What do you prioritize in your system SQ or asthetics ?

Considering all the compromises I've had to make along the way, I'm afraid my priorities have very little bearing on the matter. As long as the SQ is decent and the room doesn't look like a warehouse, I'm fine. I have to be.

 

These days, there are plenty of options so form and function are no longer mutually exclusive. I prefer a minimalist setup these days, so sound quality is important but it needs to fit in with the living space too.

As for bass traps in my lounge, I've always said my living space is just that. I don't want or need the accessories I'd find in a recording studio.

 

Analog sound recordings. Via headphones.

Unless digital instruments are involved. Then it's digital sound recordings.

But for the classic analog instruments/analog synthesizers (like the Moog) of the Sixties and Seventies: Analog sound recordings.

Aesthetics isn't really much of a factor as long as the sound is good.

Great sound makes everything look better.

 

Definitely SQ. I'm not married anymore so no problema.

 

As someone who's always had my stereo in my living room, appearance is very important to me.

In fact, I set up my hi-fi in my current house when I was banished to the world of mid-fi. I owned an earlier version of my current speaker, the B&W 804, and the electronics were in the same location as they are now, but otherwise my stereo was strictly pedestrian. Having a nice sitting area for conversation drove where I put the gear. Sure, even with an every day stereo, my listening chair was the same distance from each speaker, and I got lucky in that my furniture fit the best when the speakers weren't square to the room, which helped eliminate standing waves, but that was it.

Now that I've gotten back into high end electronics, I still have a room that is attractive and works well for people. The only compromises I've made are (a) three turntables neither fit well nor looked right, so I stayed with two, (b) I'll drop the Venetian blinds in that corner of the house when I'm being an audiophile to kill the zing reflecting off the windows, and (c) when we're doing serious listening, nobody can sit on a Victorian couch between the speakers. Having folks on the couch ruins the stereo image. Otherwise, when we are just chatting, my favorite place to sit is on that couch.

In fact, I'm sure that couch is essential to my excellent image. I think of it as a baseball mitt, grabbing the music. Soft and undulating, it absorbs sound, keeping reflections from bouncing around the room. It catches my soundstage and holds it in place.

In a perfect world, you can have both great looks and sound. My set-up is near perfect, at least for me.

 

Looks is the ONLY priority! I’m deaf, why would I care how it sounds?

But seriously, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think my Marantz 2238B is beautiful. I had a lady friend visit and she asked what that ugly box was sitting on my bedroom dresser. Even after powering it on, the blue glow of the tuner section didn’t change her mind.

 

Actually I don't like the question. It presupposes you cannot have both, which is often untrue albeit at a price. And the reality is human beings generally put aesthetics first,* even for potential dating partners. If we restrict ourselves to sound as opposed to cars or guitars or houses, sound is influenced by visuals unless we are in a deep cave, so prettier speakers etc sound better I'd bet. It would make interesting research-put identical speakers into a pretty shell and an ugly shell and do listening tests. We auditioned Wharfedale Reva 4s at the mellow Audio Element in Pasadena. I'm probably going in an in-wall direction, but while listening to those I told my friend "if you buy those, every day you'll look at them and think how nice they look. A friend once observed about some band "hey would anyone go to see them if they didn't have lights and lasers and staging and so on?" McIntosh amps sound great AND the blue meters have a stylistic resonance which is pleasing. So the aesthetics add to enjoyment, it's just how our brains work, it IS part of the performance envelope. To focus solely on sound is actually to end up with not as good of a sound overall.


*by "first" I mean that whatever we're discussing has to look "good enough" and THEN other criteria come into play. For instance for dating, personality is NEVER first. Sorry, never. Each person has to at least think the other person is somehow attractive to them at least a bit. THEN personality and so on can come into it. Same for TVs-you could have the greatest picture but if you think the TV is really ugly you are just not going to buy it. Even the fellow above who mentioned road case bass bins or whatever in his music room probably feels that in some way they are attractive (hey they ARE cool looking in a brutal way, eh?)

 

SQ

 

Both.

 

Looks like the platter is sitting on the toilet.

 

Trust me, the sound is better than the looks!! I have been using Cyrus gear for over 30yrs. Love it

 

Would just like to add the word 'musicality' to my preferences regarding hifi. While the sound of the system is obviously important if it doesn't swing it just doesn't cut it for me! I love it when a system makes me want to get up and dance, tap my feet.

JG

 

First I learn what makes the room tick without compromises.
I will make it look downright ugly if necessary.
My first job is to chase down the perfect listening spot.
I'm looking for the perfect "loading" spot for the speakers where the midrange is "alive" and punchy and the bass is clear as a bell and the soundstage is stunning.
It can look pretty bad initially for all I care.
My job is to find out how an IDEAL install would work to the max without considering how sexy it all looks.
Only after I am convinced the sound is a stunning work of perfection THEN I decide what to do to make it look BEAUTIFUL.
In my opinion you have to learn what the room is capable of sounding like at its best.
If not, what the heck did you learn about installs for?
It makes it easier to live with a compromise.
Since I have now heard the room at its BEST I now know what I am giving up for the sake of BEAUTY.
I would hate the nagging feeling that I screwed myself out of some much better sound just to build a pretty room.
As a result I wind up pretty much with BOTH a pretty room and an amazing sounding one.
Pretty cool guy, aren't I?

 

The answer is rather obvious. But the better question is: Does better looking gear make music “sound” better to us. There’s a case to be made, I think.