| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Playback Listening » Balance (6 posts, 1 page)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) Select Pages: 
08-02-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,155
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 1
Post ID: 21144
Reply to: 21144
Balance
fiogf49gjkf0d
This is an interesting subject that fascinates me recently. I have a listening room with pretty good playback custom-build for it. All together it produces a fine result and perfectly complies with general objectives of high-end audio. For a last few years I do not involved in a lot of action with my playback. It is more or less matured and all the I do is juts turn playback on, palsy music and do some occasional calibrations, adjustment of bias, change tubes and so on, more maintenance then developed tasks.  The introduction of new PP+ last year still goes with maintenance. The character of sound of my playback is the very same for years and I pretty content with it.

Earlier this year I was experimented with bringing sound to deck and discover that if drive Bose SoundDock not from MP3 file but via a cable from headphone outlet of my preamp then I get very acceptable sound for casual listening. It kind of ridicules to have a super-duper performing front- end and drive it to Bose SoundDock but I do and I am fine with it.

Lately I begin to observe an interesting phenomena. When I want to do non-critical music listening, not on deck, in spa or on pool but in my listening room then more and more often I do not run of via Macondo but use the Bose boom-box. It is not a competition of sound quality of cause but rather a feeling of balance how much efforts I want to spend for what kind level of satisfaction. It is not to mention that from my quite advanced and acquired taste the sonic result I’m getting from the boom-box is more interesting than 95% of “unintelligent” super-duper Hi-Fi installation out there.

I do have my MiniMe pilot system about which I written in past and that meant to run when I do not want to burn Milq tubes, however, the stinky Bose radio very substantially over perform them. In addition Bose is self-powered – very convenient…

So, the question is: how much quality do we need, particularly considering the majority of our recordings are severely compromised by barbaric editing?
I do not advocate the lowering our demands in sound reproduction. All that I am doing is observing the tendency of a person who does have very high reference points in sound reproduction and does have a well performing playback available for him. So, what is it? Is it some kind of changes in me or it is some kind of “false flag” in the whole high-end audio idea?

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
08-02-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,656
Joined on 10-12-2006
Post #: 2
Post ID: 21145
Reply to: 21144
Matching Energy
fiogf49gjkf0d
For me it is mostly that I have to be more or less "up" to deal with, tune into and listen to serious music via my hi-fi, and I am not always up for it. Having been conscious of this conundrum for some time, I have over the years taken steps to tune the sound so it will also do something acceptable at closer to background levels, when I want that. Funny, but even with the volume turned down for background levels the electricity is an audible element, and even my hi-fi-indifferent wife will complain of the sound played even at low volumes when the power is especially bad.

As far as the high-end audio idea, if by this we mean acquire certain equipment, and pay more for better sound, then this idea was stillborn. Any doubters, go to a high-end audio show. While there are certainly better and worse systems, it is personal, is it not, including situational. The car is a great example of this: sometimes I get wrapped up in music over that miserable system; other times I can barely stand the sound from Prairie Home Companion or Wait, Wait... Don't Tell Me. (And this one is powered from a big battery!)


Paul S
08-03-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rowuk


Germany
Posts 454
Joined on 07-05-2012
Post #: 3
Post ID: 21148
Reply to: 21144
Amar Bose was not stupid
fiogf49gjkf0d
I personally think that the legacy of Amar Bose was discovering how many "needs big box" factors could be left out and still have the products perceived at "of high quality". Bose is very popular with musicians, for all of the sonic shortcomings it still lets the information that they are looking for through. Perhaps only their logo should be modified: "Good enough music through research" seems to represent more of the truth.

Romy, I think in your case playback with MiniMe leaves you with the idea still in the back of your mind - I am not using Macondo. That is in the way of listening. When you listen to the Bose dock, this most likely does not occur. New UseCase, different parameters, no ballast in the back of your mind. Ability to focus on other things.

21st century convenience is addictive however - not only in the playback world.............. The reduction of data allows playback to be in the background if desirable. Does the respect for the composers, musicians, conductors intentions change outdoors? Does audio become a commodity? The answer "depends" is certainly easier to apply from the deck or pool than in the listening room.



Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
08-03-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,656
Joined on 10-12-2006
Post #: 4
Post ID: 21150
Reply to: 21148
High-end Bose Palliative
fiogf49gjkf0d
Many years ago, Peter Moncrieff (of IAR fame) built some Bose-like, multi-driver speakers, and some of the drivers "pointed away". These were heard and hailed by no less than Numero Uno Audio Guru, JG Holt. I never heard these speakers, but I have played around a lot with and integrated the notion of "bounced sound" into my audio system. Of course, the super-small, super-portable versions of the original ideas, along with the plastic tunnels, etc., are ridiculous. Neither are the Bose portables "cheap" for what they are, but they charge more, re-allocated some of the $$, and push them harder, in "fancy" magazines, like the New Yorker, etc. I would say, sonically acceptable boom boxes are where you find them; no "name" has a lock on these things, and one "good" model is no indication that there will be "good" models to follow from a given marque. I've bought these things for my kids, over the years, and I've bought a couple for myself, for work. Like car audio, you have to pick them by ear; you can't count on "brand shopping" for this stuff. In the small sizes, I think all the "theories" are out the window. Hard to say why some sound acceptable, and most just don't, regardless of company "history" or claims.

Paul S
08-03-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
noviygera


Chicago, IL
Posts 177
Joined on 06-12-2009
Post #: 5
Post ID: 21154
Reply to: 21144
Just getting the basics right.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Could it be that the SoundDock gets the basics of sound reproduction right? And if the basics are attained without fussing around (and it matches your values of basics) then why trick yourself to search a better rightness. For me, it's the search for this "rightness" in sound that is difficult, misleading (by my own self), and confusing. You are lucky that you have found it. What is the basic rightness in sound? How does it sound?
Gera    
08-04-2014 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,155
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 6
Post ID: 21155
Reply to: 21154
SoundDock does not get the "basics of sound" right.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 noviygera wrote:
Could it be that the SoundDock gets the basics of sound reproduction right? And if the basics are attained without fussing around (and it matches your values of basics) then why trick yourself to search a better rightness. For me, it's the search for this "rightness" in sound that is difficult, misleading (by my own self), and confusing. You are lucky that you have found it. What is the basic rightness in sound? How does it sound?

Gera, I think you miss the point of this thread. I did not state that SoundDock gets the basics of sound reproduction right. I did write in past the many thing that SoundDock is fact is not right, even though it has some very pleasant characteristics as well. The point of this thered was not to review of SoundDock soind but rather to note that despite of all problem that I clearly see in SoundDock I do find myself frequently gravitating toward to that none-perfect sound during my non-critical listening and particularly of compromised sources. I do not think that SoundDock  might be an answer to "better rightness", at least for me. However, it is very convenient tool to play music. The initial post was more about me then about SoundDock device. 

Rgs, Romy the Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) Select Pages: 
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts