In Reply to: The "goal" is not to suit your sonic taste, .. posted by cheap-Jack on November 8, 2006 at 08:43:23:
It's nice to state that replicating a live performance is the goal, but there are two factors to consider. One, that's impossible. Two, all systems that try for accurate reproduction are still a set of engineering compromises. Some of those are conscious compromises while others may not even have been identified.For example, you and I are sitting at a live concert, hearing the same unamplified music. The sonic characteristics that sweep me off my feet may go completely unnoticed by you, and vice versa.
Transport us to our living rooms, listening to a recording of the same music on our stereos. What happens when my stereo does a better job than yours of replicating the sound quality that makes me swoon? Simple, I'm going to find my system more realistic than yours. You'll probably think the same about your system and wonder what the heck I see in mine.
In that way, a person's "sonic taste" is just as present at a live event as it is in front of your stereo. And it is certainly a legitimate consideration when picking those components that transport you back to the concert.
Now it is nice when we find a design improvement that accomplishes both your goals and mine without a sacrifice in other areas. But those are never 100% perfect and inevitably leave someone else's goals unaddressed or compromised. That's why we all keep trudging this path.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: replicating live is still a set of compromises - mls-stl 13:03:58 11/08/06 (5)
- Re: replicating live is still a set of compromises - thetubeguy1954 13:45:59 11/08/06 (0)
- I said "closest" to live music, not "replicating" it. - cheap-Jack 13:41:05 11/08/06 (3)
- Re: still missing the point - mls-stl 14:46:49 11/08/06 (1)
- Who really misses the point? - cheap-Jack 08:05:30 11/09/06 (0)
- Amen To That! (NT) - thetubeguy1954 14:20:22 11/08/06 (0)