Fender turntable.

[StickyDBRmf]

I used to have a brown turntable. But when I bought a black/silver turntable, it sounded so much better with the carpet.

[Dan Dare]

3 hours ago, BigRedX said:

How a recording is made is important because it will to some extent dictate how obvious (or not) all these extraneous sounds are.

 

Not so (unless attempts are made to eq out extraneous noise, which will take some of the wanted audio content with it). Some, such as key rattle on woodwind instruments or the sound of a singer breathing, is part of their character, so why would anyone want to remove it?

 

3 hours ago, BigRedX said:

I don't think that the more expensive and esoteric HiFi does simply reproduce the audio signal as accurately as possible. If it did there would be no place for vinyl since it places a load of compromises upon the recorded audio simply to work as a delivery medium. Also a HiFi would have no controls other than volume and there would only be a single make of each component available because once each device has been made to affect the signal as little as possible there would be no need for any others.

 

How much truly "expensive and esoteric HiFi" have you actually heard? I'm not talking about gear that costs a couple of grand, but stuff that costs tens of thousands. It can be pretty astonishing - analogue or digital - but you need very deep pockets, the proper space to set it up in, etc. Vinyl is capable of remarkable results, but at a price.

 

Most decent hi-fi does have only a volume control and an input selector. Even mine does and it wasn't particularly expensive. 

 

3 hours ago, BigRedX said:

However what HiFi really does is to colour the audio signal in a way that each manufacturer considers to be pleasing while denying the fact that there is any colouration going on.

 

Any device that reproduces recorded music must introduce colouration and yes, designers will voice it to their tastes (in the same way as we use eq, etc to make our instruments and equipment sound pleasing). It's always a compromise. Proper manufacturers acknowledge this and do not deny the fact.

 

Treat yourself to a listen to something really decent. You will be surprised. 

 

 

[Leonard Smalls]

12 hours ago, Dan Dare said:

Any device that reproduces recorded music must introduce colouration and yes, designers will voice it to their tastes

 

Indeed - Neve mic pre-amps are different to Focusrite! Klipschhorns are far more coloured than ATC speakers; Lumley valve amps less valve-y than Quad 2s, and Clearaudio TTs tend to be "more hifi sounding" than Linn LP12s... And you're right about high-end being capable of astonishing realism; Frinstance a set-up I once heard with 4 Martin Logan panels plus Genesis subs multi-amped with Mcintosh valves had far more of a sense of "being there" and slam than the Radio 1 main studio at Maida Vale - mainly because hearing everything was what the PMC Bryston set-up was designed to do, rather than creating an illusion of actually being at the gig!

[BigRedX]

I have to admit I've never listened to any of the really high-end HiFi units, because I've never had the opportunity. AFAIK none of the local HiFi retailers I've visited over the past 40 years stock this kind of equipment and if they did I know for a fact from auditioning more mainstream stuff that none of them had a suitable listening space that would do it justice.

 

The things I would want from a high-end system, that would improve my listening experience would be the ability to remove excessive compression and brick-wall limiting from digital audio, or being able to compensate for vinyl that has been pressed off-centre as well as removing all the manufacturing defects and playing/handling wear that manifest as various pops and crackles and overall extraneous background noise. Those are the things that would make the music sound better for me, not the ability to hear non-musical details that should really have been picked up and corrected when the recording was actually being made.

 

It is interesting also that there is very little cross-over between the high-end audio reproduction aimed at serious recording studios, and HiFi, and when there are manufactures that service both, they have different products aimed at each market. You would have thought that the aim of the serious HiFi listener would be to replicate the sorts of systems that the music they like was made on in the first place. Surely that would be the ultimate listening experience?

 

If I had the kind of money that "serious" HiFi demands, for me it would be far better spend on making music, either in the form of musical equipment or time in the studio with a capable and well-known producer. 

[Leonard Smalls]

9 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

You would have thought that the aim of the serious HiFi listener would be to replicate the sorts of systems that the music they like was made on in the first place. Surely that would be the ultimate listening experience?

 

There's 2 schools of thought - ultimate air'n'space and feeling of being there - almost unnaturally so - and reproducing the actual recording studio exprerience.

The 1st lot will buy an Ongaku-on 8w SET amp with loads of colouration going into an enormous horn - Klipsch, Tannoy Westminster or bigger. The 2nd lot will but PMC BB5s and Bryston 14bsst (like me, 'cept I've got 14bsst and Leema Xaviers, which are a cheaper option but still made by an ex=BBC mate), or ATC SCM 150s.

And they tend to hate each other, though secretly love each other's sound... 

[BigRedX]

There with PMC we have the first mention of quality studio audio manufacturer in a HiFi thread, although the BB5 is from their Home Audio range rather than the studio one.

[Leonard Smalls]

6 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

BB5 is from their Home Audio range rather than the studio one

 

Indeed - most home folks would buy the bb5 se over the bb6 simply because it's got a nice bit of wood on the sides. But some no doubt go the whole hog; I know a bloke who has 2 sets of TAD 15" main monitors in his heavily sound-trapped "living" room!

[BigRedX]

4 hours ago, Leonard Smalls said:

 

Indeed - most home folks would buy the bb5 se over the bb6 simply because it's got a nice bit of wood on the sides. 

 

They wouldn't be listening with their eyes rather than their ears? Heaven forbid!

[Leonard Smalls]

1 hour ago, BigRedX said:

They wouldn't be listening with their eyes rather than their ears?

 

And we're back to the Fender Turntable!

[JottoSW1]

23 hours ago, BigRedX said:

How a recording is made is important because it will to some extent dictate how obvious (or not) all these extraneous sounds are. 

 

I don't think that the more expensive and esoteric HiFi does simply reproduce the audio signal as accurately as possible. If it did there would be no place for vinyl since it places a load of compromises upon the recorded audio simply to work as a delivery medium. Also a HiFi would have no controls other than volume and there would only be a single make of each component available because once each device has been made to affect the signal as little as possible there would be no need for any others.

 

However what HiFi really does is to colour the audio signal in a way that each manufacturer considers to be pleasing while denying the fact that there is any colouration going on. 

Plus a lot of people with confirmation bias. It's more expensive, it sounds different and therefore it must sound "better"

[tegs07]

10 minutes ago, JottoSW1 said:

Plus a lot of people with confirmation bias. It's more expensive, it sounds different and therefore it must sound "better"

Better is subjective as is the experience of playing vinyl. Possibly in the same way as a screw cap vs corked wine. There is a degree of ritual and respect with vinyl which some people just prefer. The imperfections are all part of the process.

[JottoSW1]

Just now, tegs07 said:

Better is subjective as is the experience of playing vinyl. Possibly in the same way as a screw cap vs corked wine. There is a degree of ritual and respect with vinyl which some people just prefer. The imperfections are all part of the process.

Yup. Have Both. My TT is old - replace cartridges (getting pricey for old school Denons sadly) once in a while. Have tried a more modern/better cartridge once.

CD more recent. Purchased when  £350/400 ones started to sound ok.

Old Audiolab / Creek amps and Musical Fidelity speakers.

Still sounds sufficiently like music

[tegs07]

Just now, JottoSW1 said:

Yup. Have Both. My TT is old - replace cartridges (getting pricey for old school Denons sadly) once in a while. Have tried a more modern/better cartridge once.

CD more recent. Purchased when  £350/400 ones started to sound ok.

Old Audiolab / Creek amps and Musical Fidelity speakers.

Still sounds sufficiently like music

Sadly had to part with the one decent HiFi I ever owned and could never really justify the cost of replacing it. Only have an old Kenwood system with some reasonable speakers. Still have a hundred odd Vinyl record’s left but mostly use an Amazon echo dot streaming from Spotify. Convenient but does suck the soul right out of music. Like talking a Japanese tea ceremony and replacing it with a vending machine.

[Dan Dare]

1 hour ago, JottoSW1 said:

Plus a lot of people with confirmation bias. It's more expensive, it sounds different and therefore it must sound "better"

 Don't forget the reverse form of confirmation bias - "I can't afford that and my pride won't allow me to admit it's any better than what I can afford".

[SumOne]

Listening bars seem like a good way to hear music on a really good system https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.discogs.com/en/top-5-listening-bars-in-the-uk/amp/