Looking for a discussion, argument, not blind contradiction

[Analogous]

I recently came across this interesting quote and thought to share here. Thoughts?

“As audiophiles mature in their hifi journeys, they invariably move away from any theoretical ideals of an absolute or 'correct' sound. They appreciate that like one's choice in personal wardrobe or home décor, the ideal balance of the various sonic qualities which playback can celebrate is purely personal. It's about no more or less than pleasing one's own sense of aesthetics. What those are can change over time. It definitely tends to get refined thus defined over time as one explores sundry flavors to routinely retreat from extreme manifestations to a result that synthesizes multiple viewpoints“ - Srajan Ebaen (Reviewer)

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

I've been a proponent of personal preference for a while now. Though I don't care for how he phrases it. I'm a simple guy who likes complex music, not unnecessary words. YMMV.

 

[Yelamanchili manohar]

Srajan definitely took tuitions from Sashi tharoor

( Everything should be made as simple as possible, not simpler - Albert Einstein )

 

[Fiftyfifty]

I recently came across this interesting quote and thought to share here. Thoughts?

“As audiophiles mature in their hifi journeys, they invariably move away from any theoretical ideals of an absolute or 'correct' sound. They appreciate that like one's choice in personal wardrobe or home décor, the ideal balance of the various sonic qualities which playback can celebrate is purely personal. It's about no more or less than pleasing one's own sense of aesthetics. What those are can change over time. It definitely tends to get refined thus defined over time as one explores sundry flavors to routinely retreat from extreme manifestations to a result that synthesizes multiple viewpoints“ - Srajan Ebaen (Reviewer)

Cannot agree more! And as listeners, we need to progress with refinements towards achieving those 'purely personal' ideals rather than get carried away by the opinions of others. In the process, listening to a variety of setups helps us better define our own goals.

 

[DB1989]

I recently came across this interesting quote and thought to share here. Thoughts?

“As audiophiles mature in their hifi journeys, they invariably move away from any theoretical ideals of an absolute or 'correct' sound. They appreciate that like one's choice in personal wardrobe or home décor, the ideal balance of the various sonic qualities which playback can celebrate is purely personal. It's about no more or less than pleasing one's own sense of aesthetics. What those are can change over time. It definitely tends to get refined thus defined over time as one explores sundry flavors to routinely retreat from extreme manifestations to a result that synthesizes multiple viewpoints“ - Srajan Ebaen (Reviewer)

Dude's trying too hard to sound erudite while stating the obvious.

Srajan definitely took tuitions from Sashi tharoor

( Everything should be made as simple as possible, not simpler - Albert Einstein )

Whether the Congress has great statesmen (or rather, still do) or not, it is undeniable that they have fantastic orators. And if the dude's taken tuition from Tharoor, it was lost on him - Tharoor's exposition is simple but he throws in a delectable word every now and then, and while these words may not be a regular feature in one's vocabulary, they manage to enthrall the audience because its easy to gather the meaning from the context.

 

[Analogous]

Good insights and humorous opinions on the style of the authors quote.
Srajan can be long winded and often takes the long way home. That’s his style I think.
look forward to more on the substance of the quote…

My bits:

it took a long time for me to start to understand and identify my personal favourite sound signature and to realise and accept this could be different from others’

In my younger days I was blissfully unaware of terms like audiophila and such; it was “thank you for the music” I’ll take it wherever I can hear some….and louder the better.

Understanding the major variables affecting SQ took quite a while…reading about, listening, watching, discussing these with friends.
Major variables for me included: recording and mastering quality, room acoustics, electronics, typology and characteristics of amplification, DA conversion, driver and speaker designs, electrical power quality for audio reproduction etc.

And how these all come together in a set up and produce various often unpredictable results.

The process was often bewildering, occasionally frustrating, frequently fun, sometimes delightful, constantly expensive, chasing a chimera

just when I begin to feel hopeful that I have achieved a good sound, the goal posts keep shifting and the quest continues.

I do sometimes wish it were simple. But as H.L. Mencken wisecracked: “ for every complex problem there is always a solution that is simple, elegant and wrong”

Einstein also made a cryptic remark “ Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler”

Truism? Make what you will of these quotes. But do share your experiences.

 

[IndianEars]

I recently came across this interesting quote and thought to share here. Thoughts?

“As audiophiles mature in their hifi journeys, they invariably move away from any theoretical ideals of an absolute or 'correct' sound. They appreciate that like one's choice in personal wardrobe or home décor, the ideal balance of the various sonic qualities which playback can celebrate is purely personal. It's about no more or less than pleasing one's own sense of aesthetics. What those are can change over time. It definitely tends to get refined thus defined over time as one explores sundry flavors to routinely retreat from extreme manifestations to a result that synthesizes multiple viewpoints“ - Srajan Ebaen (Reviewer)

Reminds me of something I read a while ago on Scotch drinking .... A scotch whiskey company person was conducting a tasting session & one of the participants asked him "What is the correct way to drink scotch?". The company person told him that scotch whiskey can be enjoyed in any way the drinker likes ... consume it neat, on the rocks, with water, soda, lemonade, coke .....
To me, the guy was just trying to sell his scotch and after the consumer had put his money down, he did not give a s@#t how it was consumed.

Srajan Ebaen's words.... I agree at the broadest level, but they paint with too broad a brush to meaningfully show the way forward for serious / genuine audiophiles.

Lets begin which my definition of an 'AUDIOPHILE' .... a person who is in the pursuit of excellence in the electronic reproduction of music... OK, I made that up, but I am happy with that definition.

Music lovers may or may not be audiophiles.
But when I enter a room with my audiophile hat on, I am exploring and judging the excellence in electronic music reproduction, in that room.

If I wear my music lover's hat, then there is another room down the hall way ... which may have an AM Radio, playing an old, bad recording ....

The Point is that to judge Excellence (in anything) one needs parameters & their milestones to judge the reproduction. This needs to identify specific parameters and then evaluate how far one has moved in that direction. Its NOT a populist judgement call that pleases all, as Srajan claims

to a result that synthesizes multiple viewpoints“

Audiophiles may judge based on few, or many or all of the below parameters (ofcourse the list below is hardly comprehensive) :

* SoundStage & Imaging, Macro Dynamics, Micro Dynamics, Frequency extension.
(As an example of Soundstage: Are individual instruments localised? Does the soundstage extend beyond the speakers? Is the Image height realistic ... Does the voice appear about 5 1/2 feet above ground level for a typical western male singer? Is the tabla playing about 18 to 24 inches above ground (depending on several inches of platform height on which the Tabla is placed?)

* Tone, Timber, Flow, Ease

* Room Pressurisation, Density of the Image, Scale, High SPL

However a discerning audiophile must select his favoured or select parameters and judge how far the reproduction has progressed along those parameters. He cannot just declare a populist judgement call, or declare that his system delivers audio nirvana, without being able to justify his claim objectively.

As the subject line has stated "Looking for a discussion, argument, not blind contradiction"

Do chip in ....

​

 

[Analogous]

Reminds me of something I read a while ago on Scotch drinking .... A scotch whiskey company person was conducting a tasting session & one of the participants asked him "What is the correct way to drink scotch?". The company person told him that scotch whiskey can be enjoyed in any way the drinker likes ... consume it neat, on the rocks, with water, soda, lemonade, coke .....
To me, the guy was just trying to sell his scotch and after the consumer had put his money down, he did not give a s@#t how it was consumed.

Srajan Ebaen's words.... I agree at the broadest level, but they paint with too broad a brush to meaningfully show the way forward for serious / genuine audiophiles.

Lets begin which my definition of an 'AUDIOPHILE' .... a person who is in the pursuit of excellence in the electronic reproduction of music... OK, I made that up, but I am happy with that definition.

Music lovers may or may not be audiophiles.
But when I enter a room with my audiophile hat on, I am exploring and judging the excellence in electronic music reproduction, in that room.

If I wear my music lover's hat, then there is another room down the hall way ... which may have an AM Radio, playing an old, bad recording ....

The Point is that to judge Excellence (in anything) one needs parameters & their milestones to judge the reproduction. This needs to identify specific parameters and then evaluate how far one has moved in that direction. Its NOT a populist judgement call that pleases all, as Srajan claims


Audiophiles may judge based on few, or many or all of the below parameters (ofcourse the list below is hardly comprehensive) :

* SoundStage & Imaging, Macro Dynamics, Micro Dynamics, Frequency extension.
(As an example of Soundstage: Are individual instruments localised? Does the soundstage extend beyond the speakers? Is the Image height realistic ... Does the voice appear about 5 1/2 feet above ground level for a typical western male singer? Is the tabla playing about 18 to 24 inches above ground (depending on several inches of platform height on which the Tabla is placed?)

* Tone, Timber, Flow, Ease

* Room Pressurisation, Density of the Image, Scale, High SPL

However a discerning audiophile must select his favoured or select parameters and judge how far the reproduction has progressed along those parameters. He cannot just declare a populist judgement call, or declare that his system delivers audio nirvana, without being able to justify his claim objectively.

As the subject line has stated "Looking for a discussion, argument, not blind contradiction"

Do chip in ....

​

Thanks. Lots to think about in this account