Signatures

What brought that on?
Who has been getting up your nose now?

That might have been Quads definition but did they ever make such a thing?

My recollection of Quad gear was that it tended to make most things sound OK.

Accurate reproduction requires that crap recordings sound crap - is that what I want?

I'm not sure.

Sometimes I wonder if a music reproduction/replay system might not be considered more akin to a musical instrument in its own right.

Certain things then are agreed to be fundamental according to the class of the instrument in question, it must be tunable to produce certain notes and have the sound characteristic of that particular class of instrument.

After that, there will be many variations on construction, tonality, adjustments etc dependent on the manufacturer and the choice of a particular instrument by a musician will depend on his preferences, playing style etc.

Two identical instruments played by 2 competent musicians will sound similar but their rendition will vary with the individual style of the player and the moment.

Much of the recording process/chain is concerned with "adjusting" various aspects to fit whatever the criteria of the moment might happen to be in the mind of the person having most control over the production.

Is this not a "performance" of a performance?

Is it somehow wrong that I should choose a particular "style" of replay for myself, that, to my ear, best suits whatever music I prefer?

Am I thereby somehow betraying some pre-ordained code of high fidelity?

Am I now a "lost cause" or must I "keep the faith" and suffer recordings that I purchased because I liked the particular piece of music, to have all their shortcomings mercilessly exposed in the name of "truth".

Is it somehow wrong that a Steinway sounds different from a Yamaha? or that not all violins sound like a Stradivarius? That 2 different and respected conductors have such variant interpretations of the same piece?

Perhaps there is an unspoken recognisance that what there is no such thing as "perfect-fi" and that 95% fidelity is "high" in comparison with, say 75% fidelity.

On the question of "truth", I rather feel that the enquiry of Pontius Pilate "what is truth?" was not at all the simple cop out it is popularly painted as, but rather a very deep and searching, possibly even heart-felt, question, as relevant today as it was then.

I also recall reading a review of a very transparent and revealing amplifier in conjunction with very revealing speakers - the reviewer is known to you and has had nothing but good things to say of your products.
Whilst absolutely captivated by what this amplifier/speaker combination brought out in good recordings he ultimately decided that so much fidelity was not to his taste, due to its stark revelation of the inadequacies of many of his recordings, preferring the slight warming and glossing over afforded by his then choice of amplifier.

I suppose that what I am attempting to say, is that, whilst I do appreciate the results of your passion for excellence in the form of your most excellent phono stages and what they allow me to hear of the music recorded on my LPs, I would respectfully suggest that there are equally valid alternative views on the desirability of 100% fidelity to the source and that, in the greater scheme of things virtue is its own reward.

There are many paths up the mountain but we all look at the same moon.

shalom

Graham Slee wrote: It doesn't have to be that way. I believe we don't have a signature (as in coloration), but we make crap recordings or crap pressings (or being polite I should say under par) sound acceptable - I've plenty but enjoy listening to most on the gear I design. As for audiovile pressings - well, I could have warned people off them, but they don't listen to the likes of me. I was once given a pile of very famous name audiovile pressings in exchange for a phono stage and after placing them in the bottom of my garbage bin I realised what constituted a crap recording...

What do you mean?

Are you talking about the Audiovile recordings or bland music or reissues? I have a reissue of Peter Gabriel 2 that sounds better than my freinds original.

What are your objection?

Are you as it was first done guy, or are you commenting on the current trend to reissue stuff louder and more compressed?


Edited by ServerBaboon - 11 Feb 2008 at 5:27pm

Is this signature why you don't seem to have any inclination for Valves? I must admit to having a fondness for valve distortion, not enough to buy one but enough to enter HiFi Choices latest competition.