My system is too accurate

[Phelonious Ponk]

Accuracy is not 100% subjective. If one can reproduce what the artist intended for them to hear in their home system, then it is by definition an accurate system. It helps to know more detail about the acoustical problems in his room, which is the weak link in almost all home systems (analog or digital). It is a funny thread because it a cry for help of sorts. However, I don't think he wants to hear anything I have to say on the matter, so I'll stay out of it. I just think it's interesting.

How is accuracy even 1% subjective? How does a playback system understand an artist's intentions?

Tim

 

[Bruce B]

Accuracy is totally objective. What comes in, goes out unchanged. A perfect representation of the source.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Accuracy is totally objective. What comes in, goes out unchanged. A perfect representation of the source.

This. It doesn't mean it is more pleasant or that something less accurate isn't more like your recollection of live music, but accurate is not subjective, and if the recording isn't great, accurate can be hard to listen to, which is exactly what Hoffman is talking about.

Tim

 

[mep]

Before this degenerates into yet another digital vs. analog debate that Tim is trying to steer the car down the crooked road on, let's keep in mind this was a generalized statement made by Hoffman who also listens to digital.

 

[dallasjustice]

Yes, but without knowing the exact frequency response and time domain response in the room the recording was mixed and mastered, it is impossible to ever really know the sound that hits your ears in room is the same sound that hit their ears when it was produced. IOW, nobody has a perfect room, even the so-called pros.

Accuracy is totally objective. What comes in, goes out unchanged. A perfect representation of the source.

 

[rbbert]

Why hasn't taters fixed the spelling in the title of this thread yet

 

[mep]

Why hasn't taters fixed the spelling in the title of this thread yet

Because he's not too accurate with his spelling?

 

[rbbert]

You know if you look at the thread at SH forums, and also look at Steve's gear, you can see that he can (and has done) easily put together a system where most recordings sound good. He's complaining that his best, mastering system reveals too many unpleasant flaws in most recordings, and since it is his best system (i.e., the one where the best recordings sound their best) he'd like to listen to it all the time. I'd also say that by most criteria it is an excellent system, individual tastes in speakers aside.

 

[Bruce B]

Yes, but without knowing the exact frequency response and time domain response in the room the recording was mixed and mastered, it is impossible to ever really know the sound that hits your ears in room is the same sound that hit their ears when it was produced. IOW, nobody has a perfect room, even the so-called pros.

I was talking about signal accuracy... whether it be analog or digital. The pros have no control of what it sounds like in someone's room. Hopefully the pros have spent the money on the complete chain, this includes the room, so there is as little variability as possible.
That's one of the reasons I got rid of my last speaker system. Too much variability.

 

[dingus]

to each his own...

i dont know what exactly Hoffman prefers to his music reproduction, but even though i love a highly resolving and detailed presentation, i do prefer a slightly euphonic coloration to mine. i dont strive for accuracy because it doesnt always yield the best possible results in terms of my listening enjoyment, and i cant get there anyway because no microphone or loudspeaker ever made can achieve total accuracy.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Before this degenerates into yet another digital vs. analog debate that Tim is trying to steer the car down the crooked road on, let's keep in mind this was a generalized statement made by Hoffman who also listens to digital.

I'm not really looking for another D vs A debate, Mark. I've passed by many opportunities to engage in that over the last couple of weeks. But I couldn't just walk past another set of personal facts. Accurate is accurate. Fidelity is fidelity. Neither are fungible concepts. Is it too much to expect subjetive terminology to be used to refer to subjective ideas?

Yes. Hoffman listens to digital. He masters digital.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

to each his own...

i dont know what exactly Hoffman prefers to his music reproduction, but even though i love a highly resolving and detailed presentation, i do prefer a slightly euphonic coloration to mine. i dont strive for accuracy because it doesnt always yield the best possible results in terms of my listening enjoyment, and i cant get there anyway because no microphone or loudspeaker ever made can achieve total accuracy.

I agree. Prefer to choose my euphony in my transducers, where it can't be avoided and seek signal accuracy up to that point, but I agree.

Tim

 

[mep]

I'm not really looking for another D vs A debate, Mark. I've passed by many opportunities to engage in that over the last couple of weeks. But I couldn't just walk past another set of personal facts. Accurate is accurate. Fidelity is fidelity. Neither are fungible concepts. Is it too much to expect subjetive terminology to be used to refer to subjective ideas?

Yes. Hoffman listens to digital. He masters digital.

Tim

Which is why I said what I said. I don't think Hoffman was complaining about his stereo system being too accurate when playing analog or when playing digital, I think he meant both.

 

[microstrip]

Accuracy is totally objective. What comes in, goes out unchanged. A perfect representation of the source.

Bruce,

IMHO, it is not so easy. Nothing is 100% accurate, and then you have to use tools to check the accuracy. Some of the tools to check it must be subjective - although if they are properly used and adequately analyzed some people consider that they can be considered objective.

 

[Bruce B]

I totally agree. But as professionals, we try to introduce the least amount of variables so we can be true to the source and artist's intention. It's when you start including 'colorful' equipment, speakers and room interaction where the problems start.

 

[dallasjustice]

So, when the "professionals" produce something that is not accurate (call it colorful or whatever), what's the home listener supposed to do? Should the the home listener just pretend it sounds "accurate" and accept it, or is okay for the home listen to alter it so that it sounds better to them?

I totally agree. But as professionals, we try to introduce the least amount of variables so we can be true to the source and artist's intention. It's when you start including 'colorful' equipment, speakers and room interaction where the problems start.

 

[Bruce B]

So, when the "professionals" produce something that is not accurate (call it colorful or whatever), what's the home listener supposed to do?

You can do 1 of 2 things...

1. Not buy the material. That's what a lot of people do by reading reviews and looking at graphs.

2. Or alter it to taste. I know Christian and others have inserted EQ's and such. They also buy colorful equipment/speakers to taste.

 

[mep]

So, when the "professionals" produce something that is not accurate (call it colorful or whatever), what's the home listener supposed to do? Should the the home listener just pretend it sounds "accurate" and accept it, or is okay for the home listen to alter it so that it sounds better to them?

So how do you alter the sound of music you are playing?

 

[Bruce B]

So how do you alter the sound of music you are playing?

you can put lots of things in the tape loop or between the pre and amp like and EQ, BSG QOL, exciter or what not. Hell, you can even put it thought an actual tape loop through your Studer to add colorization.

 

[rbbert]

I think the whole topic is a thinly veiled smear at much of the recording and music industry for releasing what SH considers poor sounding products. And although he obviously has a vested interest, I think we all basically agree with him.