Keith - would you pls point us to some of those threads on music? I'd like to read what you wrote.
WBF Audiophiles and Music
- Thread starter tima
- Start date
Keith - would you pls point us to some of those threads on music? I'd like to read what you wrote.
Uhmmm OK randomI feel safe saying a running update of every album Steve W. listened to would require a massive server memory upgrade. For many retirees and office listeners this is probably a very common circumstance. Fashions and ideas gaining value in their listening might also not be suitable for them to expose here. Beyond this time or sappily affixed to a past one is a safe place to rest that thought.
What is the sound of falling into an all too familiar rhythm?
Or are you positing the exciting bits only happen in those spaces falling between the active parts? Snappy first response regardless.
desperately using Google translate but still I’m struggling… as always my bad
Last edited:
Do I have to join a book club and talk about what I read to enjoy reading?
I always loved the music itself. But I never had much of a desire to read Rolling Stone. I don't think I care the technical side of classical. Or how an album is produced. But I have at times wondered who came when and what influence did so and so have on someone else.
I do visit threads on utu music, but not to disect a song or artist. I'm just looking for a new band to listen too.
I do enjoy a record sleeve. And I will at times read the review of some album I'm listening to in Qobuz. Thats about the extent it for me.
I always loved the music itself. But I never had much of a desire to read Rolling Stone. I don't think I care the technical side of classical. Or how an album is produced. But I have at times wondered who came when and what influence did so and so have on someone else.
I do visit threads on utu music, but not to disect a song or artist. I'm just looking for a new band to listen too.
I do enjoy a record sleeve. And I will at times read the review of some album I'm listening to in Qobuz. Thats about the extent it for me.
To understand anything about music (as differentiated from sound) I’d refer first to Gramophone or the Strad… or any music related publication or forum… audio forums are dominated by sound quality related themes not music quality related ones.
A quick look at what’s spinning or a walk through your typical hifi show tells the story of where the focus is… being audiophile is primarily a love of sound, not necessarily a love of music which is realistically a tenuously connected adventure and clearly more about someone actually being a musicophile. Sometimes the heavens align and people are both but not always… and then in truth what does it really matter??
A quick look at what’s spinning or a walk through your typical hifi show tells the story of where the focus is… being audiophile is primarily a love of sound, not necessarily a love of music which is realistically a tenuously connected adventure and clearly more about someone actually being a musicophile. Sometimes the heavens align and people are both but not always… and then in truth what does it really matter??
Last edited:
I remember my father playing a record he said he bought when stereo became popular. It was a recording of trains and you could hear a locomotive start in the left channel pass through the middle, pass through a tunnel and come out on the right channel. To me, the locomotive sound seemed quite realistic, especially when it entered the tunnel, slowly dissapearimg as the box cars entered the tunnel, then gradually re-emerging out of the tunnel.
I don't see posts about train sounds or other sounds of the world.
See the Telarc 1812 overture recording… or Jazz at the pawnshop… hmmm let’s not forget Celine Dion
… audiophile sound focussed appreciation isn’t about sound efx albums.
Last edited:
Uhmmm OK random
Just wait until a
This is my own personal life experience. Or just a simple rule: for whoever owns nothing should not desire anything.
How could one desires a better (means more expensive) equipment, when the money is so rare that it's just enough to buy new records?
Poor people are most often stuck with the hardware they own and they invest their money in new records.
They simply don't have the prosperity to join every new cult or fashion in audio. And audio is all about that. No one can tell me that every year there are big scientific advantages being made in audio engineering. The designs repeat themself and listening to a superior design of audio components from decades ago astonishly doesn't have to mean it sounds outdated. The opposite is often the case.
Audiophiles still praise the Western Electric 555 horn driver, a design from the 1930's, as the best of the best, the holy grail of music reproduction.
How could that be the case, when every year there are innovations in loudspeaker design taking place, now we count approx. eight decades after the invention of those ancient horn drivers?
Audio today is mostly a fashion thing, and poor people just have to satisfy their basic needs, and thats software (means records or concerts), combined with cheap but sufficient hardware. And they often stuck with it for many years.
To be an audiophile is a sport for the rich kids on the block. Those who have satisfied their basic needs and still can spend on luxury as it's not a must have for the audition of recorded music.
That's music theory and musicology. One can study these topics, typically in music school, to masters and PhD level. Basic music theory is taught when studying an instrument and also to college level music students. Jazz in particular uses music theory on-the-fly as part of improvisation and embellishing a song (such as chord expansions and substitutions).
While it is not all done at the conscious level, I would postulate that many listeners react to the structure of music in a very natural way. We turn up the volume for the second verse of a favorite song, anticipate the tension and release from that follows the resolution back to the dominant key, sing in tune or even harmonize to favorite songs. We also react to major keys and minor keys and implicitly understand that they convey different feelings or moods.
I sometimes listen to recordings of piano music (classical) with a score to follow along and learn more about how to play or interpret a piece.
When I just want to listen and enjoy, I don't make any effort to analyze the music. Sometimes, an idea about the structure will occur while listening, but it "pops" up of its own accord.
One exception - when I listen to Elgar's Enigma Variations, I often try to get some idea of the enigma or mystery behind it. It sounds and feels familiar, but I don't know why.
Yes, and well put about jazz. One does not need that technical training to talk about music and to suggest that technical training is what discussing and describing music is all about is a shallow-minded response. Though no matter what is one's knowledge of music you probably cannot take it very far - despite an expensive audio system - with the girl and guitar 'genre'.
Yes. I find myself doing similar and sometimes like to listen with a score which can give insight to the composers intent or the role of certain instruments. Interesting music, be it rock, jazz, classical or whatever, gets repeat hearings. Why is that? It's not hard to ask "why do I like that?" "What is it about a particular band, group or composer that leads me to look for more of their music?" When I played in a rock band is H.S. and college we had constant discussions about how to make our covers more interesting, and we would give attention to our listener's appraisal of how we played. Talking about sound to the exclusion of talking about music seems odd but here I suspect that is a minority viewpoint.
what's the difference between trains, techno dance music, and 50 video's about the growl of a cello? or the sound of the rosin on strings of the violin?
it all depends on where your head is at when you lay back, loose your conscious self, and listen to the cello or the violin. and it is only peripherally involved in your music training or vocabulary. if you are focused on the sound then it's all the same. and nothing wrong or right about it. if it's providing entertainment, or information, it's all good.
i like sounds plenty. but i don't listen to 30+ hours a week of sounds. and the music is accessible no matter my level of understanding if my head is right. but my head is not always right for all types of music. although that has evolved over time. some of what i now enjoy, maybe even my current favorite type, at one point was like trains. and i admit i have almost zero understanding of this music that i can put into words. yet it means the world to my musical enjoyment. so let's not get hung up on being able to converse about musical things. it's no barrier to enjoyment. yet i appreciate those that can express themselves coherently about music. it's a good thing. and i wish i was better at it.
Last edited:
Bass quality is one of the most difficult challenges for any audio system. Some recent videos here on WBF are of double bass, not cello. They make for an interesting contrast to the cello videos, both in terms of the wonderful music and the very different sound.
Last edited:
The why is something I would not fully understand. There are some interesting theories and observations. Perhaps you are familiar with Douglas Richard Hofstadter's book Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid. Also, Oliver Sacks' book Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain offers some insights.
Music is particularly interesting in that it offers content and structure simultaneously. And, humans respond to both aspects.
While music is "audio" since we perceive it primarily through auditory channels, interest in audio gear is quite different, at least to me. I don't often post much about music since my tastes cover the years 1500 through today. I enjoy original instruments and performance styles as well as modern instruments and styles. My tastes are mostly classical and some jazz. I don't have much to say on folk and rock since its not my cup of tea. Even on some of the supposed music forums, there is not much real discussion of music.
I joined WBF (and every other audio forum I’ve belonged to) in order to learn from the insights gained by others from listening to components and accessories, and to share my insights with others who joined for the same reason. While I have occasionally been introduced to new music by WBF posters I consider that a secondary benefit of membership. If I was looking for music history/information/reviews/theory I would consult sites that specialize in those things. WBF members are free to post about whatever they like, however there are quite a few threads I view as “college cafeteria/dorm room philosophical discussions” which can be fun (as they were in college) but little else. This thread and the related "Music or Gear" thread are good examples of the kind of philosophical discussion I'm talking about.
Last edited:
What’s kind of pathetic? My reason for joining the forum, the fact that I’ve been introduced to new music by other posters, my view of WBF philosophical discussions? That I would seek insights on music from sites that specialize in music? All of the above? Enlighten me.
Last edited:
At least you understand the question as a Why? question
Yes. If music offers content and structure, what does sound alone offer that music does not that leads to disinterest in talking about music?
GEB is a 20+ year bestseller. I have not read the Sacks book but just ordered it. Another one is "This is Your Brain on Music" by Daniel Levin.
Yes. If music offers content and structure, what does sound alone offer that music does not that leads to disinterest in talking about music?
GEB is a 20+ year bestseller. I have not read the Sacks book but just ordered it. Another one is "This is Your Brain on Music" by Daniel Levin.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |