High Fidelity (Haute Fidélité in French) Audio

[North_Sky]

What is it and what does it need to survive?
Is it the opposite of Infidelity?

For a mechanical loudspeaker system to reproduce music recordings in their original state, what's the order du jours? Can you trust your audio partner (rig) with full confidence? How should it be constructed...what kind of tubes and transistors? ...For the utmost fidelity.

* Wiki wake up: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fidelity

 

[Feanor]

Long, long ago when I was first interested in hi-fi that was apparently what enthusiasts were interest in -- fidelity of the playback chain to the recorded sound.

But over the years an "audiophile" sensibility emerged. At first it stated as fidelity to the live performance where that wasn't necessarily the same as what was on the records. Further evolution was to fidelity to live performance despite what may be on the recording, and finally to what sounds good, that is, if necessary to correct recorded sound to some subjective euphonic ideal.

 

[tomtoo]

You not have to care about tubes or transistors. They have to do the same job. You just have to care about the input and outputsignal.

 

[North_Sky]

What comes in & out ... I like that. Sounds like high fidelity to me when that transition is clean all the way.

Shortest signal path?

 

[Hipper]

Esclavage is the answer for partner fidelity. Using audiophile cables of course.

 

[tomtoo]

What comes in & out ... I like that. Sounds like high fidelity to me when that transition is clean all the way.

Shortest signal path?

I has not to be short, it has to be clean. It's the same. You not have to care how long the path is. You only have to care about input and output. If the long way is cleaner 'take the long way home'.

 

[tomtoo]

When i hear about euphonics and other BS i could start to cry.
HiFi is easy defined as reproducing a input signal as original as possible on the output.
There is noise in the input? Yes ok, thats the input signal. You dont like noise? Who likes? You filter it out? Yes thats ok. Is it hifi? No!
You enjoy added 2'end harmonis added to a voice? Thats ok. Is it HiFi? No!
HiFi not means it has to sound the most pleasant to you. It means reproduce the input signal at the output the most original.
If you enjoy the input signal changed more than the original, absolutly no problem. It's just not HiFi.

 

[tomtoo]

It's interesting. Let's imagine a old record where you can heare a lot thd and noise from the mics and the mixing console. Now let's imagine a perfect algorithm that could calculate out that errors in the original recording and would show you much more the original voice of the singer. Would that be HiFi? No, couse it changed the input signal.

 

[tomtoo]

Sry have to add something.

Hifi means the rough truth, shurly you can say a little makeup here and there looks more nice. But thats not Hifi.

 

[sergeauckland]

When i hear about euphonics and other BS i could start to cry.
HiFi is easy defined as reproducing a input signal as original as possible on the output.
There is noise in the input? Yes ok, thats the input signal. You dont like noise? Who likes? You filter it out? Yes thats ok. Is it hifi? No!
You enjoy added 2'end harmonis added to a voice? Thats ok. Is it HiFi? No!
HiFi not means it has to sound the most pleasant to you. It means reproduce the input signal at the output the most original.
If you enjoy the input signal changed more than the original, absolutly no problem. It's just not HiFi.

I wish I could give this a double like! I've been arguing this on other forums for years. HiFi isn't a matter of opinion, what sounds best, it's what measures best.

S.

 

[tomtoo]

@sergeauckland
If you look at the old hifi din45500 norm. There is no talk about pleasent sound. There is only talk about input and output signal. Change the input as less as possible.

 

[tomtoo]

I wish I could give this a double like! I've been arguing this on other forums for years. HiFi isn't a matter of opinion, what sounds best, it's what measures best.

S.

Think about every one whould decide whats more hifi??
HaHa. No it's easy, hifi is not to change the input signal. If it sounds pleasent is not importend. If the input signal sounds not pleasant, yes than the output also not sounds pleasant. Thats easy and the only way to define hifi.

 

[Feanor]

Think about every one whould decide whats more hifi??
HaHa. No it's easy, hifi is not to change the input signal. If it sounds pleasent is not importend. If the input signal sounds not pleasant, yes than the output also not sounds pleasant. Thats easy and the only way to define hifi.

Another example of "garbage in, garbage out".

 

[Orfanik]

Another example of "garbage in, garbage out".

It's often the way it is

 

[sergeauckland]

Another example of "garbage in, garbage out".

Yes, but at least the garbage out would be a high fidelity garbage.

S.

 

[ahofer]

This seems like a good place to post this song again:

 

[Orfanik]

Yes, but at least the garbage out would be a high fidelity garbage.

S.

With very Hifi devices yes it is. Often I find the recordings aren't that quality we are expecting of… But some (most often and not always recent ones) are really amazing !!!

 

[JeffS7444]

It's interesting. Let's imagine a old record where you can heare a lot thd and noise from the mics and the mixing console. Now let's imagine a perfect algorithm that could calculate out that errors in the original recording and would show you much more the original voice of the singer. Would that be HiFi? No, couse it changed the input signal.

Perhaps this is getting more the realm of sound restoration, but should we accept speed inaccuracies including wow and flutter, and refrain from removing hum from the original recording if we have the means to correct them?

 

[tomtoo]

Perhaps this is getting more the realm of sound restoration, but should we accept speed inaccuracies including wow and flutter, and refrain from removing hum from the original recording if we have the means to correct them?

You see thats the interesting part. If it's on the record(source) removing it, sounds maybe better, but it's not more hifi imo. Every change is some kinde of a effect. You can like it or not, but it is a change. And thats not hifi.
Edit says: The problem would start if you have to discuss which effects are pleasent or which effekt sounds more like the original unrecordet source? You would open the doors to hell.

 

[ahofer]

I agree that "high fidelity" implies faithfulness to source. And generally I only care a lot about that with classical music and (sort of) Jazz, (ie where I have a solid live reference as a concert-goer).

Where things can get mixed up is how much of the original performance space are you supposed to hear in your listening room - what is accurate in that trade-off? There are close-mic'd, dead room recordings, and there are recordings in huge churches. I guess that's more of a recording issue than a reproduction issue, although ambience reproduction strikes me as an additional complication in your home setup.