• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Steve Guttenberg: I am an Audiophile

OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,376
Likes
234,555
Location
Seattle Area
I face that issue any time I want to rate music in my library. I tend to assign more stars to music that is high fidelity that I would relative to how enjoyable it is. Wish Roon had two ratings: one for music and one for fidelity!
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,204
Likes
16,986
Location
Riverview FL
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/gordon-holts-big-ideas/

"Gordon’s third big idea was “Holt’s Law.” This law states that, “The better the performance, the worse the recording will be, or conversely, the better the recording sounds, the worse the performance will be. This is semi-curmudgeonly acknowledgment of the fundamental problem with recording anything – the more energy directed towards sound quality, the less is aimed at musical quality.

It’s nearly impossible to use state-of-the art recording techniques without impinging on a musician’s comfort zone. Take “direct to disc” recording for instance. Once a musician knows they will have no opportunities for overdubs or additional tracks to clean up mistakes they inevitably play more conservatively. The resulting takes often lack the spontaneous life of a recording where a player can push to the edge of their abilities, knowing that if they blow it they can re-record their tracks."
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
t’s nearly impossible to use state-of-the art recording techniques without impinging on a musician’s comfort zone. Take “direct to disc” recording for instance. Once a musician knows they will have no opportunities for overdubs or additional tracks to clean up mistakes they inevitably play more conservatively. The resulting takes often lack the spontaneous life of a recording where a player can push to the edge of their abilities, knowing that if they blow it they can re-record their tracks."
Do you think that holds true in general for live performances with an audiences? Do performers on stage hold back from letting it all hang out for fear of dropping a note. I find some of the most moving performances were recordings of live concerts. David Gilmours Comfortably Numb on the Pulse live album remains IMHO one of the greatest guitar solos ever.
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,204
Likes
16,986
Location
Riverview FL
Do you think that holds true in general for live performances with an audiences?

I dunno. I just included somebody's expansion of JGH's wry observation.

I don't mind a few warts, and generally like a well recorded live set.
 

tomelex

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
990
Likes
572
Location
So called Midwest, USA
I think the nut of this for me is that an audiophile almost always pays attention to fidelity of music he is hearing in addition to the music itself. A pure music lover doesn't. Even though I very much enjoy good music on even the most basic playback device, analysis of sound happens intuitively as a concurrent affair. I think this is the point that Steve was making in the video. That there is secondary enjoyment in achieving what we think hi-fi is.


I tend to listen to a song to see if it catches my fancy, then if it does, if I am hearing it on the car radio or some other less fidelis system, I want to hear whats fully in the recording, I then want detail retrieval once I hear something I like. I think we do "know" how good things "can" sound, and to me, if the recording is good, it will sound good on most any playback, and when I hear that, and I like the tune, If it is truly a quality recording it will sound better on better gear. If it does not "come through" as a good enough recording, even if I like the song, it does not get recorded, as I am pretty picky about what I record, only the best gets laid down as ones and zeros in my recorder. Lifes too short for background music for me, when I want to listen, it needs to be the best stuff for me.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
My greatest emotional connection to music came in the back seat of my early cars. Listening to the buzz of the tube radio vibrator along with my favorite doo wap and the young cutie in my arms. :p
 

Ken Newton

Active Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
190
Likes
47
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/gordon-holts-big-ideas/

"Gordon’s third big idea was “Holt’s Law.” This law states that, “The better the performance, the worse the recording will be, or conversely, the better the recording sounds, the worse the performance will be. This is semi-curmudgeonly acknowledgment of the fundamental problem with recording anything – the more energy directed towards sound quality, the less is aimed at musical quality.

I've always wondered whether this effect isn't also due to psychoacoustic factors. For example, I often find myself easily lost in music played over a portable or car audio system than an serious audiophile system. Of course, there's no comparison in tonality, or detail, or dynamics, or distortion, or bandwidth, or imaging, etc. It's like my brain more easily integrates, or maybe registers the whole of the musical message without the auditory distractions(?) of a more realistic audio effect produced by a serious system. Just my conjecture.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,781
Location
Oxfordshire
I think a modest system is not too bad when listening to something you know well because your brain fills in the parts that aren't being reproduced or are being masked by background noise.
I often wonder how people managed to enjoy complex music before reproduction systems. Something like a symphony is much more enjoyable if you know it ime and back when one would be lucky to hear a Beethoven symphony more than once in a lifetime how would one appreciate the more complex bits? They go straight over my head first time of listening.
 

Fitzcaraldo215

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2016
Messages
1,440
Likes
632
I've always wondered whether this effect isn't also due to psychoacoustic factors. For example, I often find myself easily lost in music played over a portable or car audio system than an serious audiophile system. Of course, there's no comparison in tonality, or detail, or dynamics, or distortion, or bandwidth, or imaging, etc. It's like my brain more easily integrates, or maybe registers the whole of the musical message without the auditory distractions(?) of a more realistic audio effect produced by a serious system. Just my conjecture.
What you say may be true for some, Ken. I also find myself lost in music sometimes via car radio, FM tabletop, etc. But, for me, I would say that it is not a more pleasurable experience. It is definitely "way better" on my main system.

However, about Holt's Law, no, he was right. But, you have to go back a ways to his heyday and the LP era. I still have a lot of those, unplayed for decades now, and for the most part some almost inverse relationship between sound quality and musical quality existed. Not always, but it seemed the rule rather than the exception on labels like Sheffield and Reference Recordings. It extended into the CD era. I could name a lot of names of my own fool's gallery of musical duds, which were allegedly great sounding. But, I grew weary of it, and started to realize that raves by magazine critics were just not credible about "wonder" recordings, or equipment either, for that matter.

Today, life is very different for me. I think on average sound has improved on commercial recordings vs. the Holt era. Reproduction systems are better, too. At least, mine is a lot better. Yes, there seem to be issues in pop music - loudness wars, etc. Newer recordings still vary in quality due to engineering differences, but not as much as they used to, in my experience. I could be wrong, but it seems there is just not room anymore in the marketplace for recordings that emphasize sound quality at the expense of musical quality.

Personally, in my classical music niche and like our friend Kal Rubinson, I have discovered a sub niche within that of hi rez Mch recordings made over the last 15 years or so. Some, that is many but not all, of these are the best commercial recordings I have ever heard by a fair margin. And, fortunately, most combine high musical quality with superbly engineered sound quality.

In classical music, some tend to quibble that X performance of, say, the Bach B-Minor Mass on CD is "better" musically than Y performance on SACD. But, I no longer find debates of that sort of much interest or validity.
 

Ken Newton

Active Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
190
Likes
47
What you say may be true for some, Ken. I also find myself lost in music sometimes via car radio, FM tabletop, etc. But, for me, I would say that it is not a more pleasurable experience. It is definitely "way better" on my main system.

I concur. Given the choice of hearing music on a radio or on a serious audio system, I would always choose the seriois audio system. I didn't intend to suggest that a portable radio provides a more pleasurable listening experience, only that it sometimes seems I'm more readily able to appreciate on the overall musical message via a decidedly non-audiophile system. Maybe basic playback system listening simply lacks the expectation of high fidelity, and so, frees the brain from sub-consciously entering analytical sound assessment mode. Whatever the reason, I find it an interesting and puzzling musical appreciation phenomena.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,797
Location
NYC
What you say may be true for some, Ken. I also find myself lost in music sometimes via car radio, FM tabletop, etc. But, for me, I would say that it is not a more pleasurable experience. It is definitely "way better" on my main system.

However, about Holt's Law, no, he was right. But, you have to go back a ways to his heyday and the LP era. I still have a lot of those, unplayed for decades now, and for the most part some almost inverse relationship between sound quality and musical quality existed. Not always, but it seemed the rule rather than the exception on labels like Sheffield and Reference Recordings. It extended into the CD era. I could name a lot of names of my own fool's gallery of musical duds, which were allegedly great sounding. But, I grew weary of it, and started to realize that raves by magazine critics were just not credible about "wonder" recordings, or equipment either, for that matter.

Today, life is very different for me. I think on average sound has improved on commercial recordings vs. the Holt era. Reproduction systems are better, too. At least, mine is a lot better. Yes, there seem to be issues in pop music - loudness wars, etc. Newer recordings still vary in quality due to engineering differences, but not as much as they used to, in my experience. I could be wrong, but it seems there is just not room anymore in the marketplace for recordings that emphasize sound quality at the expense of musical quality.

Personally, in my classical music niche and like our friend Kal Rubinson, I have discovered a sub niche within that of hi rez Mch recordings made over the last 15 years or so. Some, that is many but not all, of these are the best commercial recordings I have ever heard by a fair margin. And, fortunately, most combine high musical quality with superbly engineered sound quality.

In classical music, some tend to quibble that X performance of, say, the Bach B-Minor Mass on CD is "better" musically than Y performance on SACD. But, I no longer find debates of that sort of much interest or validity.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,797
Location
NYC
I agree with you, Carl, as you know, but I will quibble with your last point. There are still works for which there are only barely competent performances on MCH hi-rez. The situation is still improving and evolving.
 

Andy Mack

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
3
Likes
2
I will say that that was certainly a very nice video done by Steve. But I too cannot relate to him when he makes statements such as "turntables sound the best" on CNET. BTW, I'm new here. I'm an electrical engineer and a lifelong audio enthusiast. And I have to say that I crack up when I read some of watchnerds responses to other posters! Well done watchnerd!
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,376
Likes
234,555
Location
Seattle Area
Welcome to the forum Andy. Good to have another engineer here. I too dislike a lot of what he writes on CNET.

BTW, seems like you did not read the membership fine print: all compliments need to be made towards me until you reach 100 posts!
 

Andy Mack

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
3
Likes
2
And actually amirm, you also have excellent responses to a lot of the posters. But very funny! Thanks!
 

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
2,823
Likes
4,522
Personally, in my classical music niche and like our friend Kal Rubinson, I have discovered a sub niche within that of hi rez Mch recordings made over the last 15 years or so. Some, that is many but not all, of these are the best commercial recordings I have ever heard by a fair margin. And, fortunately, most combine high musical quality with superbly engineered sound quality.

Always looking for new music, especially classical/orchestral in MCH. Some recent rock recordings, such as the Temple of the Dog 25th Anniversary Blu-Ray, have me despairing that anything but orchestral music, REM, and Pink Floyd will ever be done right in MCH.

Any recommendations?
 

Thomas savage

Grand Contributor
The Watchman
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
10,260
Likes
16,298
Location
uk, taunton
I will say that that was certainly a very nice video done by Steve. But I too cannot relate to him when he makes statements such as "turntables sound the best" on CNET. BTW, I'm new here. I'm an electrical engineer and a lifelong audio enthusiast. And I have to say that I crack up when I read some of watchnerds responses to other posters! Well done watchnerd!
Welcome and thanks for posting , it's always great to have guys who are audio enthusiasts with a EE background around the place.
 

Fitzcaraldo215

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2016
Messages
1,440
Likes
632
Always looking for new music, especially classical/orchestral in MCH. Some recent rock recordings, such as the Temple of the Dog 25th Anniversary Blu-Ray, have me despairing that anything but orchestral music, REM, and Pink Floyd will ever be done right in MCH.

Any recommendations?
Oh, gosh. I have about a gazillion. But, my four favorite classical Mch labels are Channel Classics, BIS, RCO Live and Pentatone, all fairly active. There are others, mostly smaller, that are good.

It is best to browse according to your musical tastes and interests here:

http://www.hraudio.net/

You can restrict your search to just Mch. I have also found their classical reviews fairly reliable as to sound and musical quality. Not all albums are reviewed, of course. But, a lot of my own library has been built from this excellent resource, as well as album reviews by Kal Rubinson occasionally in Stereophile, and Andy Quint more frequently in The Absolute Sound.

I have not bought a CD or stereo recording in over 10 years.
 
Top Bottom