[KH]

On 11/4/2013 1:22 PM, news wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
...


There is no "the" ideal sound system. I can tell you what *my* ideal sound
system would be. It's just a few steps up from what I already have. But
without getting specific for me the ideal playback system consists of
full range electrostatic speakers with tremendous dynamic range for that
technology in a near field stereo pair in a near acoustically dead
playback room with OTL amps that have the juice to drive the speakers, a
tube preamp. A universal digital playback component. And a euphonically
colored high end TT rig.

That is *my* ideal in fairly broad terms. If you want me to name specific
components I could do that as well. Koetsu, Forsell, Oppo, ARC, Joule
Electra and Soundlab

My ideal may not be other peoples' ideal. We all have unique tastes in
music an in sound. Those aesthetics are going to affect our preferences.


Well, I was hoping it was more scientific than that.

Why? As Scott stipulated, there is no "the" system, i.e. no one size
fits all listeners system. Scott's "perfect" system certainly isn't my
ideal, but that's the point. We like, and listen for, different things
in the playback.


You ideal system sounds
like giant headphones - some sort of recording engineer's dream system, a
system for one person, but not real good for an audience or someone who
wants to move around. I would also be concerned that you would get an IHL
(Inside the Head Locatedness) problem, especially if you did it in an
anechoic environment.

I don't think a "near dead" home listening room is meant to be anything
close to anechoic. Scott can correct me if that was his intent.

snip

The real idea of stereo is not to put "signals into your ears"

Well yes, actually it is.

but rather to
reconstruct sound fields in your listening room. You PLACE the recorded
soundstage at the front of your room, establish the left to right spread and
depth of the instruments, and let the recorded early reflections happen in
your room the same way and for the same reason they did live.

Which is just your interpretation of *how* signals should be supplied to
your ears. A distinction without a difference.

If you do it
right, with speaker placement, D/R ratio, and not killing all of the sound
around the speakers, you get a very realistic soundstage that you can hear
from anywhere in the room and walk around and get different perspectives on
the performers.

Well, realistic to you is not realistic to all. And apparently, from
his description, Scott doesn't value (as I do not) a system that is
designed to present a soundstage that doesn't change significantly when
you walk around the room. I listen in my sweet spot - I don't care
about the rest of the room.


THAT is the way the system was designed to work,

Yes, in your opinion. And since Scott's system does not comport with
your definition how stereo is *supposed* to work, then his ideal system
clearly can't be his ideal system. Right?

Keith