Music Lover vs. Audiophile

[Mallette]

That's the spirit, gents!  Time for champah...nyeh music of Lawrence Welk!  Wunnerful, wunnerful...

 

There's room for all of it.

 

Dave

[BigStewMan]

i didn’t hate his show.

Didn’t hate Hee Haw either.

Didn’t hate Wolfman Jack..Midnight Special or Don Kirsher’s Rock Concert.

I have some Liberace in my music library.

Maybe I’m a music lover?

[oldtimer]

Naw you're just not  a hater.

[garyrc]

Perhaps what I'm referring to is closer to religious experience and good music (literally).

 

"Music is a higher revelation than philosophy" -- Beethoven

[wvu80]

I'd like to get back on track, Dave.  Did you review that Turtle Beach vid I posted?  I was wondering what you thought of it, if it was discussing properly the Sound Cube (is that your term?  I like it).

 

Part of the problem discussing this with you Dave, is you have a very sophisticated and very well thought out position on this.  I am not nearly on your level.  I have an elementary understanding, and you are certainly on a graduate level at the very least.  If I understand correctly, your thinking on this was way ahead of the curve and only now is Atmos beginning to implement the concepts you have been advocating for quite some time.

 

The other problem I have, and this is a bit of a nit-pic, is your topic is Audiophiles VERSUS music lovers.  I see one not VERSUS the other, but rather audiophiles being a sub-set of music lovers.  A music lover is not always an audiophile, but an audiophile is always a music lover.

[Rivernuggets]

I see.... audiophiles being a sub-set of music lovers. A music lover is not always an audiophile, but an audiophile is always a music lover.

 

Yes!

Edited September 18, 2015 by Rivernuggets

[DrWho]

At another AES meeting we learned about how the film industry usually has more than 20 down mixes of the same content, and some films may have more than 100. They are all intended to address the realities of the various playback chains. Radio, car audio, cell phones, portable media devices - algorithm after algorithm of various intentionally injected non-linearities to improve the 90th percentile listening experience.

Maybe they covered this at the AES meeting: is there an indication somewhere on Blu-ray movie discs or packages (in secret code????) that tells you whether they have "optimised" the sound for "the home" in their down mix (e.g., by rolling off the highs), or they are leaving that to the consumer? Do some studios usually (or always) create this special mix, while other studios do not? I run many movies at Audyssey Reference, with its -2 dB at 10K, falling to -6 dB at 20K, as well as having a 2 dB dip at approx 2k, but some movies sound dull and lifeless and "airless" at that setting (e.g., The Walker, and several more), so I switch over to Audyssey FLAT, and those particular films usually sound better. In otherwords, is there a way to know in advance to avoid "double compensating" or rolling off twice, other than doing so by ear, and having to change the setting part way into the film?

The Dolby, DTS, and two channel mixes for the Bluray and DVD would represent six different mixdowns. They aren't gonna do two Dolby Bluray mixes or two DTS DVD mixes, etc. The other mixes have to do with the various movie theater formats.

All that to say, you're usually getting good mixes on Blurays and DVDs. The bad mixes are probably from fatigue after doing fifty mixdowns before doing the home mixes.

I know things are occasionally remastered, but that's a different thing altogether, and they're usually advertised that way.

Edited September 18, 2015 by DrWho

[Mallette]

I'd like to get back on track, Dave. Did you review that Turtle Beach vid I posted? I was wondering what you thought of it, if it was discussing properly the Sound Cube (is that your term? I like it).

 

 

Yes, sir.  Here's a picture of it in the back yard, and I'm uploading the PDF concerning it if you are interested.  I've done so before but it's appropriate here.  SoundCube was the result of my noodling as to why surround recordings didn't seem to work in spite of the logic that they should.  As with the "ills" of CD which I investigated using basically the same approach, the answer was the same:  Overengineering.  High Fidelity is a very delicate thing and it is amazing how little monkeying with it spoils it.  I did take a look.  I didn't know anyone was using that methodology for headsets these days.  They made them back in the "quad" debacle but I never heard any then.  Theoretically, it should work.  I may order some next year when I get settled into my new life in the Music Center as I will be resuming my recording and experiments.

 

 

Part of the problem discussing this with you Dave, is you have a very sophisticated and very well thought out position on this. I am not nearly on your level. I have an elementary understanding, and you are certainly on a graduate level at the very least. If I understand correctly, your thinking on this was way ahead of the curve and only now is Atmos beginning to implement the concepts you have been advocating for quite some time.

 

I am a very simple guy.  Reading Chris work on fixing engineers messes is technically beyond me though I follow the concept well through the excellent images he posts.  Hope to learn more directly from him sometime.  And Dr. Who is somewhere well above that in areas I can only get a glimpse of.

 

What I do some to have a bit of ability for is to reduce problems to their essence, Occam's Razor, if you will.  It isn't all that hard to understand the cues our ears need to locate sound.  That known, it isn't all that much of a leap to use available tools to approximate that with microphones and loudspeakers.  Saying that "to achieve accurate playback from SoundCube simply requires reversing the transducers" is pretty, well, Duh, compared to the guys I mentioned.  But understanding that simple principle certainly illuminates why processor based systems are just now reaching anything like competency in creating an acceptable recreation of a concert hall or other music venue.   First, they have to recognize that most people aren't audiophiles and their choice of speaker locations and types will be based on appearance, easy access, and all sorts of things as opposed to the prescription for my "organic" approach.  That dictates the increasingly sophisticated auto calibration software that samples reality, then, in essence, puts the speakers by shear electronic manipulation where they really should be in the first place.  Next, as almost no surround is recorded using my methods one has to steer sounds to where you want them to go.  By now, it should be clear why it has taken decades to get even close to a realistic sound field for acoustic space/time events.  The process of achieving this artificially is totally antithetical to the process required for achieving an accurate recording, that of direct path from correctly positioned microphones to storage with no mixer or any other process in between.  So, Atmos.  Previous methods weren't complex enough to be able to adapt to conditions at the listeners end.  Eventually, this system and its successors will be able to reproduce SoundCube type purity in surround...but only by incredibly complex circuitry and algorithms that until now largely were simply not sophisticated enough to do so.  It isn't easy to fool mother nature and I am awed by the engineering that is in its infancy to achieve this.  Nonetheless, I think there may be something of a niche for my approach, both for audiophiles as well to feed such systems.  Stands to reason that if you decrease the manipulation of the original recording you will increase the perceived quality.  I'll leave it there so as to avoid going in circles...which is precisely what is happening in audio right now!  A perhaps humorous approach might be asking a mad scientist why he's so set on building a passable human being when the old fashioned approach is so much fun and so easy!

 

 

The other problem I have, and this is a bit of a nit-pic, is your topic is Audiophiles VERSUS music lovers. I see one not VERSUS the other, but rather audiophiles being a sub-set of music lovers. A music lover is not always an audiophile, but an audiophile is always a music lover.

 

 

Well, it was purposeful to bring on discussion.  I have been in places where a wonderful piece of music was overwhelming me...except for a spirited discussion of NOS vs. the same tube from Russia or whatever.  Great discussion but hard to see how it could take place with such marvelous music in the air.  Makes one wonder whether they are listening to circuits or to music. 

sixcard.pdf

Edited September 18, 2015 by Mallette

[Jim Naseum]

The use of "audiophile'" has peaked and is now in disuse. See the graph here http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/audiophile

Seems to be a dirty word nowadays. Not fashionable. Probably because of the argument over wire and cable.

Love is such a strong emotion that I use it carefully. I love my wife, but I probably only like music. I'm a music liker. I also like playing with electro mechanical toys like stereos, cars and cameras. I'm a gadget liker? I only do these things because I like the output or result of using them. My wife is also a music liker, but she's not a gadget liker, she's more of a gadget tolerator.

Speakers are like pianos. They come in many sizes, prices, styles and all have their own sonic personality. But look, you can sit down and play Rhapsody in Blue on all of them, and everyone will recognize the song, having a direct relationship to the talent of the player. Just as all pianos play the right note when you press a key, so too do all speakers play the right notes given from your media platters. Even the smallest ones are accurate in that respect. All the rest of it is nothing more than tonal personality and loudness. Bigger pianos play louder, and with more sonority.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Bigdnfay1]

 I am first and foremost a music lover. I like it to sound as good as my pocketbook will afford. If you spend all your money on gear their is none left to buy music. Without music the gear is useless.

[Mallette]

Never cared for the term or the implications either.  Doesn't really seem to be anything that fits.  Guess it's just "music lover."

 

Dave

[DrWho]

Listening to these people explain why they feel compelled to do this is like listening to Microsoft justify idiocy like Vista or Win8.  They are often believed...but not by me.  Back in the 40s concerts broadcast from a single microphone down class A lines to a fine amplifier and loudspeaker produced legendary results with only a bit of gain riding or not even that. 

 

 

I can see how it is easy to hold that view, but you're way oversimplifying a very complex problem. I would argue that many of the tricks built into the broadcast infrastructure are equivalent in merit to the RIAA curves for vinyl. I just don't like the idea of villainizing people that came up with extremely creative and well thought out solutions to very real problems. Your scenario from the 40s is simply not valid for sending audio (and video) across the country and is really more of an anecdotal justification for an approach you prefer. In other words, things would sound a lot worse without the great work of these people. I have yet to meet anyone actually doing stuff in this industry that wouldn't implement a simpler / purer approach if it would actually meet expectations. It's really the business realities that have created this hodge podge of crazy, which is no fault of the actual designs (not saying they're perfect either, but it's a perspective thing). Btw, your gain riding that you alluded to is absolutely a "processing technique" - it just costs less to have a machine do it versus a human. Aren't you one of the bigger proponents for automation these days?

[DrWho]

They are used too often to attempt corrections due to poor microphone plans or other recording errors. 

Come on Dave, that's not fair at all. I get that you enjoy a particular brush stroke, but what about the people that don't share in your preferences? These different approaches are not "errors" or "poor planning" - they are striving for a different sonic goal, and should be judged on those merits. I'm certainly not going to judge a Picasso based on it's accuracy....despite the fact they're jumbled messes of "poor planning and error"

 

Even in photography where you could have a better chance at documenting the scene, you have amazing artists working with light and the subject and altering things in artistic ways. The last time Colter was in Chicago we visited an amazing photography exhibit at the Art Museum - not once did the idea of "true to the event" ever come up. Why in the world approach the art of music from the mindset of documenting the real event? The whole beauty of art is that you're creating something that could otherwise never be experienced....

 

They didn't use a microphone so that is the sound they wanted.

 

But is it really the sound they wanted? Or was it the sound they ended up with?

[Jim Naseum]

Why in the world approach the art of music from the mindset of documenting the real event? The whole beauty of art is that you're creating something that could otherwise never be experienced....

 

I know I am butting in here, but....

 

I agree. Discs and platters are themselves an art expression just like a photograph. I am so happy to have that new metaphor! Thanks Mr. Dr. Who!

 

When I shoot photographs, they are my interpretation of the world in front of me. Yes, one can simply document, but that's not what most photography is.  The big record labels do not document a symphony by placing one mic in seat 45A. They have  mics all over the place and they create a piece of media that has never been heard by two ears.  

[Paducah Home Theater]

Something that really bothers me, and all I want to know about all this, is whether audiophiles actually _really_ like orchestra/symphony type of music or if that's just the only way they can measure their system and get constant feedback that it is correct.

1. I just have a real hard time believing that there's that many people who just really like this type of music in general, like enough to casually listen to it regularly on a stereo and not just go to quarterly orchestra performances. I can only name a couple.

2. I have a real hard time believing that everybody who likes this type of music is in to high end stereos. In fact, I know one of the richest men in this state and he does actually listen to it, but it's over Bose acoustic wave machines and Bose outdoor speakers. He does not have an awesome two channel serious listening setup.

3. I have a real hard time believing that everybody who has a serious two channel system happens to just _really_ like this music.

4. Yet, self professed audiophiles constantly talk about orchestras and crap.

It seems to me, that the reason that self professed audiophiles are fans of acoustic type of orchestra/symphony music, is that they get constant feedback with it. To me, this sounds like a psychological issue if that's true, like their mom didn't pay enough attention to them during childhood or something. Of course I joke, but this does seem like a real issue at least with many people, and if so, why are they wasting their life listening to stuff that goes against their natural tastes?

Furthermore, why is it that unless you do talk about this type of music, you cannot be admitted into the audiophile club? Why can't you just set your system up, confirm with some orchestra crap that it does in fact work right, then plug in some AC/DC like everybody else? Yet, as soon as you do this, it's all "oh youre just a music lover, not a REAL audiophile". This baffles me.

A stereo either works well or it doesn't. Set it up based on your idea of what "correct" is, confirm with some revealing test tracks, then listen to whatever you enjoy once it's to that point. Why is this idea such a faux pas in the audiophile world? Constantly listening to symphonies doesn't make your stuff any better.

Edited September 18, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[DrWho]

Hearing the negative issues is your job...and you are obviously good at it.  However, don't be one of those who loses their love of their work by learning about all the problems it has.  Fix what you can, then try to turn of your analysis and enjoy the music.

 

Haha, it's funny you mention that.

 

Several years ago I coined the term "virgin ears" - and it's a concept I now stress when teaching new sound engineers. It came about when a trusted friend leaned over during a concert one time where I was flying through several adjustments and he was like "dude, what are you fixing? Go grab a drink or something, it sounds really good". In the moment all I could hear was all of the problems I would have fixed had we had a proper sound check that evening. I stepped away from the board for a few minutes, grabbed a drink (non-alcoholic of course since I was only 18 or 19 at the time), and when I came back everything sounded awesome. Not a single setting had changed, but what had changed was how I was listening....

 

It was at that time that I had an epiphany about how a good sound engineer needs to be able to snap back and forth between listening critically and listening as if this was the first time I had ever heard the band. You gotta have the critical listening skills so you can fix problems that arise, but the problems that matter are the ones you hear with "virgin ears". There's an underlying tone there of listening for enjoyment as well - but it's more than that. It's hearing things as a holistic artistic whole. If you're thinking to yourself, "I want to hear more guitar", then immediately the guitar sounds louder because you've shifted your aural focus onto the guitar. You could actually go around the mix making everything louder by just listening to various channels, but never touching a single fader. One way to know when a sound engineer is falling prey to this is when he reaches down to adjust a fader and only touches it, or moves it ever so slightly. There is no audible change, but the engineer has shifted his aural focus. There is this special happy place where you consciously choose to make a change, but then you don't listen to the change. You have to listen to the entire mix until the entire mix sounds correct - so you're listening for the change without listening to what you're changing. One of the happiest moments as an instructor is when the student learns this skill - then all of a sudden everything they do sounds really good.

 

You are right though that work makes it hard to snap out of the critical mode. I spend a lot less time these days listening to music at home for that very reason. I've shifted most of my focus onto racing lately - which is horrible for the ears.,but part of me kinda wishes my hearing would get damaged a bit so I don't have to be distracted when I recognize artifacts. I just need to find a way to do the engineering thing without listening critically all the time. Unfortunately they don't let us drink whisky at work....

[DrWho]

Why can't you just set your system up, confirm with some orchestra crap that it does in fact work right, then plug in some AC/DC like everybody else? Yet, as soon as you do this, it's all "oh youre just a music lover, not a REAL audiophile". This baffles me.

 

My experience has been that a system that makes AC/DC sound amazing will make the orchestra sound worse. And a system where the orchestra sounds amazing will tend to make AC/DC sound like crap.

[BigStewMan]

You could actually go around the mix making everything louder by just listening to various channels, but never touching a single fader.

wasn’t it Ian Paice (Deep Purple) that had the mixing theory of “just make everything louder than everything else." 

[MyOwn]

Something that really bothers me, and all I want to know about all this, is whether audiophiles actually _really_ like orchestra/symphony type of music or if that's just the only way they can measure their system and get constant feedback that it is correct.

1. I just have a real hard time believing that there's that many people who just really like this type of music in general, like enough to casually listen to it regularly on a stereo and not just go to quarterly orchestra performances. I can only name a couple.

2. I have a real hard time believing that everybody who likes this type of music is in to high end stereos. In fact, I know one of the richest men in this state and he does actually listen to it, but it's over Bose acoustic wave machines and Bose outdoor speakers. He does not have an awesome two channel serious listening setup.

3. I have a real hard time believing that everybody who has a serious two channel system happens to just _really_ like this music.

4. Yet, self professed audiophiles constantly talk about orchestras and crap.

It seems to me, that the reason that self professed audiophiles are fans of acoustic type of orchestra/symphony music, is that they get constant feedback with it. To me, this sounds like a psychological issue if that's true, like their mom didn't pay enough attention to them during childhood or something. Of course I joke, but this does seem like a real issue at least with many people, and if so, why are they wasting their life listening to stuff that does against their natural tastes?

Furthermore, why is it that unless you do talk about this type of music, you cannot be admitted into the audiophile club? Why can't you just set your system up, confirm with some orchestra crap that it does in fact work right, then plug in some AC/DC like everybody else? Yet, as soon as you do this, it's all "oh youre just a music lover, not a REAL audiophile". This baffles me.

A stereo either works well or it doesn't. Set it up based on your idea of what "correct" is, confirm with some revealing test tracks, then listen to whatever you enjoy once it's to that point. Why is this idea such a faux pas in the audiophile world? Constantly listening to symphonies doesn't make your stuff any better.

I have never cared for orchestra/symphony music, I could not sit still throuh a concert that is only this type of music. Now if you mix this with some kick *** rock and roll than you have something...This thread is really DEEP, lots of views and all are valid as we are all individuals with our own thoughts, ideas, likes and dislikes...I can say for certain Im a music lover...I love to hear it on my home system and it sounds damn good at home, but I do rock at work, in my truck, at bars at shows and I know for sure without music in my life than just kill me now.

[Chris A]

My experience has been that a system that makes AC/DC sound amazing will make the orchestra sound worse. And a system where the orchestra sounds amazing will tend to make AC/DC sound like crap.

 

...unless you fix the poor music tracks themselves (via remastering)--and stop using loudspeakers, amplifiers and DACs to fix bad mastering.  Then you'll be done with the problems once and for all.  All it costs is a little time.

 

YMMV.

 

Chris