Regarding the following quote re David Chesky:

"Then we have the challenge of few people sitting down just to listen to
recorded music any more. David Chesky has observed that music loses its
value and is no longer important in our society when the capacity to sit
down and listen to it - doing nothing else - has been lost. He feels
this is responsible for the downward trend in audio quality - society
openly embracing the lower standards. Home theater and surround sound
can and are having some effect in interesting people in sitting down
just to listen to music, but it gets little attention in most dealer
demonstrations of home theater systems."

I'm wondering how many of we audio enthusiasts spend much time actually
listening to music on our systems for extended periods without worrying
about further upgrades, adjustments, tuning, room conditioning, etc.
I'm a long-time (mono-stereo-surround) enthusiast, my present system
including two SACD players, five Magneplaner speakers, a Velodyne
woofer, an HDTV, etc. But I don't seem to find myself doing much
listening these days. - My original expectation was that I would get the
system set up, adjusted, etc, and then begin to listen to lots of
(mainly classical) music. So far, there's always something that seems to
get in the way of any extended, concentrated listening.

Sort of as an informal poll, how many on this ng have "substantially
completed" (for now) their systems in the sense that they are no longer
primarily interested in tweaks, upgrades, etc., and instead are spending
a significant amount of time each month actually listening to music.
(I'm not suggesting we won't be interested in further upgrades; I'm
trying to get at the priorities, and the underlying reasons for
assembling a good system in the first place.) Put otherwise, how many
have a system of sufficiently high quality for your present tastes that
you no longer concentrate on the sound quality as much as on the music
itself. For those who respond positively, please briefly discuss your
system, listening routines, schedules, etc.

Jim Cate

In article , Jim Cate
wrote:

Regarding the following quote re David Chesky:

"Then we have the challenge of few people sitting down just to listen to
recorded music any more. David Chesky has observed that music loses its
value and is no longer important in our society when the capacity to sit
down and listen to it - doing nothing else - has been lost. He feels
this is responsible for the downward trend in audio quality - society
openly embracing the lower standards. Home theater and surround sound
can and are having some effect in interesting people in sitting down
just to listen to music, but it gets little attention in most dealer
demonstrations of home theater systems."

I'm wondering how many of we audio enthusiasts spend much time actually
listening to music on our systems for extended periods without worrying
about further upgrades, adjustments, tuning, room conditioning, etc.
I'm a long-time (mono-stereo-surround) enthusiast, my present system
including two SACD players, five Magneplaner speakers, a Velodyne
woofer, an HDTV, etc. But I don't seem to find myself doing much
listening these days. - My original expectation was that I would get the
system set up, adjusted, etc, and then begin to listen to lots of
(mainly classical) music. So far, there's always something that seems to
get in the way of any extended, concentrated listening.

Sort of as an informal poll, how many on this ng have "substantially
completed" (for now) their systems in the sense that they are no longer
primarily interested in tweaks, upgrades, etc., and instead are spending
a significant amount of time each month actually listening to music.
(I'm not suggesting we won't be interested in further upgrades; I'm
trying to get at the priorities, and the underlying reasons for
assembling a good system in the first place.) Put otherwise, how many
have a system of sufficiently high quality for your present tastes that
you no longer concentrate on the sound quality as much as on the music
itself. For those who respond positively, please briefly discuss your
system, listening routines, schedules, etc.

Jim Cate

Great questions and observations, Jim.

My system is "substantially completed", as I'm happy with the sound that
I am getting, though I know that it can be improved. In my experience,
from here on "up" the law of diminishing returns really starts to take
hold, for me. My system reminds me enough of what I value in live
acoustic music that I'm at the place where I can enjoy it and not be
thinking constantly of upgrading while I listen. And, by "hi-fi"
standards, it's pretty modest: Clearaudio/Rotel/Vandersteen.

As to time spent listening, I'm able to listen in a concentrated way for
about an hour a day, more on most weekends. For me, I have to approach
several aspects of music in a very disciplined way, or else, as you say,
other things too easily get in the way. For example, most of my
colleagues don't continue to work on ear training every day. I, on the
other hand, set aside a half hour a day, EVERY day, no matter what.
Though I don't directly get paid for it, there is a 3 hour block of each
and every day that I do score study and ear training. This 3 hour block
happens every day, no matter what else is pressing on my time; no
visitors, no computer, the telephone is turned off, the dog is outside,
etc. If something really huge occurs in life or job that keeps me from
that time, I feel tremendously let down, and I feel that I'm not as good
a musician as I should be. My recreational music listening via the
stereo is approached in a bit of the same way: it's "me time" and I
guard it quite jealously.

Jim Cate wrote:
Regarding the following quote re David Chesky:

"Then we have the challenge of few people sitting down just to listen to
recorded music any more. David Chesky has observed that music loses its
value and is no longer important in our society when the capacity to sit
down and listen to it - doing nothing else - has been lost.

This reflects a certain aesthetic snobbery on Chesky's part. Music
plays different roles for different people at different times. Music
doesn't "lose its value" just because people don't listen the way
Chesky thinks they should.

He feels
this is responsible for the downward trend in audio quality - society
openly embracing the lower standards.

Are people really embracing lower standards? When I was a kid we played
45s with cheap ceramic cartridges. Then we had cassettes on Walkmen.
MP3s on an iPod are a clear step up. People who want convenience and/or
portability are listening to much better sound than they used to. (So
are audiophiles, IMO.)

Home theater and surround sound
can and are having some effect in interesting people in sitting down
just to listen to music, but it gets little attention in most dealer
demonstrations of home theater systems."

I'm wondering how many of we audio enthusiasts spend much time actually
listening to music on our systems for extended periods without worrying
about further upgrades, adjustments, tuning, room conditioning, etc.
I'm a long-time (mono-stereo-surround) enthusiast, my present system
including two SACD players, five Magneplaner speakers, a Velodyne
woofer, an HDTV, etc. But I don't seem to find myself doing much
listening these days. - My original expectation was that I would get the
system set up, adjusted, etc, and then begin to listen to lots of
(mainly classical) music. So far, there's always something that seems to
get in the way of any extended, concentrated listening.

In retrospect, perhaps you shouldn't have waited for that "perfect
system" to start listening to music. Lots of people listen to music,
and enjoy it very much, on equipment far worse than yours. They, not
gear-centric audiophiles, are the true music lovers.

For another perspective on listening to music, consider this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/bu...y/15cont.html#

Two observations directly related to music:

"Indeed, the worldwide pop concert business grossed $2.6 billion last
year, and for many artists, giving performances is more lucrative than
making recordings. (It's a good thing, because downloading, legal and
otherwise, threatens to kill off the old-fashioned record business
anyway.)"

"In the future, the entertainment we pay for may be mainly the
in-person variety, best enjoyed in a crowd. Recorded music may become
mainly a promotional vehicle for live appearances, just as the
theatrical release of many films serves mainly to usher in their more
lucrative release on DVD."

Chesky's worried about people not listening to music *at home*. But
home isn't the best place to listen to music, no matter how good your
system is. And there's economic evidence (the prevalence of scalping)
to indicate that there is unmet demand for live music. I'm not too
worried that listening to music is going to go out of style. But then,
I'm not trying to sell a particular form of it.

bob

"Jim Cate" wrote in message
...
Regarding the following quote re David Chesky:

snip

Sort of as an informal poll, how many on this ng have "substantially
completed" (for now) their systems in the sense that they are no longer
primarily interested in tweaks, upgrades, etc., and instead are spending a
significant amount of time each month actually listening to music. (I'm
not suggesting we won't be interested in further upgrades; I'm trying to
get at the priorities, and the underlying reasons for assembling a good
system in the first place.) Put otherwise, how many have a system of
sufficiently high quality for your present tastes that you no longer
concentrate on the sound quality as much as on the music itself. For
those who respond positively, please briefly discuss your system,
listening routines, schedules, etc.


Put me in the happily listening to music column. The system upgrade I've
gone through over the last two years (from stereo to multichannel) was the
first since the early '90's, other than replacing failed units. I'm
thrilled just to be listening...the other evening I spent about three and a
half hours just listening to an excellent FM jazz program, and have spent a
few afternoons recently just listening to classical music. This has been my
pattern off and on over the last four years, since I entered
semi-retirement.

Jim Cate wrote:
Regarding the following quote re David Chesky:

"Then we have the challenge of few people sitting down just to listen to
recorded music any more. David Chesky has observed that music loses its
value and is no longer important in our society when the capacity to sit
down and listen to it - doing nothing else - has been lost. He feels
this is responsible for the downward trend in audio quality - society
openly embracing the lower standards. Home theater and surround sound
can and are having some effect in interesting people in sitting down
just to listen to music, but it gets little attention in most dealer
demonstrations of home theater systems."

I'm wondering how many of we audio enthusiasts spend much time actually
listening to music on our systems for extended periods without worrying
about further upgrades, adjustments, tuning, room conditioning, etc.
I'm a long-time (mono-stereo-surround) enthusiast, my present system
including two SACD players, five Magneplaner speakers, a Velodyne
woofer, an HDTV, etc. But I don't seem to find myself doing much
listening these days. - My original expectation was that I would get the
system set up, adjusted, etc, and then begin to listen to lots of
(mainly classical) music. So far, there's always something that seems to
get in the way of any extended, concentrated listening.

Sort of as an informal poll, how many on this ng have "substantially
completed" (for now) their systems in the sense that they are no longer
primarily interested in tweaks, upgrades, etc., and instead are spending
a significant amount of time each month actually listening to music.
(I'm not suggesting we won't be interested in further upgrades; I'm
trying to get at the priorities, and the underlying reasons for
assembling a good system in the first place.) Put otherwise, how many
have a system of sufficiently high quality for your present tastes that
you no longer concentrate on the sound quality as much as on the music
itself. For those who respond positively, please briefly discuss your
system, listening routines, schedules, etc.

Jim Cate
I do not have a high end sound system but I spend a great deal of time
listening to albums. In a given day I will listen to about 10 albums.
My music consumption is at these high levels because I'm a student and
spend lots of time reading and at the computer both of which are next to
my stereo system. The biggest cause of my increased consumption of
music is due to not owning a tv.

Now as for just sitting and listening and doing nothing else that occurs
less often as many times I will be reading a book or programming at the
same time while listening to jams.

This reflects a certain aesthetic snobbery on Chesky's part. Music
plays different roles for different people at different times. Music
doesn't "lose its value" just because people don't listen the way
Chesky thinks they should.

Well said. I am not one of those who bemoans the incredible popularity of
the MP3 format and the explosion of portable MP3 players. There is no
"right-way" to listen to music or for that matter, a "right-format". This
reminds me a little bit of the hi-fi press back in the 60's and 70's (Audio
and Stereophile for example) and their unwillingness to accept Rock and Roll
as being high-fidelity. I remember they would only review classical, jazz
and other types of music they considered the "right-subject-matter". Like
Rock and Roll in the seventies, MP3 is the ugly step-child we like to
pretend doesn't exist, and will hopefully soon go away.

As far as just sitting and listening to music vs. tweaking and upgrading, I
guess I do both. I'm not the sort of person who can just sit, listen to
music and do absolutely nothing else. But, I do listen to music WHENEVER I
can (in my car, at the computer, etc.)! And BTW, I use MP3 in my car
because for me the sonic drawbacks are outweighed by this format's
incredible flexibility.

Upgrading my car system, home-music and home-theater systems are my favorite
hobbies so I would say I'm never really satisfied. But I don't feel that
detracts from my listening experience.

MOSFET

bob wrote:
Jim Cate wrote:
Regarding the following quote re David Chesky:

"Then we have the challenge of few people sitting down just to listen to
recorded music any more. David Chesky has observed that music loses its
value and is no longer important in our society when the capacity to sit
down and listen to it - doing nothing else - has been lost.

This reflects a certain aesthetic snobbery on Chesky's part.


Hardly. It relfects a certian care about the art of music. David Chesky
is amoung other things a Jazz musician. Perhaps he simply wishes that
more people appreciate music on the same level as he does, a level far
different than using it as background noise to fill in a void. his
devotion and care for music is hardly any sort of aesthetic snobbery.
If it were snobbery he wouldn't really want to bring others back into
it. Snobs love their exclusivity.


Music
plays different roles for different people at different times. Music
doesn't "lose its value" just because people don't listen the way
Chesky thinks they should.

Well I disagree. It is an entirely subjective call but I disagree. When
I see great paintings being used as patterns for wall paper i think
that art is being devalued. It's harmless on one level but it seems to
be a sign of a lack of art appreciation. Excellence in the arts is not
appreciated by casual sampling and use as a background device to fill
in empty spaces.



He feels
this is responsible for the downward trend in audio quality - society
openly embracing the lower standards.

Are people really embracing lower standards?

Yes, recording quality is way in the hole pretty much accross the
board. Don't forget that David Chesky is also a recording engineer.


When I was a kid we played
45s with cheap ceramic cartridges. Then we had cassettes on Walkmen.
MP3s on an iPod are a clear step up.


I don't think he is refering to what the kids are playing.


People who want convenience and/or
portability are listening to much better sound than they used to. (So
are audiophiles, IMO.)


Which has what to do with Chesky's claims?





Home theater and surround sound
can and are having some effect in interesting people in sitting down
just to listen to music, but it gets little attention in most dealer
demonstrations of home theater systems."

I'm wondering how many of we audio enthusiasts spend much time actually
listening to music on our systems for extended periods without worrying
about further upgrades, adjustments, tuning, room conditioning, etc.
I'm a long-time (mono-stereo-surround) enthusiast, my present system
including two SACD players, five Magneplaner speakers, a Velodyne
woofer, an HDTV, etc. But I don't seem to find myself doing much
listening these days. - My original expectation was that I would get the
system set up, adjusted, etc, and then begin to listen to lots of
(mainly classical) music. So far, there's always something that seems to
get in the way of any extended, concentrated listening.

In retrospect, perhaps you shouldn't have waited for that "perfect
system" to start listening to music. Lots of people listen to music,
and enjoy it very much, on equipment far worse than yours. They, not
gear-centric audiophiles, are the true music lovers.


Which ones, the ones using music as fill on their IPods or the ones
sitting down and listening to music?




For another perspective on listening to music, consider this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/bu...y/15cont.html#

Two observations directly related to music:

"Indeed, the worldwide pop concert business grossed $2.6 billion last
year, and for many artists, giving performances is more lucrative than
making recordings. (It's a good thing, because downloading, legal and
otherwise, threatens to kill off the old-fashioned record business
anyway.)"


And what does that have to do with anything? Pop concerts are for the
sake of *seeing* the artist not hearing them.




"In the future, the entertainment we pay for may be mainly the
in-person variety, best enjoyed in a crowd. Recorded music may become
mainly a promotional vehicle for live appearances, just as the
theatrical release of many films serves mainly to usher in their more
lucrative release on DVD."


That will be a sad day. That is the very thing guys like Chesky worries
about. What sort of movie do you think is filmed with the idea that the
theatrical release "serves mainly to usher in their more lucrative
release on DVD?" I'll give you a hint, the the disposable pop
entertainment movies. If all music and film is reduced to this then it
will be the end of the art.





Chesky's worried about people not listening to music *at home*. But
home isn't the best place to listen to music, no matter how good your
system is.


What place is better to listen to playback? The car? The street with
some portable? I think yo are wrong here.


And there's economic evidence (the prevalence of scalping)
to indicate that there is unmet demand for live music.

The scalping is predominantly found in pop concerts. Pop concerts are
for seeing the artist not for hearing them. It is the one kind of music
where "live" ( a laugh since it is all amplified and played over PA
systems built to play loudly enough over a wide enough area to allow a
large noisy crowd to hear) is quite inferior to playback. I have never
heard any live concert over a PA that came close to the quality I get
at home listening to the recordings.


I'm not too
worried that listening to music is going to go out of style. But then,
I'm not trying to sell a particular form of it.

You also aren't a Jazz musician. Compare the live Jazz scene now to
fifty years ago.

Scott

bob wrote:

Jim Cate wrote:


Regarding the following quote re David Chesky:

"Then we have the challenge of few people sitting down just to listen to
recorded music any more. David Chesky has observed that music loses its
value and is no longer important in our society when the capacity to sit
down and listen to it - doing nothing else - has been lost.



This reflects a certain aesthetic snobbery on Chesky's part. Music
plays different roles for different people at different times. Music
doesn't "lose its value" just because people don't listen the way
Chesky thinks they should.



He feels
this is responsible for the downward trend in audio quality - society
openly embracing the lower standards.



Are people really embracing lower standards? When I was a kid we played
45s with cheap ceramic cartridges. Then we had cassettes on Walkmen.
MP3s on an iPod are a clear step up. People who want convenience and/or
portability are listening to much better sound than they used to. (So
are audiophiles, IMO.)


I often listen to classical music, and I can't quite see enjoying a
40-minute symphony or concerto on an Ipod. The ambience and room
acoustics also seem to have an important effect in hearing the full
orchestra.




Home theater and surround sound
can and are having some effect in interesting people in sitting down
just to listen to music, but it gets little attention in most dealer
demonstrations of home theater systems."

I'm wondering how many of we audio enthusiasts spend much time actually
listening to music on our systems for extended periods without worrying
about further upgrades, adjustments, tuning, room conditioning, etc.
I'm a long-time (mono-stereo-surround) enthusiast, my present system
including two SACD players, five Magneplaner speakers, a Velodyne
woofer, an HDTV, etc. But I don't seem to find myself doing much
listening these days. - My original expectation was that I would get the
system set up, adjusted, etc, and then begin to listen to lots of
(mainly classical) music. So far, there's always something that seems to
get in the way of any extended, concentrated listening.



In retrospect, perhaps you shouldn't have waited for that "perfect
system" to start listening to music.

Actually, I didn't. I've been listening for over 40 years, on various
systems.

Jim

Jim:

I have "substantially completed" my systems... but what is actually
in-play at any one time is constantly changing... excepting the
speakers, which are either-of-two pairs depending on which room I am
using at the time.

I do not "listen to music" in the same way as I would go to a concert,
drive a car, or even work at my bench on whatever piece of equipment is
getting diagnosed or restored. Of those three, all of them require a
certain single-mindedness and concentration in order to be satisfying,
safe or successful (in that order). While driving or working at the
bench, I may have music in the background, but that is ambient and of
the same order-of-importance as good light or a clean windshield. At a
concert, I am _LISTENING TO MUSIC_. When I am at home, and listening to
music, I may be reading, dozing, petting the cat, watching the fire, or
snuggling with my wife. At moments, I will stop whatever else (with the
exception of the snuggling, of course) to listen to certain passages in
the music. But I most certainly do not sit bolt-upright and listen.
Never have, and I hope never to, at least at home. That would enslave
me to the experience and take it from being an enhancement to my life
to being work. That is not to say I NEVER concentrate at home.... To
me, good music (and of whatever type & stripe) will draw one in and
demand attention. One will *want* to stop doing something else because
of that quality. A system should be able to deliver that feeling IF IT
IS THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. For the most part, it isn't, and no system
will deliver what wasn't there initially.

It is my *unsubstantiated* belief that most people-into-audio in a
very, very serious way (AKA Audiophools) often miss the point that
music is meant to transport the soul, reach out and grab you, if you
will. So few sources have that capacity for many reasons, and so few
individual performers do so for many others, that often recording and
performance failures are blamed on the system rather than the source.
It has been my *experience* that most Audiophiles are rather more
relaxed about the systems they use and truly concentrate on their
source material. In general, they are much the happier between the two.


My main system likely gets about 10-20 hours of use a week, mostly on
weekends by me, during the week by my wife. The secondary system might
get 10 hours in a month. The system at my bench might get 20 hours in a
month, and the system in my office might get 15 hours in a week. The
system at our summer-house gets used as many hours as we are there.

Amps include: Scott LK150, Dynaco ST-70, Dynaco 416, ST-80
Pre-amps include: Dynaco PAT-5, PAS-3, PAT-4, Scott LC-2, Revox A720
tuner/pre-amp
Tuners include: Dynaco FM-5, FM-3, Soundcraftsman, Scott LT-110, Revox
A76
Receivers: AR Model R, AR Model A10
Integrated amps: AR x 2, Dynaco SCA-35, SCA-80Q, Revox A78
Speakers: AR 3a, 2pair, AR 4x, M5, M6 & two Model 622 sat/sub systems.
TT: Rabco ST-8, Revox A790
CD: Revox B225, Yamaha CDC 585 changer, Philips changer, Sony
"very-first" Walkman (at 'souce' at the bench).

None of this stuff is terribly high-end, some of it is of Jurassic
design, but I like it, and it is capable of reaching out and grabbing
my attention and the attention of others as well. Stuff comes and goes
constantly, as I tend to give a lot of stuff away to friends &
family... makes room for more. I also shift things around some, but on
the main system, the goal is to make it simple enough that my wife is
not intimidated by it. Fewest-buttons-to-best-sound, if you will. She
uses it more than I do, so that goal appears to be met.

But, none of us are snobs about music. All of it is honorable depending
on one's taste, the purpose of the system is to deliver it to you in a
way that you enjoy.

One more thing: We have almost raised an entire generation to believe
that "good sound" is what comes out of their computer and/or game
system. Just look at modern speakers if you need proof of that. We have
mostly emasculated speakers and amplifiers, and created a polite
illusion of "full-range single-drivers"... if only by redefining
"range". We have also developed a cultural fear of unoccupied time...
we schedule our kids to a fare-thee-well, we wire ourselves 24/7, and
we feel naked if we are not 'in touch' constantly and at some level.
Listening to music for enjoyment (not on-schedule, not by routine) can
hardly compete at that level. That is a loss we make for ourselves.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

wrote in message ...
Jim:

I have "substantially completed" my systems... but what is actually
in-play at any one time is constantly changing... excepting the
speakers, which are either-of-two pairs depending on which room I am
using at the time.

I do not "listen to music" in the same way as I would go to a concert,
drive a car, or even work at my bench on whatever piece of equipment is
getting diagnosed or restored. Of those three, all of them require a
certain single-mindedness and concentration in order to be satisfying,
safe or successful (in that order). While driving or working at the
bench, I may have music in the background, but that is ambient and of
the same order-of-importance as good light or a clean windshield. At a
concert, I am _LISTENING TO MUSIC_. When I am at home, and listening to
music, I may be reading, dozing, petting the cat, watching the fire, or
snuggling with my wife. At moments, I will stop whatever else (with the
exception of the snuggling, of course) to listen to certain passages in
the music. But I most certainly do not sit bolt-upright and listen.
Never have, and I hope never to, at least at home. That would enslave
me to the experience and take it from being an enhancement to my life
to being work. That is not to say I NEVER concentrate at home.... To
me, good music (and of whatever type & stripe) will draw one in and
demand attention. One will *want* to stop doing something else because
of that quality. A system should be able to deliver that feeling IF IT
IS THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. For the most part, it isn't, and no system
will deliver what wasn't there initially.

It is my *unsubstantiated* belief that most people-into-audio in a
very, very serious way (AKA Audiophools) often miss the point that
music is meant to transport the soul, reach out and grab you, if you
will. So few sources have that capacity for many reasons, and so few
individual performers do so for many others, that often recording and
performance failures are blamed on the system rather than the source.
It has been my *experience* that most Audiophiles are rather more
relaxed about the systems they use and truly concentrate on their
source material. In general, they are much the happier between the two.


My main system likely gets about 10-20 hours of use a week, mostly on
weekends by me, during the week by my wife. The secondary system might
get 10 hours in a month. The system at my bench might get 20 hours in a
month, and the system in my office might get 15 hours in a week. The
system at our summer-house gets used as many hours as we are there.

Amps include: Scott LK150, Dynaco ST-70, Dynaco 416, ST-80
Pre-amps include: Dynaco PAT-5, PAS-3, PAT-4, Scott LC-2, Revox A720
tuner/pre-amp
Tuners include: Dynaco FM-5, FM-3, Soundcraftsman, Scott LT-110, Revox
A76
Receivers: AR Model R, AR Model A10
Integrated amps: AR x 2, Dynaco SCA-35, SCA-80Q, Revox A78
Speakers: AR 3a, 2pair, AR 4x, M5, M6 & two Model 622 sat/sub systems.
TT: Rabco ST-8, Revox A790
CD: Revox B225, Yamaha CDC 585 changer, Philips changer, Sony
"very-first" Walkman (at 'souce' at the bench).

None of this stuff is terribly high-end, some of it is of Jurassic
design, but I like it, and it is capable of reaching out and grabbing
my attention and the attention of others as well. Stuff comes and goes
constantly, as I tend to give a lot of stuff away to friends &
family... makes room for more. I also shift things around some, but on
the main system, the goal is to make it simple enough that my wife is
not intimidated by it. Fewest-buttons-to-best-sound, if you will. She
uses it more than I do, so that goal appears to be met.

But, none of us are snobs about music. All of it is honorable depending
on one's taste, the purpose of the system is to deliver it to you in a
way that you enjoy.

One more thing: We have almost raised an entire generation to believe
that "good sound" is what comes out of their computer and/or game
system. Just look at modern speakers if you need proof of that. We have
mostly emasculated speakers and amplifiers, and created a polite
illusion of "full-range single-drivers"... if only by redefining
"range". We have also developed a cultural fear of unoccupied time...
we schedule our kids to a fare-thee-well, we wire ourselves 24/7, and
we feel naked if we are not 'in touch' constantly and at some level.
Listening to music for enjoyment (not on-schedule, not by routine) can
hardly compete at that level. That is a loss we make for ourselves.


Hey any and/or all of that is fine. My serious listening is classical m and
for that I try to creep inside the composer's brain to think and feel
whatever he/she might have at during its composition, and perhaps then,
relate that to my life experience. Very often interpreters, performers,
engineers and technology get in my way.

Jim Cate wrote:
Sort of as an informal poll, how many on this ng have "substantially
completed" (for now) their systems in the sense that they are no longer
primarily interested in tweaks, upgrades, etc., and instead are spending
a significant amount of time each month actually listening to music.
(I'm not suggesting we won't be interested in further upgrades; I'm
trying to get at the priorities, and the underlying reasons for
assembling a good system in the first place.) Put otherwise, how many
have a system of sufficiently high quality for your present tastes that
you no longer concentrate on the sound quality as much as on the music
itself. For those who respond positively, please briefly discuss your
system, listening routines, schedules, etc.

Jim Cate

Put me in the "substantially completed" category.

I've been a music lover since early childhood, and a musician since the age
of ten.Dissatisfaction with my parents' console stereo (primarily with the
non-counterbalanced tonearm and the damage it would inflict on my
precious records, as I recall) led to the purchase, at age thirteen, of my
first component system (Technics, BIC, AcoustiPhase). I spent an entire
year saving paper route earnings to afford that equipment, and to say that
it was cherished would be understating the case. I spent (or misspent ;^))
thousands of hours of my adolescence listening to records on that system.

As a young adult, I went through a succession of similar equipment -
"superstore" type stuff - Kenwood, Sony, Cerwin-Vega, etc., until
around the age of 30, when one year a sizeable income tax refund was
burning a hole in my pocket and I decided that what I really needed
was a "good pair of speakers". Anyway, through good luck, I ended
up at Stereo Exchange this time (back when they had a store in Nanuet
NY) rather than Best Buy, or whatever, and the rest, as they say, is
history.

I ended up buying a pair of Definitive Technology bipoles and a CAL
CD player. The following year I bought separates by McCormack and
Audio Research to replace my Yamaha receiver. I then lived happily
with this system in place for about eight years. During that time, our music
collection grew from 200 CDs to 1200, and from 200 LPs to over 1000.

In 2002 I added a Rega turntable, and in 2003 I finally replaced my
Definitives with a pair of long-coveted ProAcs. So, other than the speakers,
the system has essentially remained the same for about ten years - that
speaks to the durability of the gear, as well as my satisfaction with the
sound. I could continue be happy with the this system for many more
years, and likely wouldn't replace another component unless it failed.

I usually listen to music between 7:30 and 9:00 every evening. I like to
read while listening, but it can't be anything too difficult because I find
that the music draws my attention away, again and again. I'm partial to
music mags, current affairs mags and, yes, the occasional stereo mag.

As far as sound quality, at the moment I'm really appreciating how good
the music sounds at low volumes, which is how most of my listening is
done these days - we have a one-year-old son who goes to sleep at 7:30!

thanks for letting me reminisce,
Santos

I've been an "audio nut" for nearly 40 years - I bought my first Dynaco
ST-70 in 1969 and I still have issue 1 of The Audio Amateur (but not a
complete set - things like med school and residency interrupted my audio
addiction briefly). Just recently I finished building a home theater
system based on (modified) Ariel design speakers
(http://www.nutshellhifi.com/Ariel.html) driven by a mid-fi Yamaha. It
is fine for movies, but my "listening" system is a straight stereo set
up with (minimally modified) Linkwitz Phoenix speakers
(http://linkwitzlab.com/builtown.htm) biamped with a custom preamp
driving a modified ST-70 (no, alas, not the one I bought in 1969) and a
400W MOSFET amp to drive the 4x12" woofers. I'm not going to say I
won't change the system, but for now, I'm listening.
I spend an hour or more listening to music (mostly jazz) at least once
or twice a week. (I wish it were more!)
MarkT

Jim Cate wrote:

I'm wondering how many of we audio enthusiasts spend much time actually
listening to music on our systems for extended periods without worrying
about further upgrades, adjustments, tuning, room conditioning, etc.

Jim Cate