Hi-Fi is NOT a subjective hobby.

[LammJunkie]

Ok, I had not understood from your post that the topic was room acoustics.

My point is that you are not sound engineer…. You hear things differently and if you take 40 audiophiles here and on and Audio event, you will hear 40 different opinions… people here things personally until they have trained ears and understanding of sound and music what they are listening to.

Among mix engineers you will hear onlybprecise and accurate opinions…. Because they hear and they CAN hear and understand things differently.. and thats big difference.

I hope you understand now….,i said this at first post here…

Cheers

 

[PYP]

My point is that you are not sound engineer…. You hear things differently and if you take 40 audiophiles here and on and Audio event, you will hear 40 different opinions… people here things personally until they have trained ears and understanding of sound and music what they are listening to.

Among mix engineers you will hear onlybprecise and accurate opinions…. Because they hear and they CAN hear and understand things differently.. and thats big difference.

I hope you understand now….,i said this at first post here…

Cheers

even if mix engineers hear precisely (which they must given their job depends upon that), they make personal decisions about what sounds right for the mix. I've read several autobiographies of recording/mixing/mastering engineers and it is interesting who the main client actually is. Sometimes the artist (when/if they are interested), sometimes the producer (if they aren't the producer themselves), sometimes themselves (trying to represent the musicians as he/she hears them) and maybe, inevitably all of those. How to you keep everyone happy?

As my setup has become more revealing of the recording technique I can hear some of the decisions made by different engineers and the recordings, of course, have a very different in vibe/atmosphere (for simplicity, just considering studio settings). That may be due to my reaction to the music, but there is also a feeling that is established by the engineering choices. Do you agree?

 

[hopkins]

My point is that you are not sound engineer…. You hear things differently and if you take 40 audiophiles here and on and Audio event, you will hear 40 different opinions… people here things personally until they have trained ears and understanding of sound and music what they are listening to.

Among mix engineers you will hear onlybprecise and accurate opinions…. Because they hear and they CAN hear and understand things differently.. and thats big difference.

I hope you understand now….,i said this at first post here…

Cheers

No, sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying I should ask a mixing engineer what system I should listen to? Or maybe even worse, what music I should listen to?

It would be like walking into a random restaurant expecting to get great food, just because "cooking is the chef's profession".

 

[Lagonda]

Its ok. Very positive .,but because you dont have responsibility towards clients ( mixing and mastering ) you just can be relaxed and make things that sounds good for you.
I mean, even than, everything is planned to sound good to audience and specific formats need…. Radio/ CD/ Tape/ Vinyl etc
Because it has to sound good at the end of the process….

But
There are physics , acoustics, mathematical rules when designing audio room is on air. You need to do things right, even more seriously, because room costs x100 then any mix or master.

But for daily audio listening, ( living rooom as example ) my personal opinion is that you dont need that level of accuracy in room acoustics… it costs … but you can make things good with less investments…

As always, its your money, you can do everything you want. Its personal taste

I have a lot of experience with producers mix- engineers and engineers, some of them grammy nominated of high reputation in the business. I have heard and seen little that qualifies you lot as specially gifted when it comes to hearing. In the years i owned a commercial recording studio, the big names shoved little interest in correct or natural sound, it was all about comercial potential and sounding good on the radio. Sound effects, pluggins and interesting sounds where valued much higher than correct sound, each producer had a special sound he was after, some would bring their own equipment that had a special "fat" sound. I am sure a lot of them had hearing damage because of prolonged exposure to loud sounds too, as did a lot of the musicians. I never dealt directly with mastering engineers, but judging from a lot of the shitty work done by some of the biggest names in that part of the business, i will not call them all " golden ears" !

 

[ssfas]

I thought the definition of a hobby is an activity done purely for personal pleasure, irrespective of any social or economic benefit or cost to the hobbyist or anyone else. That's what makes it different to a job (it provides food), a sport (it provides healthy exercise) or a religion (it provides salvation).

You can do a hobby as well or badly as you like, as long as you don't hurt anyone, except possibly yourself, financially.

So there really shouldn't be any rules about how you do it, unless possibly you're building things, especially aircraft. Buy the most expensive, snake oil hifi you can find, as long as it gives you pleasure.

 

[PYP]

Buy the most expensive, snake oil hifi you can find, as long as it gives you pleasure.

Perhaps it is hifi that is giving snake oil a bad name:

Oil from Chinese water snakes has for centuries been used in Chinese traditional medicine to treat joint pain such as arthritis and bursitis. It has been suggested that the use of snake oil in the United States may have originated with Chinese railway laborers in the mid-19th century, who worked long days of physical toil. Chinese snake oil may have had real benefits due to its high concentration of the omega−3 fatty acid eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)—more than that of salmon; the rattlesnake oil later sold by charlatans did not contain a significant amount of omega−3.[2] In a modern study, erabusea-snake oil was found to significantly improve the ability of mice to learn mazes, and their swimming endurance, over mice fed lard.[2][3]

 

[TonyW]

I don’t have to be a trained chef or food critic to enjoy a good meal and I don’t need to be a musician or have golden ears to enjoy good music on a good stereo system. Building a good stereo system however, requires skill, talent, some education and money. My formal education for things Audio was the School of Hard Knocks. It wasn’t the most efficient or cost effective way to learn. Although I finally came around, I would not hire myself to build a high end system. I know now how to get to what I want but I would not be willing to build something for someone else. When people come to me for advice I shy away from giving any.

So now these days I can go hear the best systems at a hifi shop or at Axpona and I can’t wait to get back to listening to my system. That is an achievement but on the other hand hifi shops and Axpona especially, have lots of electrical noise, high ambient noise levels and constantly changing gear to deal with. I spent months positioning my speakers and listening position.

I have used various objective tools and measurements over the years to layout and tune my stereo system but it still comes down to listening. I used to play piano and violin growing up. I always had an ear for music. A musician friend came to the house once years ago and tuned my piano with just a single tuning fork. He had an exceptional gift. That piano never sounded better.

It costs serious money to build an exceptional sounding stereo system but serious money can be spent on an average sounding system as well. Being able to tell the difference is important- especially if it is your money.

 

[wil]

Perhaps it is hifi that is giving snake oil a bad name:

Oil from Chinese water snakes has for centuries been used in Chinese traditional medicine to treat joint pain such as arthritis and bursitis. It has been suggested that the use of snake oil in the United States may have originated with Chinese railway laborers in the mid-19th century, who worked long days of physical toil. Chinese snake oil may have had real benefits due to its high concentration of the omega−3 fatty acid eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)—more than that of salmon; the rattlesnake oil later sold by charlatans did not contain a significant amount of omega−3.[2] In a modern study, erabusea-snake oil was found to significantly improve the ability of mice to learn mazes, and their swimming endurance, over mice fed lard.[2][3]

Let’s give some love for SnakeOil!

 

[godofwealth]

As an audiophile for 40+ years, I would say that my priorities have changed over the years. Excessive reading of HP's writings in TAS led me to spend an inordinate amount of time of what I now consider silly pastimes like imaging and sound staging. When I go to a concert (and I have attended tens of thousands of live concerts all over the world, due to a lot of international travel), the last thing I am concerned about is imaging or sound staging. You "hear the music" and revel in the "The Absolute Sound" (in this, HP was absolutely right, although he went off on a tangent when it came to describing hifi systems). Having owned many systems, and sunk a minor fortune into them (which if I had bought some tech stock 30+ years ago would make me a millionaire many times over!), what I have learned from experience is that there is no perfect system and no perfect way to enjoy a system. I ended up having 4-5 systems in my house of varying degrees of sophistication, and enjoy all of them, from the humble Quad ESL 57 that's 50+ years old and works perfectly, to a massive 9' pair of Soundlab G9-7c's that's my latest loudspeaker acquisition. The SL won't work in spaces that the 57's will and they both do different things in different ways. The same goes for tube and solid state components, and I consider it an absolute waste of time to pontificate on "What's Best" (that's about as silly as a question that asks who the best composer is, or who the best singer is, or the best pianist). Life's too short to waste on meaningless questions, for which there are no answers.

So, now, each evening I play music and listen, to music, not sound staging, not imaging, nor depth or any of the silly audiophile notions that I used to so love doing in my youth. I enjoy mono vinyl records from the 1930s just as much (and often more so) than the latest whizbang DSD recordings. I always keep J. Gordon Holt's law in mind -- the better the recording, the worse the musical performance generally is. I have rarely found exceptions to Holt's law. The recordings I enjoy most are often poorly recorded (e.g., classic jazz is often mono mixed into stereo).

I have found it useful to simply walk around my large listening room, which connects to the adjoining kitchen and dining room, while playing music. I get exercise, and enjoy the music. I don't sit with my butt glued to my listening chair. I can't imagine anything more silly than doing that. Yet, I did exactly that in my youth, and wasted many hours doing that. As you get older, you hopefully get wiser!

 

[PeterA]

As an audiophile for 40+ years, I would say that my priorities have changed over the years. Excessive reading of HP's writings in TAS led me to spend an inordinate amount of time of what I now consider silly pastimes like imaging and sound staging. When I go to a concert (and I have attended tens of thousands of live concerts all over the world, due to a lot of international travel), the last thing I am concerned about is imaging or sound staging. You "hear the music" and revel in the "The Absolute Sound" (in this, HP was absolutely right, although he went off on a tangent when it came to describing hifi systems). Having owned many systems, and sunk a minor fortune into them (which if I had bought some tech stock 30+ years ago would make me a millionaire many times over!), what I have learned from experience is that there is no perfect system and no perfect way to enjoy a system. I ended up having 4-5 systems in my house of varying degrees of sophistication, and enjoy all of them, from the humble Quad ESL 57 that's 50+ years old and works perfectly, to a massive 9' pair of Soundlab G9-7c's that's my latest loudspeaker acquisition. The SL won't work in spaces that the 57's will and they both do different things in different ways. The same goes for tube and solid state components, and I consider it an absolute waste of time to pontificate on "What's Best" (that's about as silly as a question that asks who the best composer is, or who the best singer is, or the best pianist). Life's too short to waste on meaningless questions, for which there are no answers.

So, now, each evening I play music and listen, to music, not sound staging, not imaging, nor depth or any of the silly audiophile notions that I used to so love doing in my youth. I enjoy mono vinyl records from the 1930s just as much (and often more so) than the latest whizbang DSD recordings. I always keep J. Gordon Holt's law in mind -- the better the recording, the worse the musical performance generally is. I have rarely found exceptions to Holt's law. The recordings I enjoy most are often poorly recorded (e.g., classic jazz is often mono mixed into stereo).

I have found it useful to simply walk around my large listening room, which connects to the adjoining kitchen and dining room, while playing music. I get exercise, and enjoy the music. I don't sit with my butt glued to my listening chair. I can't imagine anything more silly than doing that. Yet, I did exactly that in my youth, and wasted many hours doing that. As you get older, you hopefully get wiser!

I started enjoying the hobby a lot more when I stopped reading the silly magazines. The writers tell you to focus on bits and pieces of the music and hi-fi sound attributes. They want you to chase individual things and are always telling you to upgrade. It’s a complete waste of time. The interests of the magazines don’t align with the interest of the hobbyist If all the hobbyist wants to do is assemble a good system that allows him to enjoy his music collection.

 

[PYP]

I started enjoying the hobby a lot more when I stopped reading the silly magazines. The writers tell you to focus on bits and pieces of the music and hi-fi sound attributes.

yes, as if a system is composed of individual pieces that don't interact. To say nothing of the room, electrical system and network (if that is your thing). We are all looking for the gestalt. We know it when we hear it.

I have read one or two reviews that reveal what the individual component contributes to that reviewer's particular system according to a meaningful reaction to music the reviewer listened to. Not sound effects, but newfound perspective. That is what we are looking for in a new piece of gear. But there is no way to generalize the effect.

 

[TonyW]

As an audiophile for 40+ years, I would say that my priorities have changed over the years. Excessive reading of HP's writings in TAS led me to spend an inordinate amount of time of what I now consider silly pastimes like imaging and sound staging. When I go to a concert (and I have attended tens of thousands of live concerts all over the world, due to a lot of international travel), the last thing I am concerned about is imaging or sound staging. You "hear the music" and revel in the "The Absolute Sound" (in this, HP was absolutely right, although he went off on a tangent when it came to describing hifi systems). Having owned many systems, and sunk a minor fortune into them (which if I had bought some tech stock 30+ years ago would make me a millionaire many times over!), what I have learned from experience is that there is no perfect system and no perfect way to enjoy a system. I ended up having 4-5 systems in my house of varying degrees of sophistication, and enjoy all of them, from the humble Quad ESL 57 that's 50+ years old and works perfectly, to a massive 9' pair of Soundlab G9-7c's that's my latest loudspeaker acquisition. The SL won't work in spaces that the 57's will and they both do different things in different ways. The same goes for tube and solid state components, and I consider it an absolute waste of time to pontificate on "What's Best" (that's about as silly as a question that asks who the best composer is, or who the best singer is, or the best pianist). Life's too short to waste on meaningless questions, for which there are no answers.

So, now, each evening I play music and listen, to music, not sound staging, not imaging, nor depth or any of the silly audiophile notions that I used to so love doing in my youth. I enjoy mono vinyl records from the 1930s just as much (and often more so) than the latest whizbang DSD recordings. I always keep J. Gordon Holt's law in mind -- the better the recording, the worse the musical performance generally is. I have rarely found exceptions to Holt's law. The recordings I enjoy most are often poorly recorded (e.g., classic jazz is often mono mixed into stereo).

I have found it useful to simply walk around my large listening room, which connects to the adjoining kitchen and dining room, while playing music. I get exercise, and enjoy the music. I don't sit with my butt glued to my listening chair. I can't imagine anything more silly than doing that. Yet, I did exactly that in my youth, and wasted many hours doing that. As you get older, you hopefully get wiser!

See, for me I’m glued to my chair when listening to music on my stereo. From that day in the 80s, first time I heard a pair of Quads, I have chased after that soundstage magic ever since. If the stereo is on I cannot get anything else done. For background music I’ll use the HT Receiver. Otherwise, several times a week it is Concert Time for me. Old recordings or new, they all sound great to me. Many audiophile recordings are too boring but there are exceptions.

 

[Al M.]

See, for me I’m glued to my chair when listening to music on my stereo. From that day in the 80s, first time I heard a pair of Quads, I have chased after that soundstage magic ever since. If the stereo is on I cannot get anything else done. For background music I’ll use the HT Receiver. Otherwise, several times a week it is Concert Time for me. Old recordings or new, they all sound great to me. Many audiophile recordings are too boring but there are exceptions.

I am also glued to my chair. That's the only way I can fully concentrate on the music. And the music is what it's all about, isn't it? When I am sitting in the concert hall, I am obviously also glued to my chair. What exactly is wrong or "silly" (godofwealth's term) about that?

 

[TonyW]

I started enjoying the hobby a lot more when I stopped reading the silly magazines. The writers tell you to focus on bits and pieces of the music and hi-fi sound attributes. They want you to chase individual things and are always telling you to upgrade. It’s a complete waste of time. The interests of the magazines don’t align with the interest of the hobbyist If all the hobbyist wants to do is assemble a good system that allows him to enjoy his music collection.

Yes, rather than getting caught up in the latest gear offerings, it is much more rewarding to set a target and work towards that goal. Chasing the wind is frustrating. The latest and greatest is a moving target. Get to a point where the sound is satisfying, rewarding and don’t look back.

1978: “This is the best Pontiac yet”.
1988: “ This is the best Pontiac ever”
And so on year after year.
2010- no more Pontiac.

On the other hand, I kept my last CD Player for 15 years. Focusing on vinyl I believed CDs didn’t have much more to offer. Now the digital side rivals the vinyl side. Both are just as thrilling to hear. All it took was time effort and money. For me, I’m am pleased and glad to be focused on the music again after upgrading gear. Maybe in another 15 years I might look to upgrade but likely not.

While in the upgrade cycle I found the articles and videos to be of little help. They gave me a chance to see what is out there and what the costs were but not much else except for a shopping list of gear to audition. I visited stores, Axpona and shipped several items into/out of my home. It’s a lot of work and trouble but I found it worthwhile auditioning gear directly in my home. The incentive to keep something offset by its cost. In the end the performance of a piece of gear had to be really good- insanely good to offset the cost.

I find working on tweaks and fine tuning helps to tame that restless upgrade bug as well. Every now and then I think about a tube amp and I just slap myself with the spiraling costs these days of power tubes. Even my preamp tubes are getting a bit salty.

The first rule of Audio: Your system sounds great until you hear something better.
I’m at the point where I haven’t heard better in a good while. I know its out there but I’m not looking for it either.

 

[wil]

I am also glued to my chair. That's the only way I can fully concentrate on the music. And the music is what it's all about, isn't it? When I am sitting in the concert hall, I am obviously also glued to my chair. What exactly is wrong or "silly" (godofwealth's term) about that?

I like to sit and fully focus — that’s the deepest musical experience. But only for an hour at a time usually. Music as background for doing other stuff is rich as well. Different experiences.

 

[Lee]

As an audiophile for 40+ years, I would say that my priorities have changed over the years. Excessive reading of HP's writings in TAS led me to spend an inordinate amount of time of what I now consider silly pastimes like imaging and sound staging. When I go to a concert (and I have attended tens of thousands of live concerts all over the world, due to a lot of international travel), the last thing I am concerned about is imaging or sound staging. You "hear the music" and revel in the "The Absolute Sound" (in this, HP was absolutely right, although he went off on a tangent when it came to describing hifi systems). Having owned many systems, and sunk a minor fortune into them (which if I had bought some tech stock 30+ years ago would make me a millionaire many times over!), what I have learned from experience is that there is no perfect system and no perfect way to enjoy a system. I ended up having 4-5 systems in my house of varying degrees of sophistication, and enjoy all of them, from the humble Quad ESL 57 that's 50+ years old and works perfectly, to a massive 9' pair of Soundlab G9-7c's that's my latest loudspeaker acquisition. The SL won't work in spaces that the 57's will and they both do different things in different ways. The same goes for tube and solid state components, and I consider it an absolute waste of time to pontificate on "What's Best" (that's about as silly as a question that asks who the best composer is, or who the best singer is, or the best pianist). Life's too short to waste on meaningless questions, for which there are no answers.

So, now, each evening I play music and listen, to music, not sound staging, not imaging, nor depth or any of the silly audiophile notions that I used to so love doing in my youth. I enjoy mono vinyl records from the 1930s just as much (and often more so) than the latest whizbang DSD recordings. I always keep J. Gordon Holt's law in mind -- the better the recording, the worse the musical performance generally is. I have rarely found exceptions to Holt's law. The recordings I enjoy most are often poorly recorded (e.g., classic jazz is often mono mixed into stereo).

I have found it useful to simply walk around my large listening room, which connects to the adjoining kitchen and dining room, while playing music. I get exercise, and enjoy the music. I don't sit with my butt glued to my listening chair. I can't imagine anything more silly than doing that. Yet, I did exactly that in my youth, and wasted many hours doing that. As you get older, you hopefully get wiser!

If I am listening to Blue Note jazz, I love hearing the music with it’s recorded soundstage. That’s a big part of jazz. The interplay between instruments. It adds to the enjoyment.

 

[PYP]

I like to sit and fully focus — that’s the deepest musical experience. But only for an hour at a time usually. Music as background for doing other stuff is rich as well. Different experiences.

Like you, I enjoy both. Typically, after listening intently, Roon Radio continues in the background (the algorithms choose songs that are similar - well, some of the time). Sometimes, the background music will catch my ear and I'll park myself and listen intently. Adding the album to Roon's Listen Later playlist is one click. Have discovered a lot of new music that way. I like the idea of a limitless collection of music. Time being the only constraint.

 

[hopkins]

As an audiophile for 40+ years, I would say that my priorities have changed over the years. Excessive reading of HP's writings in TAS led me to spend an inordinate amount of time of what I now consider silly pastimes like imaging and sound staging. When I go to a concert (and I have attended tens of thousands of live concerts all over the world, due to a lot of international travel), the last thing I am concerned about is imaging or sound staging. You "hear the music" and revel in the "The Absolute Sound" (in this, HP was absolutely right, although he went off on a tangent when it came to describing hifi systems). Having owned many systems, and sunk a minor fortune into them (which if I had bought some tech stock 30+ years ago would make me a millionaire many times over!), what I have learned from experience is that there is no perfect system and no perfect way to enjoy a system. I ended up having 4-5 systems in my house of varying degrees of sophistication, and enjoy all of them, from the humble Quad ESL 57 that's 50+ years old and works perfectly, to a massive 9' pair of Soundlab G9-7c's that's my latest loudspeaker acquisition. The SL won't work in spaces that the 57's will and they both do different things in different ways. The same goes for tube and solid state components, and I consider it an absolute waste of time to pontificate on "What's Best" (that's about as silly as a question that asks who the best composer is, or who the best singer is, or the best pianist). Life's too short to waste on meaningless questions, for which there are no answers.

So, now, each evening I play music and listen, to music, not sound staging, not imaging, nor depth or any of the silly audiophile notions that I used to so love doing in my youth. I enjoy mono vinyl records from the 1930s just as much (and often more so) than the latest whizbang DSD recordings. I always keep J. Gordon Holt's law in mind -- the better the recording, the worse the musical performance generally is. I have rarely found exceptions to Holt's law. The recordings I enjoy most are often poorly recorded (e.g., classic jazz is often mono mixed into stereo).

I have found it useful to simply walk around my large listening room, which connects to the adjoining kitchen and dining room, while playing music. I get exercise, and enjoy the music. I don't sit with my butt glued to my listening chair. I can't imagine anything more silly than doing that. Yet, I did exactly that in my youth, and wasted many hours doing that. As you get older, you hopefully get wiser.

I don't know if it is a matter of "wisdom". Both types of listening are complimentary, at least for me - listening habits vary from person to person.

Sometimes I feel like having an "immersive" listening experience, and sometimes music plays in the background. My system allows me to enjoy both.

The more focused listening is very similar to listening with headphones, but with all the benefits of speakers (air, presence, etc...). In that context, those "audiophile" attributes you mention do apply, yet the music is very relaxing.

It is hard to describe sound...and any attempt to do so here invariably results in criticism.

Like you, I listen to a lot of older recordings. Contrary to popular belief, I find those are the ones that benefit most from being played on my speakers, and that is a source of great satisfaction.

 

[hopkins]

The first rule of Audio: Your system sounds great until you hear something better.

I have heard many other systems, and am well aware of my systems' limitations, but yet can honestly say that I love how it sounds and would not trade it for any other I have heard - at this point, and given my "room" - simply because I don't see the benefits in terms of musical enjoyment.

I could upgrade my turntable and get better sound from my records, that I am certain of, but why bother at this point if I enjoy what I listen to?

My dac/amp is made by a small manufacturer that I know well, and if they come up with an improved model, I will purchase it because I enjoy following their progress, and admire their work.

At this point, spending thousands of euros for a "different" speaker, that is not going to be "perfect" either, seems like a waste of money, and time.

Maybe that is some form of "wisdom"...and maybe it is time for me to quit posting on audiophile forums

 

[microstrip]

(...) The first rule of Audio: Your system sounds great until you hear something better. (...)

Not IMO. My system sounds great because I appreciate and enjoy it. I have listened to better systems, and even owned a better system some time ago.

I’m at the point where I haven’t heard better in a good while. I know its out there but I’m not looking for it either.

I hope to improve my system soon. Other priorities have forced me to keep delaying it. My wallet and critters associated to reasonability will be my main limitation.