Jump to content

Could it be worthless to spend on highend turntables?


Recommended Posts

I was just thinking if I where new to this hobby and sat down with MLXXX, then sat down with someone like Michael Fremer, (trying to think of who loves vinyl, could substitute others) I would get 2 widely totally different opinions on vinyl playback.

 

Who is right.

I would say both are as it is a personal opinion formed over the years for themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 443
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Interesting topic for debate........   From a very personal view, I moved from a $3k turntable to a +$30k  TT in one shot without changing anything else (even the cart).  The difference was

I don't think it was a troll type question by the OP @gumptown, but rather I feel he may have been trying to justify to himself not spending much money on a vinyl rig. In the past, I've got into more

Over the (too) many decades I have been involved with music reproduction systems (note, I did not say 'hifi' systems) I have, at different stages of my audio journey, been a subjectivist, an objectivi

52 minutes ago, rocky500 said:

I gave my young Nephew a Denon DP1200 turntable with ortofon om20 cart and simple nad or rega phonostage & a bunch of records many years ago.

He loves it. Always comments he likes the sound more than his digital playback.

It is remarkable that vinyl has enjoyed such a marked resurgence with young people in recent years.

 

I grew up with vinyl, and remember my excitement leading up to trying out an upmarket cartridge I had purchased, fitted to a precision tone arm I had carefully adjusted.  I was perplexed when I was not presented with the pristine sound quality I had been hoping for. I was also perplexed (and not a little disappointed) when first trying out 24/96 stereo and comparing it with the supposedly obviously inferior sound of  CD quality stereo, but that's a different debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Zed Zed said:

One other factor which I find is massively influential (for me) in how my system 'sounds' is my mood or my state of mind. If I am upbeat, relaxed and happy, I put on Alison Krauss singing, let's say, 'A Living Prayer' and I am transported to heaven. If I am tired, or stressed or have just had a sh11tty day, and I turn to Alison to elevate my mood, sometimes I find her beautiful voice has become a little 'hard', or 'strained' or some other negative descriptor. Same turntable, same amplifier, same speakers, same room. Same listener, same ears. So I have zero doubt that there are other factors at work than simply sound waves.

Absolutely!

 

One application of this is how courageous it is to opine on how "Freddy's" system sounded last weekend compared with how "Maria's" sounds this weekend, be this with either a digital or vinyl source. How highly we must regard our human abilities if we think that we can hold an aural memory in our heads for an entire week, and call up and replicate the same listening mood now that we had a week ago.  For a truly chalk and cheese difference, we might perhaps venture an opinion.  But for a small perceived difference in overall  apparent sound quality?  Most unwise, I would suggest. 

 

Edit: In contrast to the above,  I will gladly audition different speakers in a showroom, where they can be switched between quickly for immediate comparison. 

Edited by MLXXX
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, MLXXX said:

For an objectivist audiophile seeking a medium that will merely pass on the music intact

 

Everybody thinks they are  principally objective. - you are not unique , except for wanting to audition analog sounds using  an abstract digital method. That is anything but a purist  approach.  

 

22 hours ago, MLXXX said:

For an audiophile in love with vinyl, then the following sorts of activities:

  • levelling the turntable to within a fraction of a degree
  • isolating the turntable from mechanical vibration using a special support
  • exploring adjustments to playing weight, anti-skating, and vertical and horizontal alignment

 

 

 

As President Kennedy said :

 

We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone,  ...

 

And because we are are capable people who don't get put off easily and don't understand  the attraction to be glued in one's seat in front of  an LCD screen. 

    

 

22 hours ago, MLXXX said:

And so at the end of the day I really think we are left with two answers to the OP's question, not one. 

 

There are always purchasing decisions to be made but it is an insult to anyones intelligence to suggest that the "test" referred to could be used to answer the OP question.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by TP1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, rocky500 said:

I would say both are as it is a personal opinion formed over the years for themselves.

 

The cold hard reality  is that both formats have strengths over the other. IMO,  some  digital recordings these days sound better than vinyl pressings  which I think can lose a little bit during the analog mastering process.  (I know others may not agree particularly on the issue of timbre and tonality )

 

Where vinyl still cant be touched by digital is where the original recording was in analog and the record was well mastered.  If people want proof , they just need to hear it for themselves.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, TP1 said:

Where vinyl still cant be touched by digital is where the original recording was in analog and the record was well mastered.  If people want proof , they just need to hear it for themselves.

 

 

What do you mean by "the original recording was in analog? :-

 

  1. Do you mean cases where the cutting head received its signal from a live microphone mix? (I guess you'd need to capture the live microphone mix digitally at the same time as cutting the master disc, if you wanted to perform  a comparison of technologies and "prove that vinyl can't be touched".)
     
  2. Or, do you mean cases where analogue technology was used to make a recording on a studio tape recorder and then at a later time that studio analogue recording was disseminated via vinyl pressings?  (I guess in such instances you'd need to create a digital version from the studio recorder analogue output, if you wished to make a comparison.)
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TP1 said:

Where vinyl still cant be touched by digital is where the original recording was in analog and the record was well mastered.  If people want proof , they just need to hear it for themselves.

 

Still not convinced that a format that has to be mastered differently for inside tracks on an LP (compares to the outside tracks) is a good format. Analog is the only way to listen (obviously), but vinyl is one of the worst ways to carry it. And throwing money at is doesn't necessarily make it better, just more expensive.

But I still have some LPs and a TT - the covers are better and the sound, when well mastered, is good if not full range...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MLXXX said:

What do you mean by "the original recording was in analog”?

 

Hi MLXXX

 

In the case where the master is an analog tape, it would be difficult to dispute that an unedited digital rip from that tape, by the studio, would preserve the sound of that original recording far better than a good-as-it-gets vinyl transfer, with all the remastering and imperfect copying involved in a vinyl transfer.

 

Studio engineers who have actually done this (produced a digital rip and a premium vinyl LP from the same analog master tape) have confirmed it. To paraphrase: “The digital file, now that’s the sound I was hearing in the studio. The vinyl: it’s perfectly enjoyable, but it’s not the sound the engineers made.”

 

If you want that sound the engineers made, the actual recorded artwork, there is only one way to get it. And this is not opinion, or my personal bias: it is fact.

 

Not that we have gone off topic or anything! ;) 

 

cheers

Grant

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Grant Slack said:

 

Hi MLXXX

 

In the case where the master is an analog tape, it would be difficult to dispute that an unedited digital rip from that tape, by the studio, would preserve the sound of that original recording far better than a good-as-it-gets vinyl transfer, with all the remastering and imperfect copying involved in a vinyl transfer.

 

Studio engineers who have actually done this (produced a digital rip and a premium vinyl LP from the same analog master tape) have confirmed it. To paraphrase: “The digital file, now that’s the sound I was hearing in the studio. The vinyl: it’s perfectly enjoyable, but it’s not the sound the engineers made.”

 

If you want that sound the engineers made, the actual recorded artwork, there is only one way to get it. And this is not opinion, or my personal bias: it is fact.

 

Not that we have gone off topic or anything! ;) 

 

cheers

Grant

 

This could be another reason of why people prefer vinyl.

It might bypass all the sound engineers who love compression, who alter the original quite a bit to add their touch on it to then put it on CD's etc. While the LP is left alone some.

Just a quick google of saw this from an Audio engineer discussing adding just a little compression.

 

 

 

Edited by rocky500
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw the add for the dangerous music system for Engineers.

 

This was part of the blurb.

"Today's audio landscape is fraught with formats. Radio, Vinyl, Streaming, Downloads, Club Mixes. Played back on disparate systems: laptops, phones, earbuds, PAs, cars- and they all sound different. How will your megahit land? Will the ballad resonate? Does the anthem deliver body blows? Get your mix to translate emotively everywhere."

So you would think their mixes are not really targeted for the audiophiles system when they are doing their thing.

While the LP may be void of this?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rocky500 said:

Just saw the add for the dangerous music system for Engineers.

 

Sorry Rocky500, I don’t know what you are talking about, with this strange turn of phrase. It comes across like you are trying to have a dig at someone, or at a certain group?

 

cheers

Grant

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grant Slack said:

In the case where the master is an analog tape, it would be difficult to dispute that an unedited digital rip from that tape, by the studio, would preserve the sound of that original recording far better than a good-as-it-gets vinyl transfer, with all the remastering and imperfect copying involved in a vinyl transfer.

 

If "disputing" were handled simply by resorting to claiming over and over, "vinyl sounds superior to anything digital, trust your ears",  it would not be so difficult!   🙂

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Grant Slack said:

 

Sorry Rocky500, I don’t know what you are talking about, with this strange turn of phrase. It comes across like you are trying to have a dig at someone, or at a certain group?

 

cheers

Grant

It was just a certain system that is used by I take some Audio Engineers. Could be any name but that was just the first one that popped up in google and was on the video.

https://www.dangerousmusic.com/dangerous-system-complete

 

Edited by rocky500
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I was trying to say if bands, singers, Record companies etc are putting out there material they might not be thinking of audiophiles at all. Very small market.

this quote made sense

"Today's audio landscape is fraught with formats. Radio, Vinyl, Streaming, Downloads, Club Mixes. Played back on disparate systems: laptops, phones, earbuds, PAs, cars- and they all sound different. How will your megahit land? Will the ballad resonate? Does the anthem deliver body blows? Get your mix to translate emotively everywhere."

 

So the audio engineers are shaping, enhancing and compressing etc with the above in mind on their final released digital files. Lots on the net on this. Even the loudness war.

Very few singers think of the audiophile. One I came across that seems to was Anne Bisson. She even goes to Hifi equipment shows. :)

 

While Vinyl is really only played back one way, so the original analog transfer can stay close to how it was first recorded? No need to widen the soundstage, enhance the highs, compress to sound better on phones, buds, cars etc

 

 

Edited by rocky500
Link to post
Share on other sites

“Megabit....ballad....anthem.....body blows...emotively” — obviously, we are talking about a specific style of music here. But he is talking to the artists, so if that’s what the artist wants his music to convey, why would an audiophile not want that, and instead, chose a medium that can’t deliver it?

 

cheers

Grant

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, TP1 said:

Where vinyl still cant be touched by digital is where the original recording was in analog and the record was well mastered.  If people want proof , they just need to hear it for themselves


“well mastered” is the key. I’d take a well mastered MQA file (I know, right) any day over a poorly mastered record or high rez digital 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Grant Slack said:

Studio engineers who have actually done this (produced a digital rip and a premium vinyl LP from the same analog master tape) have confirmed it. To paraphrase: “The digital file, now that’s the sound I was hearing in the studio. The vinyl: it’s perfectly enjoyable, but it’s not the sound the engineers made.”

 

If you want that sound the engineers made, the actual recorded artwork, there is only one way to get it. And this is not opinion, or my personal bias: it is fact.

 

 I have stated I often prefer the digital recording over the digitally mastered vinyl album.  But many don't. Why? Firstly  They may be listening to the 16/44 CD   while the record would have been mastered at 24/192.  Or they may have a wonderful sounding cartridge that makes the digital replay sound hard. So which is best -  to me it might be the digital but to someone else it will be the vinyl. 

 

Studio engineers, like the rest of us, have their own preferences so I wouldn't hang my hat on any particular  quote. Sometimes  they just don't l think the digital process is good enough and go to the trouble of creating an analog master to improve the sound. Like in the case of this album.   BTW, I recommend the album - both CD and LP

 

51A9KPnCV2L.jpg.eb5a18b927b803a72f8184945b6fd22a.jpg

Edited by TP1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TP1 said:

 

 BTW, I recommend the album - both CD and LP

 

51A9KPnCV2L.jpg.eb5a18b927b803a72f8184945b6fd22a.jpg

 

Thanks!. Now ordered 2 copies on vinyl from Amazon as think a mate would love this too plus it gave me free freight getting 2. :)

He has a Lenco turntable and has been buying a lot of records lately.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 05/05/2021 at 6:33 PM, TP1 said:

 

I have attached links to a couple of digital files I have uploaded to google drive.  They are both full track of "High Life" from 'Jazz at the Pawnshop' .  There is a DSD128  rip from vinyl and also an original Flac version from the CD 

 

I originally ripped a few albums this way to save wear and tear on the record.  I only ripped records that were produced using  an analog process all the way through. This  shows records at their very best IMO and as close as the Digital recordings are ( almost impossible to pick using rapid switching) there is no doubting that the analog  original still gives a bit more to the listener.  Still, the  differences may be in the "too small to matter" category for some people  but not perhaps for vinyl purists.

 

1. Turntable - Pioneer Exclusive P3a , Cartridge - Lyra Etna, Phono Stage - Accuphase C-37,  ADC- Korg MR-2000S

2.  Amps Accuphase C-3850  and 2 x Accuphase A-200

3.  Digital replay -  Accuphase DP-950 SACD transport and Accuphase DC-950 DAC

4. Speakers - Magico S7

 

Downloads:

 

Flac

 

Vinyl Rip DSD128

 

Ha, thanks for posting these. Always fun to do a comparison.  It got me to thinking it might be interesting to see what mastering software might do when using your needledrop as a reference and applied to the flac. 

 

But first I needed to swap channels, invert phase,  adjust the balance as a start. Not sure why all those are different, What it cant do is add back the content above 20KHz so lets just forget about that. 

 

Anyhow just for giggles. Enjoy. So it has been made to the same channel, phase and balance config as the needledrop for easy comparison.

 

"Vinyled" flac.dsf

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by frednork
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Could this also be a difference between the science based people and others.

In the science types I keep seeing you have to distance yourself from your emotions. Even the tests you have do this.

 

When you think about any hobby, could be having a boat, or a spending a lot of cars, etc when you talk to them, they are so passionate about their hobby. It is what drives them.

 

Same when you talk to people into turntables or even other components, when you talk to them, they are so passionate about it. For example Catman is one on here that comes across as very passionate with his vinyl setups and it seems to be what drives him in this hobby and what rewards him.

 

Then you read what the science based people who also post everywhere and it seems it can be quite cold in comparison when they talk about this hobby. 

Do science based people loose a bit of passion in this hobby from their held views/thought patterns?

 

So if Turntables  and even spending on expensive ones give someone more passion in this hobby, then that is what it is all about.

 

Edited by rocky500
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grant Slack said:

Hi Zed, I think it’s kindergarten-level. “The sky is blue because it looks blue.”

 

cheers

Grant

 

Then again, Grant - Zen-level would be  “Does the sky stop being blue ... if you go blind?”  :lol:

 

22 minutes ago, rocky500 said:

Could this also be the difference between the science based people and others.

In the science types I keep seeing you have to distance yourself from your emotions. Even the tests you have do this.

 

When you think about any hobby, could be having a boat, or a spending a lot of cars, etc when you talk to them, they are so passionate about their hobby. It is what drives them.

 

Same when you talk to people into turntables or even other components, when you talk to them, they are so passionate about it. For example Catman is one on here that comes across as very passionate with his vinyl setups and it seems to be what drives him in this hobby and what rewards him.

 

Then you read what the science based people who also post everywhere and it seems it can be quite cold in comparison when they talk about this hobby. 

Do science based people loose a bit of passion in this hobby from their held views/thought patterns?

 

So if Turntables  and even spending on expensive ones give someone more passion in this hobby, then that is what it is all about.

 

Great post, rocky!  :thumb:

 

Andy

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Kind of reminds me of that saying "Those that use their systems to listen to music" compared to "Those that use their music to listen to their systems"

maybe something is missing if you are always doing the latter? (could become more clinical and less emotional maybe???)

Edited by April Snow
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, April Snow said:

Kind of reminds me of that saying "Those that use their systems to listen to music" compared to "Those that use their music to listen to their systems"

maybe something is missing if you are always doing the latter? (could become more clinical and less emotional maybe???)

 

Hi April, great post!

 

Guess which audiophile group spends more time than any other, telling everyone how much one format ‘sounds better’ than other formats? By definition, these people belong to "Those that use their music to listen to their systems". This group does the same with mastering: they use their music to listen to the mastering, compared to most of us.

 

I am much more in the former group: I will put together a technically good system then “use my system to listen to music”.

 

Cheers

Grant

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is the beauty of this hobby.

If components, equipment is important to the person and they really enjoy the hobby because of this, it really is a win for them.

So i think you if are in this hobby and really enjoy the equipment and enjoy swapping changing, buying new stuff, upgrading then great and the other benefit is you can listen to great music too.

Some people enjoy owning their boat/done up car and hardly ever go sailing or driving. They still love it :)

 

I certainly love the equipment side myself and all what it brings to me. Love listening to music too.

That new tweak, better Dac....., it is what makes this such a fun hobby for me.

 

Edited by rocky500
  • Like 3
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/05/2021 at 10:20 AM, rocky500 said:

 ...sound engineers who love compression...

People who own record companies love compression. As far as I know, there's very few other people in the chain from the artist to your home who even likes compression. It's a tool to do what the "masters" tell them to do. In the case of compression, it was to make every track as loud and un-dynamic as possible - as that's what was selling albums back in the 90's and 00's. Probably still is - but it's doubtful that the original of a lot of things has been recorded that way.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cloth Ears said:

People who own record companies love compression. As far as I know, there's very few other people in the chain from the artist to your home who even likes compression. It's a tool to do what the "masters" tell them to do. In the case of compression, it was to make every track as loud and un-dynamic as possible - as that's what was selling albums back in the 90's and 00's. Probably still is - but it's doubtful that the original of a lot of things has been recorded that way.

 

 

Same things happens now with digital and rock music  in particular.   I haven't understood the reasoning but can only guess that they are pitching the recording to  people listening to Mp3 via  bluetooth   speakers or ear buds.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rocky500 said:

Could this also be a difference between the science based people and others.

In the science types I keep seeing you have to distance yourself from your emotions. Even the tests you have do this.

No, because you are describing an ideal. In real world situation scientists are just like everyone else. So no surprise that Grant enjoys his music. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, rocky500 said:

Could this also be a difference between the science based people and others.

In the science types I keep seeing you have to distance yourself from your emotions.....

 

Then you read what the science based people who also post everywhere and it seems it can be quite cold in comparison when they talk about this hobby. 

Do science based people loose a bit of passion in this hobby from their held views/thought patterns?

 

 

Ouch! I know no offence was intended 🙂

I hadn't noticed my comments were cold, or anyone else's for that matter.

Oh well, we are who we are  🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, tripitaka said:

 

Ouch! I know no offence was intended 🙂

I hadn't noticed my comments were cold, or anyone else's for that matter.

Oh well, we are who we are  🙂

Whoops it does appear that way. Maybe it could be the way they talk about components, like turntables dacs etc. But I did say can be quite cold.  (as in sometimes) :)

 

I know the given is we all like the music. It may be just how the different groups approach it?

 

I think for me it is the gear that has grabbed my attention and kept my interests so strong and enjoyment in this hobby.

 

Edited by rocky500
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, rocky500 said:

Whoops it does appear that way. Maybe it could be the way they talk about components, like turntables dacs etc. But I did say can be quite cold. 

 

I know the given is we all like the music. It may be just how the different groups approach it?

 

I think for me it is the gear that has grabbed my attention and kept my interests so strong and enjoyment in this hobby.

 

 

😀 I think we are all just hifi and music addicts, hopeless cases.

 

 🤣🤣🤣

 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Grant Slack said:

 

Hi Zed, I think it’s kindergarten-level. “The sky is blue because it looks blue.”

 

cheers

Grant

 

I think it's "If I don't like what you like, I am wrong". (Not you personally)

 

If it sounds good, it is good. Nobody else has any right to tell somebody that what they hear is 'wrong'.

 

I don't know what you hear, you don't know what I hear.

I don't know what you like, you don't know what I like.

I like pistacchio, you like chocolate.

I like Hendrix, you like Clapton.

Vinyl sounds different to digital. 

Tubes sound different to transistors.

I like Krall, you like Pavarotti.

Some like this, some like that. 

 

It's music. It's subjective.

 

 

Edited by Zed Zed
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BLAH BLAH said:

Pretty much in my book errr CD ummm Vinyl arrr Streamer...I liked his line...the question itself is the problem...

 

Exactly it. The question is the problem. It's fun to discuss, but it's meaningless and there is no 'answer'. You might prefer whisky, I might prefer wine. Does that make one of us 'wrong'? Narrowing it down, you might prefer a nice Californian red and I might prefer a good Australian red. Who's 'right'? Answer: it's the wrong question. :) 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, rocky500 said:

Could this also be a difference between the science based people and others.

In the science types I keep seeing you have to distance yourself from your emotions. Even the tests you have do this.

 

When you think about any hobby, could be having a boat, or a spending a lot of cars, etc when you talk to them, they are so passionate about their hobby. It is what drives them.

 

Same when you talk to people into turntables or even other components, when you talk to them, they are so passionate about it. For example Catman is one on here that comes across as very passionate with his vinyl setups and it seems to be what drives him in this hobby and what rewards him.

 

Then you read what the science based people who also post everywhere and it seems it can be quite cold in comparison when they talk about this hobby. 

Do science based people loose a bit of passion in this hobby from their held views/thought patterns?

 

So if Turntables  and even spending on expensive ones give someone more passion in this hobby, then that is what it is all about.

 

 

Absolutely. I listen to my music on vinyl, on CD and (hi-res) streamed. I enjoy all three. Sometimes, the music sounds better to me on vinyl. Sometimes in digital form. Sometimes vice-versa. I love the 'process' of vinyl - the setting up of the TT, the fussing with the record before lowering the stylus. I like mechanical things. They give me a bit of a buzz when they work beautifully, whether it's a TT, a wristwatch, a V8 engine or whatever. Someone can tell me all day long how digital is 'superior' -- I might even agree with them. But it won't change the pleasure I get from listening to music on vinyl. Same the other way around too. I have a great Quartz watch -- it keeps way better time than my old Omega Speedmaster mechanical watch. Does it make it a 'better' watch? Do I enjoy one more than the other? No -- they are both amazing. Just different. Someone says "which is the best?", they are asking the wrong question. They don't get it.

 

 

Edited by Zed Zed
Typo correction
  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, April Snow said:

Kind of reminds me of that saying "Those that use their systems to listen to music" compared to "Those that use their music to listen to their systems"

maybe something is missing if you are always doing the latter? (could become more clinical and less emotional maybe???)

 

I use my system to listen to my music. Period. Interestingly, I can enjoy music even on a small radio. My hobby is music. I have a friend who uses the music to listen to his system. He only has about 12 LPs and a handful of CDs and a system that cost him many thousands of dollars. His hobby is 'hifi systems'.

 

Thing is, he is not 'wrong' and me 'right'. We have different interests and different objectives. He gets a great kick from swapping to a new cartridge or pre-amp. I get a great kick from discovering an artist I hadn't come across before. The world has room for us all.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Zed Zed said:

His hobby is 'hifi systems'.

 

That reminds me of an advertisement that I saw in the 1970s from an audio equipment maker that claimed their system was so wonderful that it was possible to hear a string break during a Keith Richards' guitar riff.

 

Even as a hi-fi obsessed teenager I found that unappealing.

 

IMO that is like a person viewing a beautiful painting and focusing on a paintbrush hair. Maybe at heart I am not an audiophile.

Edited by thethrowback
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, thethrowback said:

 

That reminds me of an advertisement that I saw in the 1970s from an audio equipment maker that claimed their system was so wonderful that it was possible to hear a string break during a Keith Richards' guitar riff.

Even as a hi-fi obsessed teenager I found that unappealing.

IMO that is like a person viewing a beautiful painting and focusing on a paintbrush hair. Maybe at heart I am not an audiophile.

WOW  is that a hair sticking out of that beautiful painting?!? Feck me lets have a closer look...I'll have a gander at this then...putting the nose inches away from the surface of the painting, squinting and gandering...is it bristle, horse, human...I wonder?!? White, black, grey hair?!? How, why is it not covered in paint?!? Was it deposited by the brush action of paint on canvas or the artist's wrist from various vigorous brush stroking, or from his/her sleeve rubbing up and down and shedding hairs gently down onto the wet paint...I wonder?! Maybe a DNA test to further confirm the real identity re the artist of the painting...cos once you have the hair and the confirming DNA test of the artist you canna have a fake it's the real thing!...think of the prestige! How original...extraordinary...one of...collectable...the value...and before you know it everyone will want one! And what's the painting about?!?...no idea...I'm too busy focusing on that inscrutable hair!!!

 

Edited by BLAH BLAH
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

To build further on Blah Blah's point, I still believe we all doing the same thing and that the differences (which should be celebrated, not argued about) are just in how we connect with the music and which aspects make us individually perceive it as seeming more 'real'.

 

Peace😀

  • Like 4
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...