Accuracy and Emotion

[jrios212]

So while the end goal is always to enjoy the music, we must realize

that we must also train our ears to know what is good.

Personally for me, I completely disagree with the second part of this sentance.  I'll explain this in a bit but first I need to make one quick comment.

Mike, I haven't been part of these forums very long but from reading them I have to say I have quite a bit of respect for you and appreciate your comments. (even when I completely disagree)   

Since you are a sound engineer I can understand why you have this perpective. I think you unfortunately have a conflict of interest when listening to music because you are a sound engineer.  The reason I say this is because when I listen to CDs now I really don't pay attention to my speakers and just listen to the music and enjoy.  However, I can probably only do this because people like you know what you're doing when it comes to creating accurate recordings ... so thanks for that.  Similiarly, I enjoy the sound of the guitar, but only when it is being played by someone who knows how to use it.

Now to the personal story I wanted to tell you guys that I think re-emphasizes the point everyone is making here.  

I have loved listening to music all my life and before buying my Klipsch speakers 6 months ago all I had was a really crappy HTIB Sony system that I had from college.  I used to listen to it all the time and loved it.  Then I decided I finally had the disposable income and upgraded to what I have today.  One thing led to another and I started down this horrible path of trying to make my system perfect.  I think you guys call it "The Madness".  I spent hours on this forum reading, hours adjusting the placement of my speakers, using my new spl meter to flatten my room response, etc.  Two months into it all I actually regretted ever buying my Klipsch speakers.  Instead of listening to the music, I started listening to my speakers.  It was horrible.  I no longer enjoyed listening to music because I couldn't just sit an listen.  I was always thinking about technicalities.  I finally just stopped trying to make things perfect ... perfect is a moving target.  My system is set up pretty good now and I don't care.  Now I just put cds in and smile away.

That's it really.  The day I have to train myself to enjoy music is a day I don't want to see, but I'm thankful that people like you MIke know what sounds "good" so I don't have to worry about it when enjoying my CDs.

As a random side note ... this thread makes me think of that song that goes ..."If you want to be happy for the rest of your life, never make a pretty woman your wife"  ... it causes too much worry. In my case for awhile, my Klipsh speakers were the pretty woman.

[Duke Spinner]

The day I have to train myself to enjoy music is a day I don't want to see, but I'm thankful that people like you MIke know what sounds "good" so I don't have to worry about it when enjoying my CDs.

aaaah ....

don't get all twisted up about this .......

somma us ...just have listen ... more critically //

it doesn't mean .. We don't .. Enjoy it ..

just a different Perspective

like .. when ya notice the Snare, and Kick ..aren't reversed in phase ...[].

[Mallette]

I will go along with Mikes sentence if the word "good" were substituted for something else more technical. "Good" is a subjective word that means many things to many people. Consider "quality." Deming said, very profoundly, "Quality is defined as fitness for intended use."

jrios, there was nothing wrong with your "Madness," except you found no pleasure in it. Some, like Mike, make a living at it. In my case, I've been on both sides. As an audio engineer paid to get it right, my ears were tuned to hearing what was wrong. As a music lover, my ears and heart are looking for nourishment and my expectations are that Mike, PWK, Hafler, et al, have done what I pay them for and nothing will be so wrong as to intrude on my transcendent experience.

Many of the shooting wars that have broken out here in that past were due to a complete misunderstanding of the values of the individuals involved. Actually, the same thing is responsible for a LOT of wars...

Dave

[jrios212]

Many of the shooting wars that have broken out here in that past were due to a complete misunderstanding of the values of the individuals involved.    Actually, the same thing is responsible for a LOT of wars...

Dave .... good post. 

Regarding your quote above I completely agree with that as well.  One thing I learned from back in my speech and debate days is that before you get involved in any kind discussion, debate, etc you first need to come to an agreement or at least an understanding of the other's perspective on the definitions of certain key words.  After that you need to make it clear what it is you value in respect to the topic of discussion.  Then once all that is settled ... you can proceed. 

Without this people just end up taking past eachother.  It's clear we all have different definitions of what is "good", "accurate", etc. as well as what it is we all value.

The nice thing is that no one is wrong but it's still fun to talk about anyway, as sometimes people bring up points I never thought to consider.  It's all perpective.

Jacob

[klipschguy101]

Congrats to the author of this thread for devising such thought provocation. This really gets to the heart of the matter, doesn't it?

The measure of a "good" speaker seems in many ways dependent upon your reason for listening in the first place. Reading the posts it would appear that there are two types of people who listen to stereos. Some listen for accuracy, hoping for no "impurities" in the way a wine connoisseur might judge a favorite grape. Others listen to music, hoping to get lost in the emotion, in the way a wine lover might enjoy the fermented grape.

The fundamental differences in this regard seem to explain the sometimes heated exchanges in this forum about Bose speakers which, as I understand, were designed more to evoke emotion, than awe in accuracy. But, as proven by the fact that there are nearly 20 pages of posts about the latest iteration of 901s on this forum, whatever else is true, Bose does evoke emotion.

To me, speakers are more like tires, than wine. They are a product of compromise. Its hard to make a small speaker sound like a K-horn. Its hard to make an "accurate" speaker sound "live." Its hard to make a "live" speaker sound "warm" without tubes and vinyl. Its harder still to do any of these things and still sell the product at a competitive price point.

But perhaps the most defining moment of this thread so far was Max's description of the emotional moment when 20 people gave a home stereo a standing ovation. Most of us who read this forum with any frequency can probably appreciate (if not personally relate to) the magical feeling Max described. Few others could. In the end, that distinction between types of listeners may be the most relevant.

[Erik Mandaville]

Klipschguy:

"To me, speakers are more like tires, than wine."

I like that description, and I agree with your idea about the importance of compromise -- not just for loudspeakers, but all components, from the design stage all the way to the user level.

Erik

PS: The Heresy IIIs in your avatar look great -- solid and simple.

[wstrickland1]

oH for cryin' out loud

[jacksonbart]

I like good music

[oldbuckster]

I like good music

Me Too....................and I don't have to be trained to know what I like................Emotion, is that when a song can bring a tear to your eye? Accuracy, is that when you can tell a Bass Drum from Bass guitar?

[skonopa]

I don't know how "accurate" or not my system is, as I've never ran any frequency curves on it, but listening to this brand-new Sonata Arctica album on my RF-7s with B&K amplification with a Denon AVR-3802 acting as a pre-pro, this is just friggan kicking my a$$! Holy crap, does the track "Caleb" sound awesome on here! All I can say if it make me smile and runs shivers up my back, than it is good for me!

However, after seeing TSO at a live show a couple years ago (and sitting in the third row right at center stage - I don't think I was any farther from the lead vocalist than I sit from my own TV), and then playing the identical track off their CD, as sung by the same lead singer as I saw at the live performance, it put my right back at the show! It was just stunning! I could not friggan believe it, that my home setup could be just as, if not better than, the setup I heard at live performance! This is not some dinky little club with a crappy setup, this was friggan Trans-Siberian Orchestra for crying out loud at the Richmond Coliseum! Again, is that "accurate", but it sure was awesome to think that hearing a live performance and then within a couple hours, hear the same track again on my own setup, it was such a nearly identical experience for me (of course, without the wicked lighting show!). It was funny that just this past fall, when I saw TSO again and got to talk to that singer and told him about my experience. He thought it was awesome that I was able to get an experience like that with his performance. I don't know if that is a testament as to how good the live performance was, the recording on the CD, or my own setup. Perhaps it is a combination of all three. BTW, the track in question of "Christmastime in Blue" off their Lost Christmas Eve album.

But right now, I am just simply amazed at how awesome this Sonata Arctica UNIA album sounds on my setup!

[bodcaw boy]

How bout moving away from the realm of the unknown and the unknown to discuss things that are known? You most certainly can quantify all sorts of attributes that deviate from accuracy. Whether or not you like each particular quantifiable attribute is up to each individual.

The best of wine tasters pride themselves in identifying impurities in their wine. Or heck, the same is true of milk judges too. There certainly is no shortage of people that will immensely enjoy a a McDonald's hamburger, but that doesn't make it a 'high-fidelity' burger. The problem with "relying on emotion" is that "quality" is being measured by a meter stick that changes daily.

Surely you wouldn't expect wine tasters to enjoy a really bad glass of wine. In the persuit of excellence, they are training their taste buds to reject imperfection. And it's immensely interesting to read about all of the science that goes into a good glass of wine; science based originally on the perceptions of wine tasters. Science is being used as a tool to improve the quality of wine that a winemaker manufactures. And it is no different in the audio world. And when I refer to science, I am referring to the process of identifying imperfections. The art (or magic as audiophiles would prefer) is in finding solutions to the problems. Not all solutions are the same.

So while the end goal is always to enjoy the music, we must realize that we must also train our ears to know what is good. The most obvious fruit of that training is going to be the natural rejection of a bad glass of wine. The ability of a person to forego that rejection is nothing less than lack of refined listening habits.

And finally my point, fidelity cannot be measured by unrefined observation. Anything short of refined listening to identify fidelity is an absolute waste of time.

If I may make an observation, there is no shortage of unrefined listeners trying to masquerade as audiophiles by making themselves feel good when finding other fakes that also enjoy poor fidelity. Fancy talk does not equal refinement.

i have been thinking about what you have said doc and i will try to be brief (the tighties whities kind). and in my puny mind, i have come to some sorts of conclusions as it must satisfy my hunger for logic, such as it is.

i can listen to music on a single speaker system in a vehicle and if the songs evokes something in me, i can immensely enjoy the song. i mean it doesn't matter much to me about the technical aspect of the system i am listening. i just get to jamming, visualizing playing along, getting into the music, lyrics, whatever. i have noticed that the more the technical the system, and if the song is poorly recorded, the less i like hearing it on a technical system.

on the other hand, from a technical perspective, some like myself, really shoot to try to get a "live you are there" appeal to a speaker system. we know about certain aspects that we measure and hope to find others to get closer to getting to the point of coorelating what we hear to what we measure and vice versa. i have found that the lousier the recording, the worse it will sound on a very good speaker system and electronics. they tend to reveal the bad stuff where so so systems will gloss over the details. i have loved some songs in the past and then played them on an excellent system only to be severely disappointed. i mean, to the point, that i will only listen to them on bad systems to enjoy them again!! i have also taken those songs and eq'd and have even taken an expander (for severely compressed songs) in order to breathe the "live" character into them. (there are ought to be a law against bad recordings!).

we have to measure in my opinon, in order to get the system to be as neutral as possible in order for it not to interfere with music. that is how i believe that some speakers were labeled as rock music speakers or classical speakers. i have auditioned speakers by listening to my favorite cuts and then take them to the chamber only to find out that some bands, coverage, distortion, whatever was not excited by that genre of music and therefore, did not reveal some coloration and if i had played another genre i could have noticed some other problems (pink noise is very revealing). we do not know what kind of music will be played thru the speakers and that is why we must measure as we do and even come up with some others ways to measure if we miss something.

i am in total agreement in the pursuit of understanding what we want to achieve in speakers. that we must learn to measure, coorelate and proceed cause after all, almost every discipline started with tinkering and then it was developed into some set way of doing things and the notion that we just happen to stumble upon a great speaker, is just not acceptable to me. (i remember someone telling me about how great the northwest horn was and i asked why and they couldn't tell me; just that it sounded great. it does sound great but only because it seems to me that someone just happened to stumble upon the right parameters to make a horn sound good, in my opinion. that person said, what does it matter, just appreciate that it sounds great. i replied, sure but what if i want to make a smaller version or a slightly larger version or a slightly different aspect ratio, we must have ways to provide a single solution to a distinct problem knowing what it the spec is.)

so the more resolution we have in the system, the better the recording has to be cause in some sense we could be taking a step backward enjoying less of what we hear. when we merge the love of music with the love of state of the art of the reproduction of music, we can have some clashes. i love both but both can be a schitzo experience.

as a wise philosopher once said, "that's all i have to say about that."

galatians 4:5

roy

[Deang]

With highly compressed recordings, the lower you play them the better they sound. If you like to jack the volume, high resolving power works against you with those kinds of recordings -- but you need as much of it as you can get when you're listening at 65-70dB.

[AndyKubicki]

Wow...what a thread! Emotion is all in the head, kinda like sex. It is funny how an old song will bring back a memory, good or bad. Will that influence the emotion felt as listening to a song? Is the emotion played the same as the emotion heard? Remember, a pro musician will put on an excellent performance whether he feels good or not. I may have tears streaming down my cheeks listening to something while the musicians can't wait to get to their favorite tune, or they can't wait to get home to watch a movie.

If you get a chance, rent the movie Grizzly Man. Watch the DVD extras, where they show the great talent that went into making the sound track. "OK, give us an ominous sound of doom on that cello", and he does it! These guys could play emotion on demand! Fascinating! The soundtrack video is quite extensive, and, IMNSHO, better than the movie itself!

And remember the time before you can afford anything Klipsch? The songs of the 60s sure sounded great to me on my transistor radio! I even found that if I got lucky and put a small cap between two points, I got less treble, giving the illusion more bass. Remember the plug in tubes for transistor radios? So, for me, as I grew up, I liked stereos with good bass. Give me a 12 inch woofer over an 8....or better, give me a 15! But when, exactly did I notice the notes in the treble cleff? And was the level of enjoyment of music less when I heard it through the transistor radio than through what I have today? I don't think so...perhaps the reverse might be true. When young, I could spend HOURS listening to music. Today, it's rare that I can sit down and listen to much more than an album. Things to do and obligations get in the way.

Here's another angle: I don't have the experience with mixing that Mike does, but I am learning as I do our my and my friend's music. Will what sounds good always be true to the original? I'm working on a piece now that has a ton of tracks. Instruments are competing to be heard within the same frequency band. Mixing engineers can do a few things to make the instruments heard. Panning left or right is one (this creates soundstage). But you can only pan so many tracks. Another technique is to EQ carve, that is, bump up frequencies in different ranges for the individual instruments. to give each one its own space. Play that individual track, and the instrument sounds like crap. BUT, the overall mix sounds better. You hear every instrument. Your brain fills in the missing (or tones down the exaggerated) frequencies. So you need to mix for the best total mix. Audiophiles will sit around their systems astonished at how good the music sounds! OTOH, I recorded a friend's acoustic guitar, and NOTHING I did could make it sound better, richer, crisper, or whatever, than the original track with no effects, just as the mic and pickups recorded the strings.

Accuracy is external, but still perceived internally. Emotion is internal. It can be transmitted, but, as with many subjective things, its beauty is in the eyes or ears of the beholder.

Enjoy the music, friends! []

[UFObuster]

So while the end goal is always to enjoy the music, we must realize
that we must also train our ears to know what is good. The most obvious
fruit of that training is going to be the natural rejection of a bad
glass of wine. The ability of a person to forego that rejection is
nothing less than lack of refined listening habits.





And finally my point, fidelity cannot be measured by unrefined
observation. Anything short of refined listening to identify fidelity
is an absolute waste of time.





If I may make an observation, there is no shortage of unrefined
listeners trying to masquerade as audiophiles by making themselves feel
good when finding other fakes that also enjoy poor fidelity. Fancy talk
does not equal refinement.

Well, that is well put....as I sit here listening to Glen Gould's 1955 recording of Bach's Goldberg Variations...it is essential to know that recording and playback systems are built on mechanical skills devoted to delivering the artistry of the performer. This always assumes that the listener is equiped with the mental acuteness to appreciate what is being performed. The "transparency" of the playback will always factor in. That is why we spend lots of dollars on fidelity.

But, the last and largest factor is the dedication of the listener to meeting the performer half-way....as DrWho says "refined listening habits". I was trained as a musician...before I got a "real job". I remember listening to my father and my grandfather learning and rehearsing pieces of music over, over, over, and over again. In real life...it takes such skill, dedication, devotion, and practice time to execute a piece preserving the technical side and developing the emotional side of a piece of music. Then consider that the composer put hugh chunks of life into learning and finally writing a composition. Doesn't the listener owe these people something?....we are not supposed to be passive listeners giving a thumbs up or down opinion on a recording. I was told by a symphony conductor once (in university) that if I didn't listen to a classical composition at least 50 times over, I may not ever get the point of the composition. Meet the composer/performer half way.....learn the music before you speak of it.

So, back to 1955 and a mono recording that won't hold up to modern recording standards but the emotion is all too evident...if you give it your time..."refined listening habits" . That's why an old transistor radio version of a piece of music will always sound good to some listeners...if they have the equipment (mental) to hear it.

Edit: ditto, Eric Clapton doing Robert Johnson's stuff (CD and DVD) or (take your pick) many jazz comps...and even a few pops.

[Erik Mandaville]

"If I may make an observation, there is no shortage of unrefined listeners trying to masquerade as audiophiles by making themselves feel good when finding other fakes that also enjoy poor fidelity. Fancy talk does not equal refinement."

Sure, we are free to make observations, but for me those tend to be with the qualification that I'm speaking on behalf of myself. Your reference to 'unrefined listeners trying to masquerade as audiophiles' is the aspect of your text that sits with me less comfortably. I've been listening to music seriously for longer than you, Who, if you are twenty years old, have been alive. I have experience playing drums and percussion in both rock/fusion bands, as well as jazz trios and quartets, and have listened to a great deal of 'live' music. I have a benchmark of experience to work from, and I, as some others have mentioned, can listen to music on a very modest system and yet retain the ability to connect not so much with the quality of the reproduction, but with the artistic aspect of the composition; and that, for me, is ultimately what matters.

Erik

[NOSValves]

The best of wine tasters pride themselves in identifying impurities in their wine.

Fancy talk does not equal refinement.

You seems to prove your own point pretty well...

Might better stick to Dr Pepper.

To funny

[Painful Reality]

I have experience playing drums and percussion in both rock/fusion bands, as well as jazz trios and quartets, and have listened to a great deal of 'live' music. I have a benchmark of experience to work from, and I, as some others have mentioned, can listen to music on a very modest system and yet retain the ability to connect not so much with the quality of the reproduction, but with the artistic aspect of the composition; and that, for me, is ultimately what matters.

All the experience in the world just goes down the drain the moment you own a Pat Metheny record.

Life is unfair but... heh!

[maxg]

I have experience playing drums and percussion in both rock/fusion bands, as well as jazz trios and quartets, and have listened to a great deal of 'live' music. I have a benchmark of experience to work from, and I, as some others have mentioned, can listen to music on a very modest system and yet retain the ability to connect not so much with the quality of the reproduction, but with the artistic aspect of the composition; and that, for me, is ultimately what matters.

All the experience in the world just goes down the drain the moment you own a Pat Metheny record.

Life is unfair but... heh!

Phew - so my 42 years of classical listening is saved. Frankly - other than reading the name on the forum from time to time I have never heard of Pat - I have no idea what form of music he performs.

Whatever it is I have the feeling it never made it big in Europe....

[Erik Mandaville]

Heh. Life tastes like chicken.

[Erik Mandaville]

Max:

Pat Metheny is a contemporary jazz guitarist, whose later albums in my opinion tend to lack a good bit of the originality on the stuff he and his band were doing twenty years ago or more. There were one or two quite good productions since that time, as well as some of his collaborative work with composers/performers outside his band, but the best work for me came earlier on.

Not to worry. It sounds to me like you and your music collection are safe.

Erik