Too many items in the play back chain, too many variables.

Perfectly reproduce is an oxymoron.

We will never be able to perfectly reproduce the sound of a live music in our living rooms. The microphones used to record distort and color the sound. The microphone preamps the microphones are connected to distort and color the sound. Starting from that point in the recording chain to the point where you're listening to a recording, every device colors and distorts the sound. It is impossible to reproduce the sound in your living room, in the mastering studio, and even in the recording studio.

The engineers like to tamper with things, placement of instruments, etc. And with multichannel audio and re-issues of the old stuff again) who knows if what you hear is anything like what was recorded originally.