 Romy the Cat wrote: |  PeterA wrote: | Romy, natural sound is only a methodological compromise if the goal is to be able to shape or manipulate the sound of a chosen system to suit ones preferences and moods, depending on recordings and music. my target is to create through the selection of my specific equipment and setting it up in a way to give me a listening experience that reminds me of the listening experience I have when listening to live music. Just as different instruments and musicians and concert halls and conductors sound different, a natural sounding system will sound different depending on the recording. I can also affect this in an active expression by switching cartridges on different tone arms based on the recording and my mood. The sound changes, but it is all within a range of natural sound just as it is with real music. I do not see the compromise that you identify. The difference between this approach and your third way of personal expression is simply a matter of degree. I do not see the inherent compromise. An approach is only compromised when you give up certain things and acknowledge weaknesses in a method to achieve the goal.
My approach is only a compromise when applied to your goals because you want something different and my approach won’t get you there because it is not as flexible. I don’t need the range of flexibility that you want from a system to shape the sound to your ideals. Yours is a more active approach, but only in degree. |
|
We do not need to agree, and I certainly am not in a position
to say that you are doing something right or wrong. I can talk about with certainty
only about myself. I personally do not look
for a listening experience that reminds me of the listening experience I have
when listening to live music. I was a vocal and very persistent opponent of it over
the years and I have advocated against it a lot. In fact, I feel that that “teleportation
to listening event” is one of the surrogacies of selling the “Absolute Sound” experience
at level #1. It is all crap the sale people injected into consumers to move
more UPS boxes… |
|
That is correct, we do not need to agree. Audio is a very personal pursuit centered around in individual's goals. There are many different approaches, and you have chosen three to discuss in your recent videos. The industry needs to sell boxes and come up with ways to convince the buyer that something is new and better this time. They do this with the help of magazines promoting ideas that emphasize how music at home is not like music in the concert hall. They talk about attributes, you call them properties, like dark backgrounds, pinpoint imaging, details. The designers chase these things, the magazines point them out, the consumer tries to hear more of them. It is about enhancing the experience. It has little to do with real music. It is about sound, removed and isolated, broken into pieces.
Natural sound is more about the holistic gestalt of music, experiencing it as the energy that produces emotions and carries away the listener. #1 and #2 are very different approaches, but they share in common with each other, and with the third approach of expressivity, the desire to shape the sound to one's ideals. We all think about what to buy based on these ideals. What we do with the gear once at home is where things become interesting.
I think I understand your talks being this: #1 is about the gear and the sound you get. #2 is about the gear and set up sounding like live music, but that is impossible, so it is a futile effort. But I say this is about getting the system right for the listener so it allows him to then focus on the music, and learn about the music. #3, the right way, your way, is about buying gear, modifying it, choosing it for flexibility, so that you can then manage, manipulate, change, the sound to enhance, amplify, the musical intent of the recording/composer/musicians, so that you Romy get a more intense emotional experience from the music you are playing.
I witnessed this with your enthusiastic pronouncements about Bruckner and watched you air conducting the symphony. You were truly absorbed, lost in the experience. I get that, and I appreciate what I think you are doing. Yes, that is the right way, the best way for you. This is you using the system as a tool to express yourself and enhance the experience.
My friend in Vienna, the former head archivist at the Vienna Opera, told me the genius exists in the mind of the composer. It is corrupted the moment he transcribes it to notes on paper. It is then interpreted by the conductor who instructs the musicians how to play it. Each step along the way, it is is changed and loses some of the genius. Yet, beauty, and power, and fear, love, and joy come through for the audience to experience. You are using audio to put your interpretation onto the music to make it a bit more of your own. It is a third way, and it is a good way.
If I am wrong in my understanding of what you are doing, let me know or do a video part three. The other thing you touched on and that I would like to learn more about is your ideas about subjective versus objective. You mentioned it in the second video, but I think this topic needs a new dedicated video.
American Sound AS2000; Lamm LP1, LL1.1 Sig, ML2; Vitavox CN-191
DIY signal cables, rack, Ching Cheng power cords
System link: https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/natural-sound.32867/
|