Ruud Broens wrote:
"Ayn Marx" wrote in 2 messages
oups.com...
:
: Clyde Slick wrote:
:
: If one hears it, its there.
:
:
: A very comforting thought for schizophrenics.
:
: Wouldn't that be better expressed as 'If one hears it, one hears it'?
:
Ayn got a cat, too ?

Not the last time I looked.

In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices.
I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox
or some such device.
All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better
sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile.

But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their
instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first
place?
A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of
tune pub piano?
Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster'
theory.

This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good
musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it
seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my
colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from
the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why
bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common
mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why
spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to
be the prevailing attitude.

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices.
I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox
or some such device.
All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better
sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile.

But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their
instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first
place?
A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of
tune pub piano?
Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster'
theory.

This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good
musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it
seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my
colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from
the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why
bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common
mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why
spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to
be the prevailing attitude.

I accept it may be the case musicians are able to 'fill in the gaps'
missing when listening to their crappy audio systems at home if they
are gifted with some form of trained ear/brain skill that enables them
to hear 'what it should sound like'. However, time and time again, I've
observed musicians who don't care what their home audio system sounds
like , use utterly crappy PA systems . Tough on the audience Hey, but
who cares, sounds OK up hear on the fold back speakers.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR !

In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote:

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices.
I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox
or some such device.
All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better
sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile.

But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their
instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first
place?
A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of
tune pub piano?
Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster'
theory.

This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good
musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it
seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my
colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from
the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why
bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common
mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why
spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to
be the prevailing attitude.

I accept it may be the case musicians are able to 'fill in the gaps'
missing when listening to their crappy audio systems at home if they
are gifted with some form of trained ear/brain skill that enables them
to hear 'what it should sound like'. However, time and time again, I've
observed musicians who don't care what their home audio system sounds
like , use utterly crappy PA systems . Tough on the audience Hey, but
who cares, sounds OK up hear on the fold back speakers.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR !

'Tis true all too often. I was mostly referring to musicians who
perform altogether unamplified. I agree, though, that those who perform
amplifed need to pay much more attention to the sound the audience
receives. Two examples on a positive note: I caught two concerts on
last year's Simon and Garfunkel tour and in each case the live sound was
the best of this type that I've ever heard, especially in the case of
Paul's acoustic guitar sound. Also, I perform a couple of times a year
with a very well-known folk trio, and the member of that group who
oversees the PA sound is FANATICAL about the quality of it. I've seen
him stop the concert in order to run out to the seats in the hall to do
a sound re-check.

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices.
I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox
or some such device.
All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better
sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile.

But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their
instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first
place?
A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of
tune pub piano?
Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster'
theory.

This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good
musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it
seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my
colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from
the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why
bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common
mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why
spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to
be the prevailing attitude.

besides, if they wanted realistically sounding music, all they
have to do is call up three friends and they've got
a live quartet.

In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices.
I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox
or some such device.
All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better
sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile.

But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their
instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first
place?
A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of
tune pub piano?
Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster'
theory.

This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good
musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it
seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my
colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from
the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why
bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common
mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why
spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to
be the prevailing attitude.

besides, if they wanted realistically sounding music, all they
have to do is call up three friends and they've got
a live quartet.

Exactly. I'm kind of the exception to this "rule".

"Ayn Marx" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sander deWaal wrote:
I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices.
I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox
or some such device.
All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better
sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile.

But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their
instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first
place?
A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of
tune pub piano?
Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster'
theory.

It mirrors my experience with the musicians I've known as well. They just
don't care since the music itself is what matters for them. They don't seem
to care about sonic accuracy nearly as much as the art.

wrote:


What about their audio tests do you find troublesome?
Completely ommiting to tell us what the stuff actually sounds like for
starters.

Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote:

Sander deWaal wrote:
I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices.
I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox
or some such device.
All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better
sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile.

But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their
instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first
place?
A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of
tune pub piano?
Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster'
theory.

This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good
musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it
seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my
colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from
the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why
bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common
mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why
spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to
be the prevailing attitude.

True. Symphony orchestra musicians by and large don't care what the
domestic "system" sounds like. But there is one exception: "Turn it up
louder. I can't hear my violin (flute, trumpet, oboe etc.)
Ludovic Mirabel
The alternative explanation is that by the time they reach 40 they are
pretty deaf.