On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:35:51 +0000, Nousaine wrote:

(Mkuller) wrote:

(Nousaine) wrote:
When I'm having a good time I can often enjoy a good program spit out
of a horse **** sounding audio system ....

We all can. That's not the point.

Then what is?

snip
Regarding "that swing." IMO the Swing is in the program (music and
performance)
not the playback equipment. It is true that a superior sound system may
bring
the Swing in a more accurate or realistic manner but the musical
qualities are
not "produced" by the playback system.

The playback system is only a transmission medium. It has no musical or
human
qualities; no rhythm and pace or other mystical characteristics that
take weeks
to develop or appreciate. It's either a transparent medium or its not.
If not,
the deficiencies can be discovered in a couple hours with a practical,
systematic, analytical listening regimen.
Agreed - the system is allowing the composer's and the music's *intent*
to come
through. Not all communicate it that well, regardless of their
*transparency*.

If the system is transparent .... adds/subtracts nothing ..... how can
it improve or diminish the 'intent' of the artist, songwriter, producer
or production staff?

If it's NOT initially transparent then it can ONLY subtract from the
production intent. That's the missing link in the subjectivist
viewpoint.

What good is an evaluation if it misses out on whether the system is
enjoyable and musical? You might as well just read the equipment specs.
Regards,
Mike

If the system transports the original program with sufficient
transparency then it has to be as 'enjoyable, exciting, fullfilling,
thought-provoking or irritating' as the production/artist team intended.

Anything added at the far end is only a single party-end user
preference. For example in enjoy-mode I never listen to 2-channel
programs without using one of the Lexicon Logic 7 modes because it adds
a sense of envelopment and spatial stability and 'realism' that is not
contained in the original program.

Just because I 'like' it and it's more enjoyable doesn't subtract from
my reference systems' ability to deliver the original as intended. My
'preference' is a personal choice.
__________________________________________________ ___
Ref: personal single-listerner issues...

Leonard wrote:

As those of us with a differing view have been saying for
a long time...however, the inability of speaker systems, acoustic
surroundings and other odd elements in the
mix can detract from those "reference systems" that are
dry, irritating and harsh on the ears. They are not something one can
listen to for extended periods of time. They are there for a particular
"mindset" that requires this "reference"
or "standard" sitting there. If they are happy...so be it. However, the
real world generally requires some digital mellowing to satify the
practical side of our Personal choice. Not a thing wrong with this
action...it is an action to satisfy desires of the analysis by the
"ear-brain" construct.

But then, some do not recognize "personal choice"...and relate it to
"bias" and other buzz words that have no value in this audio domain in
the first place.