With rock/pop, we have no idea what's accurate, so I go for bliss. However, if Steve Hoffman were to come to my place and hear my stereo playing a disc he knows well, and he told me that my system was coloured in a certain way, I would believe him. And I'd try to do something about that to see if I could get more accuracy and keep the bliss. Some aspects of accuracy I can manage myself. If I listen to a solo piano recording I can have a good shot at accuracy, because I've heard this instrument live. So if my stereo gives something of the illusion that there's a piano in my lounge room, I figure I'm on the right track. I can remember the live sound and I can contrast what I hear on my stereo with that memory. The dynamics, the attack as the hammer hits the strings, the overtones and sympathetic vibrations of other strings, the soundboard and so on. Same with clarinet, cello, violin etc., and of course, the same with the human voice. But I have no idea if I'm meant to hear a "wooden" quality to the sound of a clock softly ticking way off to the left during the opening of the song "Late Home Tonight" from "Amused to Death". I do, and it sounds cool. But is it accurate? Regards, Metralla
I don't think this is an either/or question. There are those for which accuracy is bliss and I suspect that everybody here falls into this category to some degree. Obsessive-compulsives aside, we all, hopefully, reach some point where the inaccuracy of our system no longer inhibits our enjoyment of it.
Both. For me, bliss comes when I have both accuracy, clarity, musicality, and soul to the music. Being accurate, doesn't necessarily imply ruthlessly revealing, or strident, bright, sound. That's why I've mixed a tube phono preamp, with very accurate, solid state gear (Spectral). For me, it's the best of both worlds. Tom H
Bliss. So every time that I upgrade or change something, it sounds better (latest = interconnects). This means that it's more accurate, revealing and more limitations in my music is revealed. So really it's accuracy. Because the ultimate bliss stereo system is a $699.00 all in one system. Everything sounds the same. Or should. I'd hate that! How can you put a price on happiness or bliss? Check your local liquor store (thanks, Andy!)
Accuracy in an audio system means, of course, that the listener will hear a source as close to the way the CD, LP or whatever sounds. The more accurate a system is, the worse a bad sounding record must sound, but of course the opposite is true too: Great sounding recordings will sound better on a system that can reveal subtle sonic clues that distinguish the bad and the mediocre from the great. But what one audiophile perceives as bliss another might as misery. More importantly, there has to be a synergy created by putting the right components and speakers together in the right room. I know a local audiophile whose system is made up of some truly top-notch equipment - everything from ultra-expensive speakers, cables and interconnects to the latest and greatest in preamps and amps, all with an estimated selling price of more than $50K - but he hasn't found audio Nirvana. He's constantly looking for something more accurate, but he never finds it. I'd like to think that the perfect system for any audiophile is one in which he/she objectively examines the realities of all of this stuff within the realm of his or her own subjective preferences. The conclusions drawn might mean (for some) that the component he/she bought because it appeared in some magazine's Class A rated component list just might end up being replaced by something that's not been rated as highly (if it's been rated at all). My own system suits me just fine, although many of my audiophile guests wonder why I don't get new speaker cables (the ones I use haven't been made in more than 10 years) or why I don't replace my 17 year old amplifier. The answer is simple: been there, done that. When a component or cable comes along that suits me better I'll buy it. Meanwhile, I'll be enjoying new music purchases while my friend mentioned above spends another two or three thousand on interconnects, and still won't be happy.
Eh, if you had my Radio Shack quality patch cords, you'd replace them with proper interconnects, too. Trust me!
Funny you should mention Radio Shack, Gary. In my friend's system mentioned above he A-B'ed a R.S. IC with a fancy schmancy one for 4 audiophiles, and three of 'em preferred the cheapies from R. S. Go figure.
Steve uses some Radio Shack interconnects sometimes. He said in print that they can have an amazing midrange when used in certain applications.
Re: Re: Accuracy or bliss? Amen. For each, their own. Money doesn't always equate to synergy or audio nirvana. Better gear will help, as you say, "reveal subtle sonic clues". But what is revealed by that gear, could be seen by one listener as crap, and the other as the greatest thing since sliced bread. That's why we should never judge or criticize or stereotype someone who has, or has not, spent lots of money on their audio gear. Tom H
