HiFi & Sound reproduction

[Dave2002]

... but to deliberately avoid listening to it with high fidelity seems utterly perverse to me.

Who suggested that we would do that if we had the possibility, except perhaps for special effects? You were the one who mentioned £100 kit. My own equipment is not great but probably cost well over £1000.

Some people do like to add surface noise to simulate LPs and crackles and pops for 78s

Some composers like to "borrow" other composer's music, and recording, and incorporate it into their own. What about people like Roger Smalley, and Stockhausen etc? Some make a form of sound montage out of recordings. OK - we are talking classical here, but what about DJs who do scratching and other techniques? Are you going to place a moratorium on what they want to do, and the way they "use" music and recordings? Do you want a musical police state?

[Nevalti]

The clue is in 'gainsaid'.

That 'Yes it is' - 'No it isn't' joke was funny when done by Monty Python 50 years ago but on a 'debate' forum it can very easily sound rude or ignorant.

[Nevalti]

eeer NO (in a word) because you seem to be suggesting that the reproduction is NOT a work of art ..........

Once more, I think I understand you but again, IF I do understand you, I disagree.

It may take a great 'technician' to paint a forgery of another painting BUT is the copy actually a work of art in its own right or merely the product of that good technician? I would suggest that a superb, 'realistic' copy/reproduction is NOT itself a work of art but remains simply a copy/reproduction - which may of course still be beautiful. It takes no skill to make some superbly 'realistic' reproductions of works of art and the machine operators are certainly not 'artists' - an artist being one who creates a work of art.

Can I remind you that this off-topic discussion started over your objection to my use of the word 'realistic' in connection with the reproduction of an original work of art. Are you now saying that a realistic copy of a work of 'art', let us say it is your favourite CD, is itself a work of art? Or are you just saying that a 'manipulated' (you know full well what I meant and mean by that word) version is a work or art? If you are, I would probably agree with you, even if I did not like the manipulation and the resultant 'new' work of art.

I think some people like to justify their expenditure

IF you really and truly can not tell the difference bewtween mediocre reproduction and excellent reproduction, then you have my genuine sympathy. However, you said earlier that you DO have good hifi equipment, whatever you may mean by that. How do YOU justify your expenditure? I suggest that you felt it well worth paying a bit more to get better quality sound. I suggest that you have understood and agreed with virtually all that I have said in favour of good equipment and that you just wanted to play word games for a while. Have we played long enough yet?

[johnb]

Regretfully this discussion has taken on a somewhat unpleasant edge (though I might be being over sensitive).

Some people are enthusiastic about very high quality audio and strive to "perfect" their systems but the majority are content with something that plays music adequately (for them).

There is the whole issue of how to buy audio equipment: a generalised shop, online (on-spec), in a specialise Hi-Fi shop. Of course a Hi-Fi shop would be better in an ideal world, somewhere you can get advice and listen and compare various systems bit even that can be problematic. You only have access to the product ranges stocked by the shop (and no audio shop stocks everything), the advisor might not have the same tastes as you, most people are slightly ill at ease while listening to various pieces of kit in the shop and, most importantly, the ingredients that can make an audio system sound immediately appealing in an audio shop's listening room can often contribute to a system sounding noticeably fatiguing in one's own home. (Extended home trials might be possible for customers who have built a relationship with their audio specialist and who are spending significant sums.)

I suspect most people, even those interested in more up market audio systems, choose more by luck than fine judgement.

[MrGongGong]

It may take a great 'technician' to paint a forgery of another painting BUT is the copy actually a work of art in its own right or merely the product of that good technician? I would suggest that a superb, 'realistic' copy/reproduction is NOT itself a work of art but remains simply a copy/reproduction - which may of course still be beautiful. It takes no skill to make some superbly 'realistic' reproductions of works of art and the machine operators are certainly not 'artists' - an artist being one who creates a work of art.

It's not "word games" I assure you
but (and I do think that these discussions are somewhat strange to people who work in the visual arts)

What do you mean by "creates" ?

you might be in danger of consigning Matisse to the skip at the back of Tate modern

Are you now saying that a realistic copy of a work of 'art', let us say it is your favourite CD, is itself a work of art? Or are you just saying that a 'manipulated' (you know full well what I meant and mean by that word) version is a work or art? If you are, I would probably agree with you, even if I did not like the manipulation and the resultant 'new' work of art.

Yes it is
and I really don't know what you mean by manipulated

John Oswald ?
or
Patching session to fix the split horn note at the end of the New World ?

or ?

[Beef Oven]

That 'Yes it is' - 'No it isn't' joke was funny when done by Monty Python 50 years ago but on a 'debate' forum it can very easily sound rude or ignorant.

You started it.

Post #158.

And then started getting arsey in post# 164.

So stop being sanctimonious

[Beef Oven]

I suspect most people, even those interested in more up market audio systems, choose more by luck than fine judgement.

Sadly, you're probably right. But the risk of a wrong purchase can be significantly reduced if some self-imposed discipline is brought to bear.

I honestly believe I've avoided being taken in by hi-fi salesmen, things I've set my heart on etc by simply sticking to a two week cooling off.

I never buy less than 2 weeks of the demo or shop visit or whatever.

Stephen Smith's distance selling induced trial period is an excellent opportunity too.

[Beef Oven]

A good hifi dealer is usually VERY accommodating. I have barely bought anything without a home trial.

On one occasion, when I was struggling to find a way around a particular problem, two knowledgeable and enthusiastic Salisbury hifi staff came to my house with half a dozen amplifiers and other equipment. They listened to my existing system and then we sat in my lounge and tried their other amps etc for several hours. After all that effort that they put in, they readily agreed that their new amps were no better than my existing, flawed one. Not for one instant did they try to bamboozle me. They then very politely apologised for wasting my time! Exemplary service given presumably because they know I will buy from them again if I need anything.

To a cynic like me, that's called not shooting the goose that lays the golden egg.

All sales people are in business for one purpose.

Strategies for maintaining customers often appear altruistic or 'honest', but they are for one reason only - to keep you as a customer.

[Nevalti]

It's not "word games" I assure you

Strange that I don't feel in the slightest bit assured by you.

but (and I do think that these discussions are somewhat strange to people who work in the visual arts)

In English please. Slow down; take your time; I will wait.

What do you mean by "creates" ?

What do you think I mean?

you might be in danger of consigning Matisse to the skip at the back of Tate modern

Why? Do try to remember that the whole issue is of making a 'realistic' reproduction.

Yes it is

So, you think a photocopy of a work of art is a new work of art? I suspect you are alone in that.

and I really don't know what you mean by manipulated

Oh yes you do. You are simply trying to avoid the points already made.

Word games. All you are doing is making deliberately controversial half thought through comments in the hope that some fool like me will play with you. Each time I point out that you don't even know the meaning of some of the words you have used, you veer off into some other half baked idea, expressed very clumsily and in poor English.

[Nevalti]

Who suggested that we would do that if we had the possibility,

The suggestion has been made, and echoed by at least one other, that it is pointless trying to make a 'realistic' reproduction of a piece of music. The whole idea of 'realism' has been mocked and those who seek realism derided. Is there any wonder that the OP has abandoned his thread which was presumably meant to be a serious search for information. It has been thoroughly hijacked by people intent on issuing snide remarks and blatantly playing games. You only need to look at the number of posts they have made and the scant regard for grammar and accuracy to understand what their motives are - and it is not to help others.

Please understand Dave that I am not pointing my finger at you. I do realise that you asked a couple of 'sucker' questions earlier on but then you quite reasonably came clean about it.

Some composers like to "borrow" other composer's music, and recording, and incorporate it into their own. What about people like Roger Smalley, and Stockhausen etc? Some make a form of sound montage out of recordings. OK - we are talking classical here, but what about DJs who do scratching and other techniques? Are you going to place a moratorium on what they want to do, and the way they "use" music and recordings? Do you want a musical police state?

I'm not sure what prompted that question. Classical music is littered with folk tunes and copied phrases. Anyone who makes a montage or an altered version, remastered version etc is making a new work of art. I have no problem with that whatsoever. What got me started in classical music was 'Switched on Bach'! My point, because of this thread, has always been that MY aim in listening to reproduced music is to hear it as faithfully to the original art work as possible. By 'original' I do not just mean the composers original score and period instruments I mean any version of it. I don't see how that can be made any more clear.

[MrGongGong]

FFS
no one suggested that it was "pointless" using high quality recording and playback devices

It's not "playing games" either

Some people don't like to see their cultural assumptions challenged

Maybe take it to a separate thread ?


(i'm still puzzled by what you mean by "manipulated" and spare me the patronising crap about writing in English , this is a MESSAGEBOARD not a Phd seminar !)

So, you think a photocopy of a work of art is a new work of art?

Of course it is

YOu might think that what music is , is somehow a fixed thing that we all understand. But , I can assure you that this is far from the case...

[jayne lee wilson]

FFS
no one suggested that it was "pointless" using high quality recording and playback devices

It's not "playing games" either

Some people don't like to see their cultural assumptions challenged

Maybe take it to a separate thread ?


(i'm still puzzled by what you mean by "manipulated" and spare me the patronising crap about writing in English , this is a MESSAGEBOARD not a Phd seminar !)



Of course it is

YOu might think that what music is , is somehow a fixed thing that we all understand. But , I can assure you that this is far from the case...

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest..."

[Nevalti]

To a cynic like me, that's called not shooting the goose that lays the golden egg.

All sales people are in business for one purpose.

Strategies for maintaining customers often appear altruistic or 'honest', but they are for one reason only - to keep you as a customer.

I'm afraid you get no prizes for stating the blindingly obvious.

[Nevalti]

FFS
no one suggested that it was "pointless" using high quality recording and playback devices

It's not "playing games" either

Some people don't like to see their cultural assumptions challenged

Maybe take it to a separate thread ?


(i'm still puzzled by what you mean by "manipulated" and spare me the patronising crap about writing in English , this is a MESSAGEBOARD not a Phd seminar !)



Of course it is

YOu might think that what music is , is somehow a fixed thing that we all understand. But , I can assure you that this is far from the case...

Dear, dear dear. You have simply reaped what you have sown. If you can't stand the heat...........

Now, if you have a MESSAGE, I am sure someone will read it; especially if you type it out carefully and use the right words to express yourself.

(Boot? Foot? Other?)

[Eine Alpensinfonie]