At the risk of raising my blood pressure for absolutely no benefit, I am going to touch on the original post, despite and ignoring the meanderings since.
I've always considered myself an early adopter, perhaps even an avant-gardist, when it comes to hi-fi technology. Over the course of the hi-fi journey, there have been paradigm shifts – the transition to CDs, later embracing streaming, and the shift from bulky floor-standing speakers to sleek active monitors, just to name a few.
Yah, many of us have seen a lot of changes over the years, from my first system in the 1970's 'til now (and I am far from the oldest 'phile on ASR).
In my experience, I've found success in keeping my signal paths straightforward. I've been hesitant to transform my regular home listening environment into an acoustic laboratory with heavy computer usage or reliance on proprietary DSP products. Call me old-fashioned, but I value the simplicity of my setup.
I, and I imagine you, were around for the "minimalist" period of "straight wire with gain" that eschewed all tone controls and emphasized a minimalistic system with as few components in the signal path as possible. I had one of those, but honestly after a very short time decided I wanted tone controls at the very least, as too many recordings just did not sound good to me. Maybe me, maybe the room, probably the speakers and room, but certainly some recordings were "better" than others to my ears. Usually too bright, sometimes bass just over-pumped and boomy.
At the opposite end is my current system, with Trinnov (via a JBL Syntheses SDP-75) signal processing (DSP but not a DSP chip, uses a standard PC motherboard), Oppo (HDMI) for discs (CD/SACD/DVD/BD music and movies), and streaming via SONOS (optical).
I have had analog systems with equalizers and all-pass filters to integrate speakers with subs, adjust for flatter in-room (or targeted) response, and so forth.
You do not say if you have any processing of any sort in your system (tone controls or other EQ, crossovers with phase alignment, etc. -- I assume no DSP based on your comment). Given the huge impact the room has on the sound in the low frequencies, and the difficulty in solving low-frequency room modes and SBIR with just acoustic treatments, I prefer to have some ability to modify and hopefully improve the sound. For a minimal approach, I would probably get some sort of PEQ (analog or digital) to reduce peaks, and let the nulls go after adjusting placement (listener and speakers) as best as possible. If the room was such that I could listen out of the peaks, and the nulls were sufficiently narrow and hopefully at low enough frequency to ignore, then sure I could get by with no correction of any sort.
Alas, my current room is far from ideal and has some issues despite fairly heavy room treatment, so I appreciate having the power of DSP to correct things. My sources are digital so adding processing is essentially transparent to signal quality; I do not have a turntable (been in storage for years) and no real interest in messing with it again (to the chagrin of "real" audiophiles everywhere).
Are there others out there who, like me, choose to forgo room correction, measurement microphones, and other sophisticated tools in favor of a more straightforward audio experience? I'd love to hear about your approaches, experiences, and the reasoning behind your decision.
These days, with the vast majority of sources in digital format, the extra digital processing is transparent so I choose to use it. Being an EE, and with past experience in professional sound production (live and studio), I don't consider a measurement mic and REW terribly complicated to use. I usually spend perhaps 10-20 hours over the course of 2-3 weeks (weekends) dialing in a new system then forget about it. That involves measurements, adjusting speaker and listener positions, and tweaking room correction as needed. I do not continually tweak things; my goal is to get the system as optimized as possible then use it for movies and music without constant (over) analyzing. Once initial setup is done I don't usually change things unless a new component enters the system (not usually when changing a source, speakers definitely, amps usually if just to realign the gain).
In the past, I would adjust speaker and listening position, usually with pink noise and a mic plus some sort of spectral display, but sometimes with test tones or narrow-band (e.g. 1/3-octave) noise and ears. Sometimes I had an equalizer, sometimes not. Loudness control was nice as my average listening level was often low'ish (though a lot higher then than now) in deference to parents and neighbors. I had a set of music tracks I knew well and would use to assess the results (on LPs or tape back then). I did use Dolby or dbx noise reduction on "mix" tapes made from the 1/2" masters recorded live or from my records.
Is simplicity still a virtue in the ever-evolving landscape of audio technology?
"Simplicity" can cover a lot of ground. I don't have the right room to use a "simple" system with no controls, but plugging in a mic and pushing a button to run a room correction program is pretty simple IMO. An AVR can be daunting but setup is usually pretty easy for consumers. A two-channel system with minimal controls is actually more work for me to set up, as without the ability to correct the impact of the room or speaker response it takes more time in positioning and perhaps (typically analog) EQ to optimize the sound. Depends on the room and speakers, natch. Among the best sound I had was in a large room with a very basic setup and just enough room treatment to provide even response through most of the frequency range. My current room is rather ugly, acoustically-speaking.
Virtue-signaling is common among audiophiles who espouse minimal controls and basic components, to the point of minimal active devices in the signal chain (e.g. SET amplifiers). And of course they rationalize away all the processing and devices that went into making the recordings they reproduce so minimally... Having components that are very sensitive to speakers or source material, finicky TT setup and fiddling to get the best sound from records, living with undesirable room response characteristics to avoid EQ, and so forth is not a virtue to me.
I lean toward simplicity for the user, hiding the complexity behind a user-friendly interface that simplifies system optimization in a one-shot approach that allows the user (me) to rapidly set up and integrate a new system, and then forget about it. After setup, I just want to listen (watch, both).
FWIWFM - Don
) speakers for relaxed and hedonistic listening, inasmuch as the adjustment and fine-tuning process can be a PITA, I see no major disadvantage in adopting the OP's attitude - as long as the ratio of pleasure obtained/pain taken is perceived favorably.
