While I mostly agree, I doubt that you could get too many audiophiles to
agree on what "accurate reproduction" is. And they might not know it when
they do hear it; you'd have to be familiar with the absolute source to know
for certain. So while they may like one system over another because it's
more revealing or whatnot-- is that really more accurate, or is it simply
more pleasing? Otherwise, there would be a clear champion / best
manufacturer-- it must be subjective. So there really can't be a "right"
way for a stereo to sound, can there?
--PBr, who is plain happy with his "cheap" Cambridge Soundworks system. :)
-----Original Message-----
From:
ivancu@... [mailto:
ivancu@...]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 5:11 PM
To:
motm@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: [motm] [OT] Do you hear what I hear...?
In a message dated 6/14/01 1:07:27 PM,
noise@... writes:
<< This is an article about audiophiles, their compulsion to upgrade the
equipment, and the expense of their habits. ... Makes me think about all
the
MOTM vs. Moog vs. what-not arguements >>
The main difference is that these "audiophiles" are all looking for the same
thing; accurate reproduction. They're using $1,200 interconnect cables
where
the original recording used Belden mic cables with Switchcraft connectors.
Silliness, in my opinion.
A synthesizer is a musical instrument. Various components affect the
performance, thereby giving character to a particular brand or model. There
is no "right" way a synthesizer should sound.