Jenn wrote:
In article .com,
"vlad" wrote:

Jenn wrote:
vlad wrote:
Jenn wrote:
vlad wrote:
Jenn wrote:
vlad wrote:
Jenn wrote:

. . .

For technical explanations, others will have to help you, but
why not
just set it where it sounds best on a variety of recordings?

So, Jennifer, you think that High Fidelity is point
"...where
it sounds best on a variety of recordings ..." ?

No, I think that the enjoyment of listening to music in my home is
where it sounds best on a variety of recordings.


I bet, you are inviting noticeable amounts of distortion
doing
it thisa way. Of course if it is pleasing to your ears, it must
be
hi-fi :-)

Why would I listen to something that is less than how it sounds
best to
my ears?

The definition of high fidelity system in my book is to be as close
to
the original sound as possible. It seems to me that your definition
is
to have pleasing sound in your home, even if it means noticeable
distortion of the sound.

Am I right about this?

My goal is to hear, as closely as is possible, the sound of actual
acoustic instruments and voices performing in an actual space. If the
best presentation of that is on the medium, whether that be a CD, a LP,
or whatever, that's great. If it means introducing distortion to get
closer to that, that's fine with me.

Eventually you did admit that fidelity of the sound does not matter to
you.

Thx

Yes, in one brief paragraph, I explained my views, which are quite easy
to understand.

"Fidelity of the sound" is VITAL to me; that is, "fidelity to the
sound" of music. If something else is more important to you, that's
fine. Different strokes and all.


So, you are not concerned with the original sound being recorded? If I
understand you correctly, you are concerned with your liking of the
sound more then with accuracy (in technical terms) of the recording.

Correct.


I will give you an example. Let's assume that because of hall's
acoustic clarinets sounded like cardboard boxes (your expression).

Well, I believe that I said cardboard, not boxes, but a minor detail...

Do
you expect them to sound on LP

or CD

as cardboard boxes or you are willing to
tolerate gross distortion of their sound to make it more pleasing for
you?

vova

Yes, that's about it, if by "pleasing" you mean "sound like real
clarinets." I don't mean to be picky about that language, but not all
music is "pleasing" sounding, even if it sounds real. But yes, you
pretty much understand my POV. Perhaps a question for you will clarify:
Why on earth would I chose to listen to clarinets that sound like
cardboard if I can listen to them sounding more like actual clarinets,
if the music is the most important thing for me?

Jennifer,

I cannot answer this question. I am not in a position to tell you what
your preference are or should be.

Still I do not understand your POV. If at the moment of the recording
clarinets sounded like cardboards, do you expect them at the point of
reproduction sound like cardboards or like "real" (in your
definition) clarinets. If the answer is 'yes' then it seems to me
that you not only willing to tolerate gross distortion in a
reproduction chain, but you actually expect it from your system. So, is
it yes or no?

vova