Is it the shoemaker's dilemma? Or, perhaps they are so used to real sound that reproduced sound doesn't interest them? And check out our newest RU-vid channel ru-vid.com/show-UCSObrk2ePzVwHgCtxzHU22g Octave Records.
I think You are spot on already with your first answer. High end audio do not typically excel giving a deeper insight into the musical aspects of music hence do not typically give a better experience in that respect. When focusing on audio reproduction quality it seem easy to improve some aspects of the reproduction that are less significant musically while actually laying musically significant shortcomings of the equipment more obvious ending up in a musically less satisfactory result. I find that all too often with high end audio.
Answering as a musician and sound engineer: 1) Most musicians can not afford high and audio gear 2) We do not invest in high end audio to listen to music while we sit on the sofa. We invest into gear to MAKE music. This gear can be instruments, mics, studio monitors, computers, software, etc... 3) Recording studios do not record, monitor and mix through the kind of speakers that home stereo enthusiasts listen to music on. We want speakers that do not add the amount of color I generally hear on expensive "audiophile" gear. We need to create mixes that will sound good on anything, from earbuds, to car stereos, to lousy little bluetooth speakers, etc... And for that, speakers with flat response are better 4) A good pair of studio monitors cost less than "audiophile" gear. I do have the chance to listen to music through my neighbors hi-end system on occasion and it does sound great, but I would not want that kind of set-up in my studio. If someone gave me a stereo like that I would not turn it down, but if I had that kind of money to spend on audio gear it would go into my studio.
Pretty much spot on. It is an expensive endeavor. There comes a point where there is very little return for such large expenditures. Lastly allot of "high end audio gear" is literally snake oil in a box. The really amusing thing about "high end" is the fact that allot of old consoles used common Op Amps in the gain and filter sections by the hand full. So the reality is that many much loved recordings that were raved about for their sound are the result of common off the shelf parts one would find in the common integrated amp or boom box. The best money spent on audio is the speakers. Flat, clear and extended sound from good design.. Not the gimmics A certain speaker maker you know the speakers of which I speak, use to sell bad boxes! I know more than a few musicians and all have basic kit to listen to. All but the most successful simply can't afford a good set of speakers, an amp, and a good preamp to play their sources thru. Frankly most modern sources render high end a waste. I do have a PS Audio 200Cx amp and a home made simple class A preamp to drive speakers but past this is simply a waste of money. And I have heard some of the very best speakers that were made
So glad someone did the heavy lifting and explained this properly. Every single musician I know (who also records/produces their work) has nice monitors. The last thing any of us want is “High end audiophile gear” that adds low or high end hyped sound. We want the most neutral sound possible that is faithful to the original recording and mix. As far as I’m concerned, we’re the ones doing it right. I could never go back to regular speakers after getting used to a proper mixing environment.
Precisely. I do care about what sounds true and pure, but I'm not willing to join a psuedo-religious cult who believe that copper cables "sound warm", and silver "sounds bright" when that's clearly based on their fucking colour.
For me all this turntable madness is something i can`t understand. If you`ll look at the vinyl record under microscope, you will see that groove is very far from being smooth so it is NOT perfect analogue image of sound(apart from that most of the modern vinyl records are based on digital master). Digital sound is practical, eco-friendly and excellent quality that don`t decline over time.
100% agree. I feel strange in the sense that I see good audio as easily obtainable and there is really only improvement to be had. Now, I say good audio, not great audio lol. Great audio is hard
THIS. As a guitar player of 25 years with a popular music diploma, I see little value in obsessing over equipment. If the songs are good and the performance is good, it will be just as apparent on moderately priced gear as it will on the sort of ridiculously overpriced, cock substitute shit that so-called audiophiles swear by. I currently have a Pro-ject turntable plugged straight into some active speakers and that allows me to enjoy my records just fine.
My listening environment is a studio. IMO, top shelf studio gear is as good as it gets. And, I spent significantly less than the typical audiophile does when chasing performance numbers. Additionally, good studio gear allows the listener to adjust parameters to a finer degree. I personally think the listening environment has far more to do with good sound than how many dollars are spent on esoterica.
Audiophiles become audiophiles because of their love for music and their desire to have electronic equipment reproduce it as close to a live rendition of same as is reasonably possible. There is no denying however that in pursuance of the hobby, like most other hobbies, one can become somewhat swept up with certain aspects of it and so yes, listening to how different types of equipment reproduces the music often plays a major part.
Sometimes an musician doesn't find that a song interesting as well as an normal person because he hears that chord progression everyday or he already knownledged about the harmonization that might impress audiences but it's just boring to an musician/artist.Musician always focus on the new things,new chord progression,new vibe and groove instead of enjoying music as normal people.Some gerne of music like electronic/funk/jazz...etc focus on the effects of the audio signal(synthesizing) instead of the true recreation of signals.
Ahh, the irony of upper middle-class, Audiophiles. Buying a speaker lead that costs more than the microphone the music was recorded on. Owning speakers 4 times as expensive as the ones the music was mixed on. Most audiophile gear only highlights problems of the original recording. What are they hoping to hear? Secret music only $80k can unlock?
My old mate is an audiophile and his favourite band was Burzum. A band that recorded vocals through a headphone speaker modified to be used as a microphone to sound as bad as possible.
@@DodInTheSky lol.........I actually recorded black metal through my earphones ones. Me playing guitar, my buddy grunting in the mic. Granted, I was 14 and it sounded like crap. But we had loads of fun.
Yeah I bought a Crown amp thinking it would sound good and my onkyo was a cheap low watt receiver and sounds better. China made Crown unit sucked so beware!🤑
@@DodInTheSky Of course you need a high end audiophile system for Burzum. If you listen using a normal stereo system there is a chance the the distortion of your stereo and Burzum's noises cancel each other out and you can actually hear music. That would be a disaster.
As a musician for 52 years, and also a recording engineer, I’m interested in hearing all the instruments in a recording clearly. I expect my playback system to reproduce the source audio accurately. But I also have an ear trained in hearing things non musicians might not hear. I’m perfectly content listening to music on my iPhone through a nice pair of headphones, or even the Apple Earpods. The bass response is good, and the high end is crisp. I can hear what’s going on in the music. Is the audio quality perfect? No. But I’m listening to the music, not the audio gear. I do appreciate high quality systems though. I had a very nice one some years back. But more often than not I prefer listening on good headphones. It’s the same with food... I know the difference between a gourmet meal, and pizza. But I still enjoy both for what they are. And musical equipment like guitar amps aren’t hi-fi. They color the tone of the instrument. That’s why we fuss over it. And most musicians look at claims by some audiophiles, the people who buy $1,400 speaker cables, or $600 wooden knobs, with amusement. We know that stuff doesn’t matter. The studios that the music was recorded in didn’t use that stuff. It’s viewed as snake oil.
its a different mindset : producer vs consumer. we have to make sure the mix sounds good on crap.. which may actually limit what it "could" sound like on a perfect system a little but not by much.. but every recording ever has been made that way so now these "high end" systems are made to "hype" the frequencies we tend to roll off so the buick speakers don't fart
@@lanchanoinguyen2914 The recording and the playback system are two different things. We can all appreciate music even on systems that aren’t the best.
@@kebman Gold-plated connectors don't rust or oxidize the way standard connectors do, they conduct electricity better, and are typically more durable in construction. Better cables and connectors aren't always worth the price tag of Monster or Rocketfish, but there are real benefits to it.
His answer was in his own question: “they are obsessed with finding the perfect sound of their instruments”. If you’re obsessed with something you’re not really looking at much else. I lived it.
The actual answer is that there's a lot of stumbling and bumbling to pump out some BS reply because the truth is that the whole industry is mostly a scam to sell junk electronics that really don't do anything special.
As a musician myself, I have what I consider an ok receiver, speakers, turntable. I do appreciate vinyl and great sounding equipment. It's kind of ironic that you can buy the same amp that Eddie Van Halen uses for $2000, but audiophiles have $10k amps for each component. Sometimes these 150k systems are more money that the studio equipment an album was recorded on.
That is a very good point indeed. My sound system at home is decent but not over the top. Sometimes audiophiles spending more money to interlinks then the price a studio payed for a cable to connect a studio microphone. I get your point completely. Audio tech is a complete different and in my opinion a strange world where sound is more important then the music. Music must be the main goal. Not the audio sound.
guitar centers has used Digitech RP pedals and they sound really good! Into a compressor and then into a USB autdio interfacer and then onto t Audacity and its easy to make a decent recording. $10k buys a Fractas Axe, New Hand wired plexi, lots of used yamaha Se, SC, SSE, acoustic and bass guitars. Raface DX, sENNHEISHER CONDERSE MICROHPNES, radial engineering di BOXES, ETC. thankes you and thum,bbes ups!
Well, I'm a musician myself. I didn't have money to purchase High-end equipment so I got into learning and after that, making my own stuff. I now have a system that's all DIY made and sounds (and looks) amazing. It took me only 25 years LOL
Professionals in music and audio just aren’t as much into wasting money on pure snake oil gear, perhaps because we know it’s often nothing more than show-off snake oil. We can better agree on the value of a great speaker than on a US$1000 power cable.
Musicians are like actors. If you deliver a great performance, it doesn't matter whether you watch it on a square TV or an IMAX screen, the quality of your work is not measured by image clarity, but by the emotional response you generate with your audience.
To me that is the point. Listen to great old records... you still get the idea of the great job done, even if the record is comoletely worn out. you can tell how charlie Parker must have sounded even though you only have scratchy records left. the medium in between just does not matter that much.
In my experience a good audio system makes it much easier to get closer to the emotional content of a piece of music by revealing more detail about a vocalists performance and the specific sound of each instrument, as well as how they are being played. A more nuanced sound with greater detailed is especially beneficial when listening to unfamiliar performances and musical genres.
In Poland we have a saying "Szewc w dziurawych butach chodzi" which translates into "A shoemaker walks in a leaky shoes". It seems that people have always separated their craft from their personal needs.
Instruments cost a lot. A musician is always going to prefer getting a new toy that they can play with rather than an audio system for sound reproduction. To them, playing instruments is the active part of music. Listening is inherently passive. If you were a sportsman, you'd rather play the game than sit on the bench and spectate.
I must say that this video and the comments are awesome! - my thoughts, perhaps is also a factor that (generally) making music is in the art/culture corner, while building audio systems is (mostly) technical/beta. Ask a violin player about a toroidal transformer, ask a technician about Beethoven's symphony 7. These two fields rarely overlap in one person. Obviously in this world today an art career is almost a certain path into poverty (which I think is a shame) - while a technical career doesn't have this problem. Just some ideas.
As a Professional Musician I can second that. Most musicians can't afford high end gear. Also If you spend your day making music, you like quiet when you get home! and finally nothing can compare to sitting in the middle of a professional orchestra
No dumbass. They listen to uncolured sound, they listen to the truth and Audiophile Audiophile hi-fi don't provide that sound. People who work or listening to recording studio don't use Audiophile hifis. They want to hear the truth. Hifi speakers CD, they use are at 70+ khz beyond human hearing and bass low as 9hz down to 3khz. They use 5 way or 4 way speakers with super tweeter and mid_bass midrange tweeter bass, subBass and subwoofer.
A top session musician who has played on literally thousands of albums in his career was asked what he liked to listen to at home - and he said "I prefer working in my garden".
That sounds similar to what Lee Sklar would say. I know a lot of pro musicians who feel the same. Most people who work a job 40 - 80 hours per week don't go home and do the same job at home in their free time. "Must a have a balance." ~ Mr. Miyagi
@@rb032682 I think everyone is different. I spend my days teaching high school music - concert and jazz band and, before Covid, spend many of my weekends gigging or recording live ensembles. I listen to music on the way to work, on the way home, when I get home, at night and so on. I never seem to tire of it, but everyone is different.
@@ChrisHaas1 - I agree. I can't say I "tire" of music. Everyone is different and there are a lot of different musical situations. When I did nothing but play music for a living, 1971 - 1985, I couldn't afford good home stereo gear. I was more concerned about getting a better guitar or amp if I had any money to spend on musical things. No recorded audio can compete with a good live performance, so I had little motivation to make good speakers and a turntable a priority. It's great you are teaching HS concert and jazz band. 99% of the fulltime musicians I currently know have a spouse with a good day gig. lol
As a mixing and mastering engineer, the music production process teaches (the hard way) that the most important things are the ones that make the biggest changes, and those are the first ones in this process: Lyrics, instruments, arrangements, compositions and ideas. Investing in these instead of the stereo reproduction systems, or even in expensive production gear, will result in a better song at the end. Also, musicians, producers and engineers know that most people are not audiophiles, so the music must connect to the people and send the message even through the crappiest listening devices on the planet. In the end, emotion is what matters the most.
Yes. You’re talking about the software part of the equation. For us audiophiles, it’s not only about that. It’s also about the hardware, as better hardware allows us to emotionally enjoy the music better.
The older I get, the less I value pristine recordings and the more I value honest, realistic music. It doesn’t have to be perfect, it just has to make you feel good.
Not to mention the fact that as people get older their hearing acuity declines. I laughed recently at Neil Young complaining about the quality of modern recordings. As an old rocker it is highly unlikely that he can hear any frequencies above about 9 KHz and probably after a lifetime of blowing out his eardrums with loud music much less than that.
Musician here. I’m starting my journey for the last few yrs. I will say most musicians are broke and can’t afford Ps audio. We would rather have a good amp and music gear!
Hello mine frends! I cants affordsd ampes no more so when I get money I gets used dititechs or other pedela fromgutercenteres and use the amp simulutar in DFITECH RP 355 AND cabinte sim into udb autdoi interface, Distortone pedals dont soundes as nice as turbes ampes or FIGITICHES rp pedels. TANKEY YOUES AND THUMBBES USP!
You took the words right outta my mouth. 80% of musicians are usually hustling for a gig. They're not necessarily interested in providing uncle Paul a comfortable living when they're own needs of room, board and spousal support aren't met . He's such a charming man thinking PS Audio is a purveyor of alternate means to live music. Someone really should break him the news flash...
I just imagined audiophile Grimes fans, listening to music mixed on a laptop in headphones through a $30,000 stereo and orgasming about overtones and clarity that even the paid Grammy-awarded mastering engineer didn't hear in his lifetime, ever :D
@@PerkeleKeyboardist When making music the microphones and programs will capture and create and deal with frequencies you can't even hear as a human being, much less any crappy speakers you choose to work with. Then, it's up to the speakers and equipment to play it back properly. Not much people really invest in quality sound, but a $1,000 investment can get you a very nice home theater setup to enjoy movies and music in ways you never could otherwise.
@@mariomguy yeah, a pair of studio-grade reference monitors, exactly such as those the music is being mixed on. Anything else, be it $10 Aliexpress earbuds or $20,000 peudiophile stereo is just distroting the musical information in comparison to the intended sound observed by mixing engineer, i.e. lying.
@@PerkeleKeyboardist LOL, wow. And yet, studio monitors all vary in quality, bass response, mid performance, and treble highs. Every single pair of headphones "lies" because none of them can reproduce perfectly flat, nor should they be expected to. Poor quality headphones will round out highs and provide muddy or missing bass. Medium-grade headphones will cut out midtones, some worse than others. Even studio monitors struggle with accurate highs because that's just a limitation with most magnetic drivers. A good set of monitors can reproduce music accurately, honestly, and with great quality. The more you spend, the more you'll tend to improve on all fronts, with diminishing returns past $150-$400. You don't need to spend $20,000 to get something decent to mix with, but you do need something. And the higher up you go, the better reproduction you'll get. But every pair of headphones is different.
I’m a serious, professional, classical musician, with 3 music degrees, who studied with several teachers of the highest caliber, and experience in many acclaimed music organizations over the past 50 years. Even though I consider myself to be an audiophile now, this was definitely not the case a few years ago. I realized that reproduced music never compared with the live music I was making with others. I would rather make music than spend a lot of money to listen to recorded versions. Also, as a clarinetist, if I had some money, I wanted to spend it on perhaps a new mouthpiece. Or maybe an A clarinet for orchestra, or (heavens!) maybe a bass clarinet. I have pianist friends who are playing on an old upright piano at home. They want to save for a grand piano. Then I have other friends who are string players, who would like to acquire a better ($$$) violin or cello. Audiophile interests have always seemed very expensive. What happened to me was that I had been on orchestra boards and the manager of a semi-professional ensemble. With a couple of these we lost the recording service that would record all live performances. Unable to quickly find a suitable replacement, I bought a small but good quality recording set-up with a DAT recorder so that I could do it myself. What started out with 2 microphones and small mixer, became 3 mics, then 8-10 mics, and eventually 35 microphones and the ability to record 24 channels simultaneously (not on a computer). As my interest in re-mixing and mastering grew, I was disappointed in my nearfield monitors, and relied on high quality headphones. When I finally decided I needed to use high quality full-range speakers for re-mixing/mastering and listening to recorded music, I fell into the grip of high end audio. I think if serious musicians realized they could actually put together a great sounding system for a very modest investment, I believe they would be more interested. I have another generalization on musicians vs audiophiles. If you ask 50 classical musicians to list their favorite recordings and ask 50 audiophiles the same thing, I think you will see a difference in how they choose. I think the musicians would select based on the musical interpretation and emotional involvement, not on the pure sonic quality of the recording. Although these qualities might be recognized, I think a lot of audiophiles would start the other way around, making some selections that musicians would shun. Again, I think musicians would rather create music than re-create music. However, I’m thoroughly enjoying both!
People can be be a musician and a listener of sounds systems as well. My opinion is that most musicians have never actually heard a good system so they have no reference point.
You do sound like an over educated dweeb. 1000 words to say what most people say in a simple sentence. I think you should go back and get your 4th and 5th degrees. They will appreciate your nerdy wordy rhetoric.🥱. By the way I do agree with your second to last sentence. I didn’t read the rest of it.
I'm a musician. And I'm a sound engineer and producer. And I'm definitely not an audiophile. When I make music and when I mix music, I do that for ALL people, my music and my mix should sound good on every system, at least to some extend. We don't mix for high end systems, most of us at least. And what you mentioned, we mix for emotion, for impact. Many years ago I listened to a demo of a very expensive amp and speaker set and was blown away when they played a classical guitar piece and then a string ensemble piece. It was incredible! However, when someone put in a rock cd it was... it still sounded beautiful, clean. It wasn't rock anymore. Then someone put in a house cd and that was even worse. The bass drum just bounced and was deep, but it was missing every form of character. It was TOO clean. See where I'm going with this? This high end sound is not always the best for what you hear and some music actually sounds worse on a high end system than it does on a cheaper system. This may not be everybody's experience, some will totally disagree. But I want to ask, how many of you audiophiles have acoustically treated your room for audio, to give space to the sound waves? How many may actually have a 10000 dollar system sounding like a 200 dollar system because of standing waves, room resonance and lost bass because it can't "breathe"? Think hard. Cause these are the things we audio engineers care about. We have found that treating the room makes a thousand times more difference than a shielded cable or a 3000 dollar speaker. We actually truly care about sound, but in a very different and I think more scientific way.
Agreed. I have a pretty good hifi system but sometimes I'll throw the wall in my Panasonic portable cassette player and set it down next to me and just jam it all the way through.
Your experience is due to the audiophile’s bias based on the types of music that they listen to. If you put together a system that makes acoustic instruments sound good because you only listen to classical, then that system probably does not sound good for rock or electronic music. This is why I think my system sounds ok with all music because I built it with a focus on making all kinds of music sound good.
what are you talking about. Most proper audiophiles understand that no matter the price of the speaker, if the room isn't treasted correctly, you will not be able to hear nor experience the reproduction capabilities of said high end speaker.
@@Paulkatz123 Why? Also what does publications have to do with the basic understanding that many audiophiles practice. Publications, marketing are all for the rich, ignorant masses. They do not authentically represent what a large number of us practice nor believe in. Just like the idiots who think buying a $400 analog cable will suddenly allow the audio reproduction to sound cleaner, and more transparent over a well engineered $50 cable.
I’ve talked about this with a couple of my colleagues, we all either record or mix in the studio most days of the week. And it is true, apart from some guys using their stage in-ears to listen to music on the go, nobody owns high end audio gear privately. The consensus was, that for most who spend all day listening critically on pro equipment in a great room, it’s actually a relief to have a little less detail for recreational listening after work.
And musical gears are expensive. you spend thousands and thousands just to get the sound that you want to produce, but the key is that it's what you 'produce' when you are a musician, whereas that audioquest patch cable can only 'reproduce' at best.
$500 on a patch cable to listen to music recorded with $100 mics running through decades-old corroded patch bays, a few stages of 90s A->D conversion, and carried on Hosa patch cables. Pedalboards are even funnier as now you've got a dozen blocks of die-cast medal running on sketchy power supplies bodged together with unbalanced cables handling a signal in the hundreds of millivolts with mostly analog circuitry, sometimes also decades old, sometimes then running into a tube amp mic'd up with an SM57 in a basement with comforters hanging over chairs...and you can make a platinum album like that, but audiofools will pay thousands for cable elevators.
@@panzerfan And they spend 400 grand on a car and that's COOL but not hi fi. Isn't that just a little bit hypocritical? People are allowed to spend mony on what they like. People think canned music is EVIL when it's played on a high end stereo system, but canned music from their bluetooth shit speakers is still just as EVIL isn't it? It's still canned music still. Why should reproduction quality and expense make it evil? wtf
Proves my point that musicians know how modern recordings are often made and that's why we're reluctant to invest in super-high end audio. I'm interested in high-end audio to a logical extent but I'm not going to chase the dragon as I know some do. The only reason I'm into high-end audio is because l like to listen to and reverse-engineer production ideas. Getting that separation of sound so I can hear details is what I like. Again, going to insane levels isn't important to me. Same with cars. Sure I'd love to ride in a 2M hyper car but the differences between that and a 80K Corvette or the acceleration you can get in a Tesla are only important to those who care about the nuances that blur the lines between the thrill you get out of use and the thrill you get via pride of ownership/investment.
As a musician I know that you can never have a perfect recording. Live sound will NEVER be the same as recorded sound. I don't care how much you spend. So...if it's good enough it's good enough. I'm an audiophile who knows the difference and can be okay with less than perfect. Especially when I feel the hobby can many times take away from the music itself. Analysis of music quality degrades the experience of it.
As a non-musician who does music mixing and recording as a hobby, I've got to say that I prefer a well mixed and mastered record to live sound. To me, live sound is simply inferior in clarity and nuance. That said, the emotional impact of actually being in the room with the musicians and hearing new melodies morph and transform in reaction to my presence is definitely something that cannot be reproduced. Studio recordings strive to be a perfect, idealized image of the music. Live sound is much more visceral.
@@piotrgraniszewski8544 you raise a great point that I'll agree with. Properly recorded sound can sound better than a live performance, but I've seen and have experienced both scenarios where either one is better than the other which depends on many variables. I was just pointing out the fact that many audiophiles want to achieve the effect of a musician or singer performing live in their rooms which is simply impossible to do. Realizing that may save a lot of frustration and money.
@@piotrgraniszewski8544 well said. I've seen many great acts live that I was extremely disappointed with because the audio quality sucked. I demand audio quality, live or recorded. Guess that's why I hate punk rock, or whatever it's called nowadays.
I'm an engineer and musician. I've had a pair of Mackie HR824 Mk1 monitors for about 20 years. They are the foundation of my entertainment system. The joy they have brought me is immeasurable. Any kind of music sounds amazing.
Listening is such a subjective experience. When I was a kid, all I could afford was a $5 portable AM radio. But it didn't stop me falling in love with music.
I would still be annoyed by the noisy bad line, and if it was the first time they were saying it, I'd probably be excited, but still annoyed about the line...
I’m a musician. When I have money, I upgrade the quality of gear that I use to MAKE music not REPRODUCE it. So I’ll buy a mic or a mic preamp or something for recording. And the second reason is that I monitor using inexpensive ($400 new in the 80’s) Yamaha NS-10m’s. You will see those white speaker cones in studios all over the world. They have become a standard in the industry because ... mixes that sound good on NS-10m’s will sound good anywhere. Those expensive speakers are one of the last purchases I could afford to make.
That’s because they are so rare. Most knifophiles have never even seen a David Bowie knife and plebes like us would not really appreciate the superior quality of a $2 million pre-CBS cobalt-molybdenum blade Ziggy Stardust boning knife.
I'm a professional musician and an audiophile. Most of the comments are spot on, lots of us are broke. I'm fortunate work in a military band and there is a small group of audiophiles in it. Not everyone will agree with me, but I believe I understand both perspectives. Most of us that were also audiophiles, also worked in sound production, recording, mixing, etc. When I am in the rehearsal hall hearing people practice, there's a visceral part to it. The low brass, timpani, drums, bass, etc all hit you in the chest. When I mix, I want that same effect, and I want to hear it the same way I do when I'm in rehearsal or sitting in front of the band during a tune I don't play in. I aim for the same sound and feel in my home system which is only attainable through high end audio (on a musician's budget - yes it's possible). Now for the musicians that don't care for high end audio. That one is simple in my opinion. We are surrounded by music all day. As much as I love it, its hard work. My ears are exhausted and need a rest by the end of the day. This is blasphemy in the audio community, but after a hard day's work we just need some peace and quiet! lol I love the system I put together, and it sounds like the musicians are right there. But after hearing music all day all week, I tend to save the audio for my weekends, and listen to music that I don't play. It reminds me why I fell in love with music and audio in the first place.
Yeah most people here do not know anything about music. I now a lot of other band members, music teachers and so on. We do not have the time to sit and listen to music. If you have 2 hours free after a long day work. You’ll use the 2 hours to practice your instrument. The only people who sit in a quiet room to listen to music are unemployed. Or living with their parents. If you have your house to clean. Food to cook, shopping, work and hobbies and kids. There’s no way you have time to sit and listen to music or even read books Most of us musicians who buy expensive audio is just to watch movies with the family. In my case I bought a 1000 euro speakers because I can. The difference of 100 euro to 1000 euro is nothing. Only 900 euro. I couldn’t care less.
Maybe because high end sound is still a thousand miles from sounding like live music. So to a musician the difference between high end sound and a boom box doesn't seem very significant.
As a musician, I can tell you that what I hear when listening to my Skull Candy earphones is not what's coming out of the earphones. My brain fills in all the complexity of the music that I've heard before (and some that I haven't! Hello, misheard lyrics), and incorporates that into the experience of listening to my earphones. It's the imagination that fills in the gaps in audio quality to some degree, and I'm sure everybody is like this to some extent. Why I'm interested in high end audio (and why I even have a high end audio system at all! i.e. monitors) is to record my own music. Mind you, I would've wanted a good audio system anyway eventually, turntable and everything, but recording music is a much greater impetus for me towards developing a good audio system than listening to music. If you can RECORD your music the best, it will translate the best to a multitude of other devices, and so more people can enjoy more of your song's reproduction than if you had a crappy recording, though a moving song is always a moving song, no matter how well it's recorded, which is why I still love listening to the demo version of Catamaran by Yawning Man, as I like that performance better than the official version, though it's great too. Just some insight from a musician
The emotional and nostalgia of listening to music should always come first, quality second. As a audiophile and musician I believe this is the reason we love music. I don't think many people remember certain song from there youth, that reminded them of someone or some fond event and though...wow what a great recording. Of course the music takes a whole new level of experience when the quality is great, but never forget why we listen to music in the first place.
Russ (This is my father's name, therefore, you're not only correct, but also great!): We've made Paul consider musicians, here, this time around. This is why his mind came up with 'David' instead of James!
David Jones renamed himself after the Bowie knife. The surname "Bowie" does exist in the UK and is though to be of Scottish origin. Coincidentally our Dave had at least some Scottish ancestry.
Usually because it sounds nothing like their instruments whether that's natural instruments or electric like guitars. No musician has ever been fooled by audiophile gear versus the real thing. Ever.
My father was a professional musician with a world renowned orchestra. To him the sound from a perfect recording through an awesome hiding was nothing like the sounds (plural) on the stage or in the orchestra pit, which were filled with groans, grunts and other noises of players at work. On the other hand, get him into the audience and he didn’t care about the seat and what view it gave, he was there to listen and gauge how well the conductor had balanced the sound given the acoustics of the concert hall.
Exactly my man , when I record a video of a solo don’t give a damn of the quality of the video or the sound, just wanted to hear the vibe and play on time, comment on point, 👍🏿
Paul I just found your channel and am happy be apart of this experience. I am a pro audio engineer but mentored by two brilliant HIFI designer and engineers. I asked them this same quesition for years . They sat me down told me this : Mickey audio is learnt . People listen to what has been given to them over the year as the grow up . So always show them the difference , teach them and then they will understand as they hear the difference " so if you introduce them to listen to a better or accurate audio they will make the change . However there is an economical factor . In one my mentor's counseling advised that " cheaper audio equipment and quality audio can not be used in the same sentence " lol. So to get the correct results it is not necessarily affordable and not knowing what is correct accurate audio is learnt . Although there are a number of new product on market that are great quality but if you have to know what to listen for that would give you some good and above average audio. All of this experience I have used to teach musicians and quite their fears as they do what you to change the audio characteristics of the instrument . So muscians use what have as the dont knon any better or can afford . ok There are a lot more things but this is the fundamental reason. Hope this helps. I hope you read this Paul Thanks
That is something I've noticed, a lot of my friends listen to music on €10 earbuds and are totally happy with it but then as soon as I let them try my audio technicas they realise how dull the super cheap ones sound. I know it's nowhere near proper hifi quality or anything but there's a huge jump between the sound of €10 earbuds and €100 headphones that a lot of people don't realise is there until they try it
@@ceinodowd1841 well said . That the point . There are a number of head phone oout there now the sound very good . But as you have done listener would know until they hear the difference
In composition class, one classmate was always whining about the quality of the speakers and the fact that her midi wasn't set right to play the score, until on day our teacher said something like "Oh, shut up. Mozart played in 8 bit on a nokia 3310 is still Mozart!"
I'm a musician, and I'm fanatical about my stereo sound. Finally have a system that satisfies my hunger, after all these years of trial and error. But, most of my friends do not share my passion.
Nice topic! I've been a guitar player since my early teens circa '89 and around the same time started my Hi-Fi journey. In high school a subscribed to various guitar, recording, and Hi-Fi mags like Stereophile. I watched and learned how computers were growing in recording studios and anticipated a day when hi-res recording would become a reality at home escaping proprietary systems built for studios. The time came when Win XP was unleased and anticipating the release I spent a year buying parts for a custom built PC for myself. Being on a budget my computer allowed me to have a 24/192 recording workstation, home theater (TV tuner, DVR, DVD audio/video), and to game all from one box. My box was connected to a Sony ES receiver powering a Wharfedale 5.1 speaker system with custom made Kimber speaker wire and custom interconnects. What I don't obsess over is car audio because that stuff gets stolen so I build those good enough. 🔥🎸🔥
I really appreciated this - a refreshingly honest video from someone who has a vested interest in selling his product, so kudos for that. Like a few others answering here, I too have a degree in EE, specialising in DSP for my final year, and while I would never pretend to be a world expert on that front, I have a better grasp than a lot of the general public. When I graduated I was a hardware engineer for a company called Genex in the late 90's (I know... and if YOU know, you know too... ;) ) designing 96/32 M.O. recorders, (DSD compatible) used in Abbey Road (amongst other places), so have a pretty low level tech appreciation for that sort of thing. Amazing sound quality for the time which has been surpassed in the past 20 years, easily, but exactly what you wanted to master from at the time. Now, as an electronic musician/producers of almost 30 odd years now, this guy hit the nail on the head - if the song elicits an emotional response in the listener, and doesn't exhibit heinous audio artefacts , then Joe or Jane public are unlikely to notice, so that is fine. No need for higher fidelity recordings, especially seeing as that at point of delivery, MP3 was the standard until it got deprecated recently. Not many people are what we call 'golden ears' in real life anyway, so why bother trying to impress the
In Germany we have a saying which goes like "Des Schusters Kinder laufen barfuß" which would directly translate to 'The shoemakers kids are walking barefeet'. It seems not too uncommon. My Explanation is, that handymen know that they could repair their stuff when needed, so there is no urge to do it now as long as things are still working. Doesn't translate to the musician, though...
Audiophiles often go to more sterile sounds because they think it sounds more articulate. They like harsher tones and when something has a burr brown chip they say it’s muddy or outdated lmao. They think brighter and thinner is more articulate . Even if something is equally articulate and has all articulations , if it is warm, they will say it’s muddy. In fairness some guitarists do this too and often go to the high mid emphasis as clear which is also a mistake. But audiophiles often want unrealistic delivery of sounds and thinks wider soundstages are always best or hearing things that are meant to be obscured is best. They overlook the art of music and think it’s about looking at it under a microscope. It’s the equivalent of me taking a photo and over sharpening it and thinking because I can see the pores in everyone’s face in a photo the photo is now better. Audiophile equipment is way overrated for sure. Iv seen this myself looking into DACs and amps. They worry about specs and not the actual music lol . They think music sounds better when they buy an overly powerful amplifier that is way more horsepower than they need .
@@heythere6983 You are generalizing big time. So many of us audiophiles are anything like what you described. The problem is the elitists in our hobby. They are the loudest( publications etc..) and so many people think that is what an audiophile is.
This is how I see it, people always want what they can't have. A musician can reproduce the sound of a live performance in a room whenever they want audiophiles can't without spending alot of money. Most Musicians I believe are satisfied sonically with their own raw organic sound so they don't crave that desire to get closer to the music like an audiophile as they are literally creating and hearing the music in its truest form. An audiophile that doesn't play an instrument may not hear a live piano or guitar in a room all that often so that sound is 'special' to them where as a musician most likely takes that sound for granted, which isn't that unusual as most people start playing at a very young age so it has always been normal and accessible to them.
Paul, As a musician, composer, and sometimes sound engineer, I can speak directly to this issue. As the Fixies pointed out… most musicians can’t afford audiophile level gear and would rather spend their money on better quality instruments to produce/create the sound, as we are mainly concerned with the live sound quality. And as you wisely pointed out, the musician is most concerned with the emotional experience of the listener more so than the pure aesthetic experience. We also realize, no matter how hard one tries, or how much money is spent, a speaker will never quite be able to reproduce the sound of a live instrument, so it is absolutely futile to try. There are diminishing returns when you go past getting a good sound system, none of which matter to someone trying to have an emotional experience with the music they listen to. But passion is passion, and if you want to have the absolute best (desktop computer, stereo system, computer keyboard, rock climber, bowling ball, etc.) if you have the means and time to make that happen, more power to you. As you and most your viewers know, a (insert device here) can display incredible measurements in the laboratory or anechoic chamber. It can have the highest output with the lowest relative distortion. But, the actual sound can be mediocre. And so too, the more you spend on something, the better it is going to sound (to you) after you’ve installed it. But the reality is no matter how much you pay for a speaker cable, even ones that have been: dipped in liquid nitrogen; rolled around in the finest of manure of Russet piglets fed only Truffle mushrooms from the black forest of west Germany; then independently hand-woven by Armenian gypsies; then blessed not only by an rabi, but also a high cardinal from the Vatican; sent into low Earth orbit in a decommissioned Japanese weather balloon by a one-eyed Tibetan monk with a limp; before being polished with the finest of American snake oils and packaged; it is still just a wire carrying a signal. By the way, I have these limited edition PureHoakum™ cables for sale on my webstore for only $13,489,672,384.63. And remember, its not PureHoakum™ unless it has been dipped in liquid nitrogen; rolled around in the finest of manure of Russet piglets fed only Truffle mushrooms from the black forest of West Germany; independently woven by an Armenian gypsies; blessed by a rabi, and a high cardinal from the Vatican; sent into low Earth orbit in a decommissioned Japanese weather balloon by a one-eyed Tibetan monk with a limp; before being polished with the finest of American snake oils, otherwise its just plain old BS. BTW - our PureHoakum™ enhanced salt makes all foods taste amazing, and helps you loose weight too (the salt processing is slightly different than the cables). Paul thanks for your web channel. It is great stuff. Your explanations are great, helping us to understand some very heady concepts!
I am a musician, I have a decent system, i will invest in my system in the future even more. But I have no illusion to make it sound live, this is an audiophile illusion/dream I am not chasing, because I know it is not possible. So what I want to say is that many musicians are more realistic about HiFi.
Like everyone else, I’ve been to plenty of live shows that sound crappy. We accept it as a part of the experience. It’s only when you go to a venue that cares about audio-like Austin City Limits-do you appreciate what good music and good sound are like together.
As a musician and engineer and appreciator of great sounding audio, i agree with your premise that we care more about the performance than the sound of it, and as other commenters have mentioned cost is an issue, but i would like to add that the knowledge base for hi end audio and creating music has almost no overlap, and a lot of us have very little bandwidth or time left to learn a whole other area to able to participate actively in high end audio stuff and not get fleeced.
I am a jazz musician, and music director in venues. My experience is people in general don't listen to music much. There is music playing everywhere and many people have forgotten how to listen or even why music exists. It is bound to leak over to musicians also...strangely. There hasn't been awareness of good sound quality or people even ever being exposed to it. I made an intention to by a high end(as much as I could afford) system , when I realized I had stopped listening as an experience. I worked on music everyday, transcribing or composing or arranging. I would hear things and see what could inspire ideas etc...but the experience I had as a teenager where I would sit down and just listen to a whole record at one sitting didn't happen. The visceral, emotional experience of listeing to a high end system was something that I missed. Now I take time to just listen. High end gear makes this happen to me. It is beautiful. I try to evangelize this concept...not much luck. Attention spans ar shorter I guess, and we all enter life with a different level of awareness...some more emotional or sensual than others
My haute cuisine teacher, who also became my friend, once called me asking if I knew a good deliverable pizza. In a totally pedantic tone, I said him "excuse me sir, I do my pizzas by myself!". Answer was a lot of 🤬🤬 and a huge laugh. Regards from Lima, Peru.
i'm a musician but also love hi-fi, i listen to music all day so i get a lot of benefit from a good system. but also i "play songs in my head" if there isnt music, its almost involuntary
Made me think of that bit in 24 Hour Party People where Joy Devision get the tape with the final mix of Love will Tear Us Apart and they rush to play it for the first time on a crappy car stereo rather than a Hifi because they want to hear it the way most people were going to hear it.
As long as the equipment is able to reproduce a recording well enough for the listener to hear what notes are being played and pass on the performers' personal tone/ musical voice, the focus of a musician's mind tend to move towards the musical details of everything being played, song structure, arrangement, improvisational choises etc., and not the exact quality of the reproduction. At least this applies to most jazz type musicians. We get too carried away by the music to bother about better audio quality as long as we can hear enough to mentally process the music as such.
There is a point of diminishing return when paying for "audiophile" level equipment. I want to hear a quality reproduction, but don't need artificial "airy" sounds from a fancy power cable that cost more than all the standard instrument & power cables my band used combined.
There's a strong law of diminishing returns when it comes to a sound system. You only have two ears, and they can only hear so well. Also, your imagination tends to fill gaps in quality.
As a musician, I’ll answer it this way: when I spend time listening to music, it’s often not for enjoyment (tho it’s inaccurate to say I don’t enjoy it....). Rather, I listen to music either to learn it, or to gain inspiration. Further, no matter how much money I spend, the system won’t duplicate a live performance. Therefore,I want to be able to hear the music clearly. If it does that, it’s all I need. Lastly, I’m far more interested in music - making gear than music - reproducing gear. Great question! Great video thank you!
As a musician I appreciate and insist on quality audio reproduction for my music, especially because I record and produce my own music. However the very process of recording instruments introduces losses that when played back on high end audio cannot recreate the true sound of live instruments. No high end audio equipment can compare with the sound of a real instrument. Musical instruments are the real deal and cost much less. When I want high end audio I just pick up my guitar.
But most Guitar songs are done through hooking them up to an amplifier. Unless we are talking about playing acoustic guitar in a small room, the moment you hook your instrument to a piece of electrical technology you are doing the same. The best example of what you are trying to say would be a violinist. Being in the presence of a master playing in an acoustically treated concert hall is something that no audio can reproduce the same.
As an audiophile who sold high end equipment in the 80s and 90s, I concur. There is a well known violinist in the Chicago area who I sold a reel-to-reel tape recorder to so that she could listen to some run offs of work that she did in the studio. At home she had an all in one, 20 year old, department store stereo with a blown left speaker. There were no extra line level inputs, so I tried to sell her on the idea of an integrated amp or a receiver, plus an inexpensive pair of speakers. She asked if I could make what she had work, and I said yes, but it wouldn't be much less money than a decent quality, inexpensive, receiver. I also indicated that she should use the blown speaker(it still worked somewhat) with a new amp, since it could damage the receiver. I went into the old stereo chassis, installed a toggle switch between the turntable and a new set of jacks. By the way, the phono cartridge was what they used to call ceramic, so it worked on a line level input. I implored her to do the switching with the stereo off, before playing anything, then turning it on. The company I used to work for in downtown Chicago sold a lot of equipment to musicians of the Chicago Symphony, including the symphony office as well. Most musicians purchased modest stuff. Although, the modest stuff that we carried was pretty nice.
The guy that wrote in is correct. As a musician, I am way more concerned with how I sound performing than I am about how someone else sounds coming through my stereo. I used to have a huge stereo system with Garard turntable and Sony reel to reel deck, custom 3 way speakers, etc, etc, etc. The only thing left is the Sony reel to reel. I do purchase audio gear now, but it is usually so I can record myself, listen back to it, make adjustments and repeat. We do the same with the Bluegrass band I am in, at practice and at gigs. If I really want to hear myself or the band really good, I’ll throw on headphones or listen in the car. About 10 years ago I fell into an opportunity to buy some quality P.A. gear from a club closing down, and ended up doing live sound for rock and metal bands in clubs without P.A. Gear. What an experience that was !! I had a blast ! Still have most of that gear. The hard part there was vocal intelligibility of loud bands. Active 3 way systems (crossover and 3 amps for hi, mid, low) was a must. Clarity was important, but folks wanted to hear(and feel) the kick drum. 1200 pounds of gear in and out of the van every night. By the way, love your videos, keep em coming, Cheers from Akron, Ohio
The mechanic’s car doesn’t run right, the plumber’s pipes leak, the nurse makes a lousy patient, the barber needs a haircut, the psychiatrist is impolite...
I'm 54 been playing guitar from age ten and I happen to be the proud owner of a set of AR 3's powered by a set of Mac 50's .You should run this question by Rick Beato . I would love to hear his answer
Musician here. We train to fill in the gaps so often that sometimes we don't care because some of what we "listen" to is in our head already. If you play a musician a piece and randomly mute the audio for a second he probably wouldn't be bothered because the music went on in her/his mind. Same goes for frequencies. I remember how a piano should sound like. If a mediocre mp3 is cutting all those high frequencies my brain puts them back in. That might be an explanation as well.
Besides money and space for the equipment: musicians probably always appreciate high quality sound! When I had a recording session in a proper studio and we got to listen to our takes, I was overrun with joy that it sounded in the mixing room exactly like a few minutes before in front of the piano. That certainly doesn't count as "ignoring high end audio". So that phrasing is a bit off, is the point I try to make.
The thing is, the emotional connection to music can be had through a transistor radio, or a supermarket PA system, and this how I believe most musicians view it. When I connect with music, I don’t care where the bass player was stood in relation to the guitar player, and what brand of strings he was using. I’ve relaxed how I listen to music these days, no longer always rigidly sat between the speakers, as though in a Victorian photographer’s brace! That said, I do value the ability of an audio system to convey the dynamics and impact of the music, which is something many cheap audio systems fail to do.
For acoustic musicians who are into hi-fi, violin myself, and I've heard a clarinetist say the same thing, the reproduced versions of their instruments are so far off from the real thing it's hopeless. Most of the times the sound is ruined at the mixing board, never mind the rest of the playback chain. Itzhak Perlman has said he struggles with recording engineers every time to get a what he considers a good violin sound from his recordings. What you said about the communication of the content and intent of their work rings true. It's like cellphones, if you're interested in getting a message across, you just need enough clarity. The rest is on the communicator.
Nice video and interesting thoughts! I myself work as an audio engineer. I used to use only good loudspeakers, anything else would make me angry. But over the years, I switched to e.g. watching videos on my laptop with the built-in speakers. It's like I don't even want to activate my "professional hearing". But of course, when someone asks me how I like their new song, I will definitely use my studio speakers to listen to it. It's a bit sad that when you make a recording for somebody, they don't even listen to their own music on things I would call a loudspeaker. Even though, acceptable active speakers are not that expensive anymore and do last very long. But hey, what's a speaker system for 500 bucks, when you also can get the new iPhone for even more bucks. Crazy.
Classical musicians and music critics tend to value performance over reproduction. They can hear a great performance through the grunge of a pre-1950's recording, which I as an audiophile have never been able to do.
WR Day exactly! I’m an orchestra conductor and was given the side eye when purchasing Dvorak cello concerto produced by a “not great record company” ...it was Rostropovich and the performance is incredible so I didn’t care about it being the ‘best pressing”
Now imagine music teachers working remotely during the pandemic who judge their students' performances on crappy, distorting laptop speakers. It's real. It doesn't bother them one bit!
Piotr Graniszewski in defense, it’s a very long road from student to what we listen to on recordings. The amount of time and work people like Anthony McGill put in to get to where we can listen to him with the NY Philharmonic would leave jaws on the floor for many. For students during the pandemic, there’s a lot we can hear, assess, and teach disregarding tone quality of their instrument though a medium like Teams or Zoom/crap speakers. Rhythm, interpretation, technique, etc. What’s fascinating about being a musician and audiophile is that I listen in very different ways. The critical listening nature of being a conductor puts us inside the music in an enviable way. We hear details that even live audiences can’t discern, and what I like reading about is the similarities in some terminology and how the definitions of those words are so different. It’s fascinating to hear how different carts are more “musical” or has better “rhythm”.
1). My guitar amp has 2 12" speakers, my bass amp has 2 10" speakers. A stereo doesn't reproduce the sound or feel of either. (Some of this is due to studio trickery like compression.) 2). Your point about moving the audience is spot on. My favorite albums are about the songs not the quality of the recording or playback. 3). I do enjoy nicer systems. I can appreciate the details that are otherwise lost. (In particular bass guitar). If I had more money, I'd enjoy a nicer stereo.
Musicians & audiophiles (or audio enthusiasts) most of the time are 2 different types of people. Every so often, the 2 find themselves in the same body.
My impression is that most of the musical information can be revealed using a tiny fraction only of what audiophile gear is capable of transmitting. Even mp3-compression (or compact cassette in former days) is still able to reveal all instruments, their rough sounds, their rough placement in the stereo-field and so forth. Something like 95% is still there, which suffices for most listeners and in particular for musicians. Musicians are probably even better than the average person at augmenting the missing information with their own knowledge about sounds and instruments. What they would gain through audiophile reproduction systems, is just minor details that don't help them much in grasping musical ideas. Sure, there are people (and musicians among them) who really want to hear that bow touching the strings or the faint breathing of the soloist and so forth. For them, that's just a world in it's own right. But just remember that little Brahms-Story, were he attends a premiere of a compostion that was performed subpar. He angrily walks home, sits down in his armchair, quietly reads the full score and shouts into the silence: "Now THAT is music!". Illustrates nicely, how much musicians need technical vehicles to listen to music.
My parents were professional (classical) musicians. My father’s answer was that he would “hear” the piece as it should sound in his head over what the system produced. It may also have to with perspective. The listening experience in the middle of an orchestra or group is radically different from the audience perspective.
As a musician, like any artist, your prime focus is effectively transmitting a feeling/emotional content to an audience. The medium through which that is transmitted is not so important - only that it provides an effective transmitter and does not create a barrier. So, like an actor is not focused on what lens a camera is using, only that the camera is capturing the emotion of the scene. An audiophile is perhaps best compared to the cameraman who DOES care about what lens is the best or most suited to the scene being shot. Overall I suggest that a musician/artist is principally concerned with emotional content, an audiophile with the technicalities of the medium it is being transmitted through. The racing car driver and the engineer if you prefer. Hope this is helpful. Cheers, Ky
