*That's the 'natural sound' vs everything else tactic. But there may well be many different bases of preference that people have and follow. Someone might say "my basis of preference is Carnegie Hall - I built my system so whatever the music, from Elvis to Kraftwerk, it sounds as if it is performed in Carnegie Hall. There reference is ... wait for it ... Carnegie Hall. Someone might say "my basis of preference is one of self discovery - I keep learning what I like and adapt my system accordingly." Their reference is themselves. Someone might say "my basis of preference is what I hear at my audio dealer - I want my system to sound like my dealers." Their basis of preference for reproduction is another reproduction, in a showroom. Part of the issue is there does not seem to be anyone articulating an alternative - all alternatives are welcome.
*To me, some systems accentuate certain attributes during playback, such as pin-point imaging, black-background, extended high frequencies, treble-air and so on, which are not heard or highlighted when one listens to live music or instruments. These “audiophile pyrotechnics“ are either a product of the recording, recording or mastering engineers, or a product of stereophonic sound. Simply the use of panning or spatial positioning of the microphones feeds during the recording or mixing process can alter the presentation.
Those systems that emphasize these unnatural attributes, which are audiophile ear candy, to me, would be classified as sounding “Hi-Fi”, while those that present music in a more “realistic”, and perhaps tamed for lack of a better word, are the ones that provide the “Natural Sound”.
*Does your system sound natural or realistic in playing what has been recorded - that is, what it sounds like in the studio. Not sure anyone knows on most recordings.
Surely I can't be the only one who sees the inconsistencies and inherent contradictions in these quotes from earlier posts on just this page (#55)?? Is "natural sound" a realistic reproduction of what is recorded, or is it something that sounds "real" to you (the listener) regardless of what is on the recording? And as the last quote so accurately notes, how do we know what is on the recording? Even if you were there at the actual recording session (live, studio, empty concert hall or wherever) it's almost impossible to know how the subsequent mastering might affect the sound on the medium used for playback.