Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site trwspp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwspp!urban
From: urban@trwspp.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Some Thoughts On Fidelity
Message-ID: <251@trwspp.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 13-Feb-84 11:50:10 EST
Article-I.D.: trwspp.251
Posted: Mon Feb 13 11:50:10 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 16-Feb-84 05:55:30 EST
Sender: news@trwspp.UUCP
Organization: T R W, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 101

I've noticed that this is a peculiarly rambling message
for me.  It deals with fidelity for the common man, sales
techniques in stereo stores, and general confusion.  People
might want to use their 'n' keys at this point.

I'm not, by any stretch of the imagination, a "Golden
Ears", nor particularly well-versed in the
physics/electronics of audio.  Just so you understand my
level of expertise.

A couple of years ago, I found myself buying a pair of
speakers.  My musical tastes run to (what's broadly termed)
classical with a peculiar twin emphasis on romantic and
early Renaissance.  My experience with stereo-store sales
personnel was memorably unpleasant.  One guy was clearly
pushing his favorite brand of speakers.  He puts on a Joni
Mitchell album and plays it full blast, then shouts at me
"pretty good, huh?"  My reaction was something like
"compared to what?" to which he snapped, "What have you
heard that's better?"  That was Shelley Audio, L.A. people.
I left the store.

Digression 1: One of the reasons I don't like most
contemporary music was exemplified by the record he played
and the way he played it.  When I hear someone singing,
here, in the same room, I hear their voice.  When I hear
Joni Mitchell on an album, I hear whatever the microphone
was able to pick up.  Typical albums seem to be recorded
with the performer within an inch of the microphone, so
that every bubble of spit in his/her mouth is picked up by
the mike and amplified.  The result doesn't sound
like a human being, it sounds like a huge amplifier
that's imitating one.  When y'all talk about a "Live"
rock concert, you're talking about performers whose voices
and instruments have been amplified (and presumably
somewhat distorted?) by electronic equipment.  So what's
"live"?  And why do people insist on playing even
acoustic-sound-type music at volumes far above the
original?  Of course, even Paul Robeson performed with a
throat mike -- when he was in a large auditorium.

Pacific Stereo was a little TOO laid-back.  "there's the
room with the speakers; here's how to switch speakers; let
me know if you want to buy something."  

Digression 2:  Ten minutes of A/B comparison of 10 pairs of
speakers leaves me, at least, doubting my own sanity.
I can certainly hear differences between pairs of speakers.
I can even guess what these differences represent.  But
"better" and "worse" start to get very confused.  Even
"like it more" or "like it less" become tenuous.  I left
the store somewhat shaken.

University Stereo had a salesman who was pretty helpful.
He had a favorite make with good bass response (another
rock music fan) but happily didn't like to break eardrums
demonstrating them (maybe he was hiding something, but it
WAS a good demo for the level at which I would be using
them).  When I tuned in a classical station and pointed out
that the violins were almost disappearing, he agreed and
pointed out some alternative choices, then left me to my
own devices.  I ended up buying a pair of EPI speakers
which seemed to me to have a crisp, clear sound and picked
up all the instruments pretty well.  I still like them.

Digression 3: "I don't know speakers, but I know what I
like."  I know it sounds pretty know-nothing, but what ELSE
am I supposed to go on?  The main selling point for
University Stereo, for me, was their Golden-Ears-Insurance
guarantee (my term).  The salesman says "you're probably
worrried that some guy's going to visit you and say, `you
really got stuck with junk, didn't you?'  University Stereo
will allow you to exchange merchandise for full value on
other merchandise for any reason within a year of
purchase."  Nice touch.

It's all a weak-link phenomenon anyway, isn't it?  Your
music can't sound any better than the worst link in the
instrument-to-microphone-to-recording-device-to-medium-
to-pickup-to-amplifier-to-speaker chain.  That's why I have
trouble with all this discussion of digital versus analog
and so on.

When John Culshaw produced the first studio recording of
Wagner's "Ring" (still considered among the best, I'm
told), he knew damn well it wouldn't and couldn't ever
sound just like a performance at Bayreuth; he even used the
stereo imaging to exaggerate the characters' motions across
the imaginary stage.  NO, it doesn't sound "live"; it
CAN'T.  YES, it's an excellent recording.  In Culshaw's
book, "Ring Resounding," which elucidates the trials and
tribulations associated with this effort, he describes the
time he played his new "Rheingold" for a group of hard-core
Wagnerites.  Who, predictably, disliked it.  One woman
disdainfully sniffed, "I always listen for the Tenor sounds
in `Heda, Hedo'" (Donner's invocation of a thunderstorm).
Unfortunate, since Donner is a baritone part.

   Not Golden, but not Tin either,

	Mike