|
|
Romy the Cat
Boston, MA
Posts 10,166
Joined on 05-28-2004
|
Post #:
|
11
|
|
Post ID:
|
22284
|
|
Reply to:
|
22283
|
|
|
|
....from other perspectives...
|
|
|
|
|
|
fiogf49gjkf0d  rowuk wrote: | | I often wonder who REALLY
needs real high end? Maybe this is the wrong description. |
|
That is a reasonable question. However, it is not question that
aligned with the thread. I do not think that people need high-end audio.
However, if a person does form any high-end audio objectives then it should be
done with respect of the goals and not in respect of the "literature"
that was invented by audio pimps aroid high-end audio consumption.
| rowuk wrote: | | If we look at custom made
trumpets, violins, guitars for musicians, there are parameters that can be
played with to reach a desired goal. The artisans results become the working
capital of the musician. More instrument does not always mean more money! |
|
That is a separate subject: the difference and similarity between
high-end audio and high-end musical instruments.
| rowuk wrote: | | What is the meaning of a custom midbass horn? |
|
That is a very good question: what is a deference between industry
build generic midbass horn and custom midbass horn. As soon a person answers it
for himself many thing get cleared. A few weeks back there was a Russian guy
with a lot of cash came to this site and
begin to ask questions about horns. The questions he asked clearly identified
him as an idiot who shall not be doing anything in audio. Why I bring this example?
Well, I do feel that the answering yourself
the question about difference between a generic midbass horn and custom midbass
horn instantly put a person to a proper stratification of audio subtypes. We do
need both the generic midbass horns and custom midbass horns we also need
people who can understand the difference and map the requirements - they push
the High-End objectives farther. The rest of the people, including my new Russian
friend, juts reused the same alien vocabulary that they would never understand anyhow.| rowuk wrote: | | Does random equipment really mean that we lose
neutrality? Can it be that absolute, or is the only issue "no
control" over neutrality? Is neutrality a desirable goal? Not from my
viewpoint. I like "row 15 sound" where the hall adds its signature to
the performance without me losing immediacy. It is also a preference away from
pinpoint localization of sonic events. Is the sound of an instrument colored by
the hall effects still neutral? |
|
rowuk, no one talks, at least in context of this thread,
about neutrality as it is some kind absolute factor. The conversation is not
about the neutrality itself but about the interface to communicate with neutrality
reached by audio means. All the I was saying that random equipment and random utilization
of audio expressive methods dive pretty random
chance to get neutrality. BTW, that fact the most of table radio are way more neutral
then expensive so-called high end audio installations is a goof illustration of
what I was saying. | rowuk wrote: | | I think that neutrality is a bullshit argument
for the brainless. Music worth listening to is not "neutral". The
performers have intentions, the recording engineers and producers have sonic
goals. At home we also have expectations based on our relationship to music and
audio. Just like I have specific goals when I choose an instrument for a
specific playing job, my audio at home also advertises my prejudices, laziness,
audio awareness. |
|
Yes, and no. Audio neutrality in the way how you use
it in thins thread I feel very much is what you call bullshit. Neutrality might
imply many different things and might be understood from other perspectives as
well.
"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|