Am I listening to Hi-Fi ?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Khorn, Aug 12, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bill Hart

    Bill Hart Forum Resident

    Location:
    Austin
    Those weren't real???
    Jeff Goldblum looked a little artificial, but...
    :)
     
    Manimal, displayname, Khorn and 2 others like this.
  2. Mr Bass

    Mr Bass Chevelle Ma Belle

    Location:
    Mid Atlantic
    HI FI is just having a relatively neutral system that allows you to judge differences in mastering or recordings fairly well.

    Hi End should be about removing as much as possible the signatures that indicate HI FI as opposed to musical performance (given a neutral recording in a recording space). Obviously the latter is not strictly possible but the idea is to remove the electronic signatures, harmonic bleaching and residual distortion as much as possible evident in a standard HI FI setup.
     
  3. pdxway

    pdxway Forum Resident

    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    According to Dictionary by Merriam-Webster:

    Definition of high fidelity
    : the reproduction of an effect (such as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original

    So, I guess many bookshelves speakers will failed to qualify if many original songs have strong tones down to around 30 hz and below.

    Thus, one would need to add the cost of a quality sub to the minimum price of a hifi system. A low distortion sub is expensive!!!

    For example, Paradigm sub 2 has excellent distortion measurements. Paradigm® | SUB 2 | Overview . The last listing price starts at $10,500.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2018
  4. Dougr33

    Dougr33 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Twin Cities, MN
    I think there's high-fidelity and enjoy-fidelity. I've always felt that a (true) high-fidelity system should recreate the sound the mastering engineer was hearing and intended in the room he/she was working, no? And a different mix of speakers and components would be required to duplicate that for almost any listener's ears and their listening room. That's why enjoy-fidelity is a more reasonable target for most of us.
     
    bhazen likes this.
  5. Catcher10

    Catcher10 I like records, and Prog...duh

    I don't understand the OP question.......
     
  6. bhazen

    bhazen I Am The Walrus

    Location:
    Deepest suburbia
    YHi-Fi is obviously a continuum ...

    "The More Accurate System Is The One Which Reproduces More Difference
    More Contrast Between The Various Program Sources."

    -- from the article Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell? by Leonard Norwitz and Peter Qvortrup of Audio Note UK
     
  7. Robert C

    Robert C Forum Resident

    Location:
    London, UK
    No, it isn't. The original refers to the master, i.e. the finished product you are playing. The goal of high fidelity isn't to recreate a performance in the studio, unless that was the goal of the master.
     
  8. Subagent

    Subagent down the rabbit hole, they argue over esoterica

    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    I'm going to go with a paraphrase of Justice Potter Stewart (US SC 1958-1981) writing about something entirely different, but not really all that different:

    I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description, and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I hear it...
     
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2018
  9. Manimal

    Manimal Forum Resident

    Location:
    Southern US
    Nah, if they were real T Rex would have feathers:)
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  10. G B Kuipers

    G B Kuipers Forum Resident

    Location:
    Netherlands
    Good definition.

    Some thoughts, related to the fact that I wear both an audio engineer hat and a hifi nut/audiophile hat from time to time:

    I think it is useful to discern two very different perspectives to music reproduction:

    1. I think accuracy is the most important goal when a mixing or mastering engineer is working on the music. They want to be able to discern every nuance of what they are changing in the program material. When I have my audio engineer hat on, this is exactly how I listen. (Like if you would be fixing some small detail in a painting and you just use the most revealing lighting you can get, even if it does not complement the beauty of the painting.) I believe even confirmed tube lovers like our host prefer using solid state amps and modern monitors for this task. You just want it as straight as possible.

    2. High end hifi, the realm of audiophiles, on the other hand, is much more ambitious IMO. It goes beyond accurately rendering the source material. The ideal here is recreating the actual performance (for classical, jazz, etc), or at least giving the listener the illusion of being present at/immersed in the portrayed event. (In electronic music this becomes mostly about immersion as there is no actual event to portray.)
    This means that any approach is fine as long as it helps to approach Total Immersion. Tubes, specialty caps, exotic cabling, ceramic cable risers, kryptonite power cords, anything. It is all about enhancing the listening experience, transporting us to another place.
     
    bhazen, Jimi Floyd and UnityCoupled like this.
  11. Colin M

    Colin M Forum Resident

    Once, when only you in the household can tell you've updated a component... you're listening to Hi-Fi. :pineapple:
     
    G B Kuipers likes this.
  12. Tim Lookingbill

    Tim Lookingbill Alfalfa Male

    Location:
    New Braunfels, TX
    There's more to be said about first knowing the background of how one particular piece of music was mixed and mastered because I got fooled into thinking my '72 Sansui amp and '84 Norman Lab two way box speakers were so amazingly good that it made singers sound like they were in the room.

    Julie London CD's and this singer's CD...


    I read in the liner notes that Hanne was recorded in a home grown studio singing at normal speaking volume with the mic very close. Her partner producer just mixed her voice upfront.
    CRAP! All along it's been the mastering and recording technique, not my poor boy audiophile system. I don't know how they recorded and mastered Julie London back in the day but both singers sound like they're in my living room and not because of my "High End" stereo system.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine