Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

Ok. I have spent enough time getting feedback from objectivists
regarding their views on the accuracy of CDs in the real word. So it's
high time to state my case.


1. Live music in a goo acoustic space is my genereal reference. james
Boyk says it better than I can.
"What interest me in audio is perception, not technology. One
perception often lost in all the getting and spending is that live
sound is beautiful, while reproduced sound rarely is."
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~boyk/ear.htm
It is the *intrinsic* beauty of live music that I seek when I listen to
recordings of acoustic music. I know what it is. It is easily
recognizable when I hear live music and it is recognizably missing in
most playback. When it is there it is amazing. It is a matter of degree
not a black and white issue though.


Live music is not 'intrinsically' beautiful. It beggars belief to
imply that live sound can't be downright *ugly*, either due to acoustics,
playing, or the music itself.

This sort of vague 'standard' is no sort of standard at all.
It's just a subjective call, again.


And, of course, one of the reasons why *sometimes* live music is
beautiful is because it is visually beautiful. Reproduced music, played
on audio systems, can never capture that visual beauty.

I attended a concert performed by an excellent college orchestra last
Friday, and indeed, it was beautiful. The great hall, the great
atmosphere, and the young musicians who are also some of the brightest
students in the world, all add to the intrinsic beauty of live music.