high fidelity / accuracy

TroyD

These are a couple of terms that get thrown around quite a bit around here, and this is a discussion that's taken place from time to time....but without me leading with my answer first, I'd like others, especially some of the newer folks to give thier ideas on just what hifi and/or accuracy really entails.

Just for S&G

BDT

Ricardo

As per Webster:
High Fidelity: the reproduction of an effect (as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original.

In my mind, accuracy would mean the same??

TroyD

HTrookie wrote:

As per Webster:
High Fidelity: the reproduction of an effect (as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original.

In my mind, accuracy would mean the same??

Not asking for webster....what does it mean to YOU. IE, what is the goal of your setup?

BDT

amulford

For me it's the ability of my systems to give me goosebumps. To FEEL the music.

shack

HTrookie wrote:

As per Webster:
High Fidelity: the reproduction of an effect (as sound or an image) that is very faithful to the original.

In my mind, accuracy would mean the same??

I'm sure that's what the definiton is.

As I've stated in the past HiFi is not necessarily the "perfect reproduction" of live sound but is faithful to the reproduction of the recording. Even with that said, HiFi can also entail the "coloration or enhancing" of the sound if that is what is pleasing to you. HiFi is the search for the sound that YOU enjoy by employing various techniques available. ie: digital, analog, tubes, SS, vinyl, dome tweeters, silk tweeters, horns, AS, transmission line, etc, etc, etc...

I know what it is when I hear it!

Spawndn72

I want my system to make the exact same sound that the original instrument made when the piece was played.

With that said, for the most part, it will never happen. Most recordings are doctored up to the point that it is almost not even people playing much less the instruments playing.

ND13

I have no clue, I guess. I just know what sounds good to my ears.

Ricardo

TroyD wrote:

Not asking for webster....what does it mean to YOU. IE, what is the goal of your setup?

BDT

I think that hi-fi is a very subjective concept that will mean different things to different people, and even different things to the same person....an example for this:
-At some point in my life, hi-fi was what the stereo on my car was giving me.
-I then heard how the system in my neighbor's car sounded.....and then that became the new hi-fi concept to me.
-My RTi line speakers with the Denon 3803 was hi-fi for me a couple weeks ago.
-Then I got the SDA 1B's and that was the new hi-fi definition....
-Got the SDA's hooked up with a Harman Kardon...and guess what...at last...TRUE hi-fi..
-and so on; I guess this never ends.....

cfrizz

I expect my equipment to pick up & play precisely whatever has been recorded on the cd, dvd, ect. As I have gotten better/more powerful equipment and have played my same old cd's, I have picked up differences in what I used to hear. Some of it has been good & some of it has been bad.

I have discovered that some cd's/groups have good recording values & others have had bad ones. The bad ones get put aside or traded in & I get myself a new remastered cd of the same material.

The Eagles have always had top notch recording values. I have some very old cd's that have played consistently well on all of my equipment. When comparing the difference between Hotel California on my old cd vs my dvd-a of the song, the only difference is that the dvd is able to more clearly pick up ALL the nuances of the song that might be otherwise somewhat obscured on the cd. But that is the limit of the cd technology, not the original recording.

All of it is subjective & limited to what each individual hears. What I hear will not be exactly what you hear. It just isn't possible since everyone is different.

unc2701

When I say accuracy, I'm referring to the wire-with-gain philosophy... at least for anything that falls between the source and the speakers.

amulford

You can't really know, though. I wasn't there when they did the final mix. What were they listening on?

BlueMDPicker

Troy,

It sounds like Ken gave you a demonstration/definition of both during Polkfest with his R2R. No clocks, no compression, no conversion from the analog music source. It's a subjective premise that it represents "exactly" the live moment in time. But, objectively, I believe it represents exactly what the components in the recording chain were capable of -- and that's both high fidelity and accuracy for me.

PolkThug

Output = Input

VR3

I have all but given up on my hope of looking for a Hi-Fi setup...

I've heard SDA, I've heard Wilson X1s and in the end they all sucked compared to real life. So then I knew what I was really looking for... I was looking for speakers I enjoyed to own. That were fun to listen to and fun to play with..

I found those speakers, are they accurate and all that? Yeah - I think so.. others probally have higher standards... but I think once you get beyond a certain point - you start to not enjoy things AS much.

jdhdiggs

Nice post Sid, I agree with you 100%. Every system I've heard you can tell it's not live. Some are much easier to enjoy though and that's my goal now, fin it where I can imagine it's live and go along for the ride.

VR3

Exactly...

Don't get me wrong though, I like to hear instruments reproduced good and all that jazz and have depth to the soundstage - but you wont see me go out and buy B&W speakers either because they can accomplish that. B&W speakers put me to sleep.

To me, I like a very airy sound with very natural, airy sounding instruments with a very 3-D field to it and I like a strong center vocal range... I think my speakers give me that and more...

All I can tell you folks that are looking for nirvana... I suggest alot of live, unplugged concerts...

The best systems are still man made, a mechanical function and will always be "sucky" in the end in comparison to what its reproducing.

TroyD

OK, Shack and BlueMD are pretty much on target with what I was shooting for..

hifi or accuracy of a stereo rig is a subjective term.

I mean, accurate in terms of what?

Live performance? For one, it's never going to happen. Two, 'live' ain't always what it's cracked up to be.

The artists intent? How do we know what that is, really. What is in the record isn't neccessarily the artists intent.

The original master? Even the original master is played back through some sort of sound reproducing equipment.

The point is, it's crap (IMHO) when someone says 'these speakers are accurate'....it's a moving target. The BEST you can hope for, IMHO, is a listening experience that is satisfactory to you.

BDT

W WALDECKER

TroyD wrote:

These are a couple of terms that get thrown around quite a bit around here, and this is a discussion that's taken place from time to time....but without me leading with my answer first, I'd like others, especially some of the newer folks to give thier ideas on just what hifi and/or accuracy really entails.

Just for S&G

BDT

hey Troy, high fidelity to me is when the system disappears and nothing is left but myself and the music. i like a system to be involving to the point where it just draws me into the music........thanks........WCW III

KentVaughn

My ideas:

Hi-Fi = Reproduction of a recorded sound or image that is pleasing to the listener/viewer. Certainly accuracy plays a part in this, though it seems some people like to have their sound modified (tube amps for warmth for example).

Accuracy = sound reproduction that is faithful to the original recording, or performance. From what I've seen in my short time here and other forums/stores, accuracy seems to be almost impossible without incredibly expensive equipment.

I'd say that if a person was happy with the sound/video that their system presented, then they have acheived their personal hi-fi goal. It's probably not accurate, but who cares?

TroyD

KV, re your definition of accuracy...my point is, everything is an interpretation. The key is to find the interpretation that works for you.

BDT

markmarc

High Fidelity is the passionate pursuit of personally pleasing sonic reproduction.

I nodded my head in agreement with many statements, but I agree most with Waldecker "system disappears and nothing is left but myself and the music". The fun is in the chase for those moments quoted above.

gregure

A lot of great things being said here. Personally, I think Hi-Fidelity is a bit of an outdated term, and can really pertain to all things stereo/audio.
Accuracy is a term that is more practical in the pursuit of system requirements and personal taste. As an objective term, accuracy is simply reproducing a recording as accurately as possible. However, most speakers and audio processing devices add some character to the sound, which is why we describe speakers, amps, and preamps as having a warm, dry, flat, sweet, etc sound.
Personally, I think accuracy is when we stop thinking about adjectives to describe the music, and simply live it. I'm fortunate enough to work around speakers that allow me to experience this from time to time, such as the Vienna Acoustic speakers. I sat down and listened to a live recording of von Karajan conducting the Blue Danube waltz w/ the Vienna Philharmonic (appropriately enough) run by a Primare integrated amp and cd player, w/ some decent audioquest speaker cables. The speakers disappeared, the dynamics were as they should be, delicate in quieter passages, effortlessly louder in the more robust sections, and overall what I have to describe as tonally the most accurate reproduction of this recording I've ever heard. Put simply, I was IN the Musikverien on New Year's Day 1989, and it was simply blissful. That's accuracy, and it's damn expensive to get there. But it's worth it.

Jstas

I'm seeing two kinds of accuracy here.

One kind is synonmous with high fidelity in that the sound coming out of the stereo is an accurate reproduction of the source material that is faithful to the original material that the recording was made from. Unfortunatly, as great as a stereo could be, one is limited to the quality of teh recording as the only point where the listener does not have the control of changing or improving that aspect of the reproduction. So in claiming that a recording is accurate, one is really defining high fidelity to a greater degree beyond teh webster's definition.

The second kind, and what I think of when I think of accuracy, is the physical ability of the stereo to reproduce the sounds of teh recording is as true a form as possible. In other words, when I hear a tympani drum on my SDA's it sounds liek a tympani drum with the sharp, dynamic hit of the mallet on the drum to the long, deep roll off of teh bass extension as that drum head vibrates. A tympani drum on the cheap Sanyo boombox I have sound just like abass drum which sounds like a tom-tom with a sock on the recording microphone. The SDA rig is far more accurate in its reproduction of that sound than the Sanyo boombox. Along the same lines, I have recordings of violins and guitars that when played on the SDAs, the detail is so fine that I can hear the musician's fingers on the cords and frets. You'd never hear that on the Sanyo box.

The thing is that high fidelity is made up of both forms of accuracy.

Hope that made sense. It sounded good in my head.

mantis

Cool thead....

Hi fi is so subjective and so is accuracy. One will say "this speaker is accurate " and another will say " this speaker sucks". Ok 2 different people looking for 2 different things a guess. Who the hell knows.

There are more made up terms in the audio or Audiophile world then any other slang. I mean what the hell does "this sounds dark" really mean? I was told many times from alot of different audiophiles that old Krell amps where dark. They had tons of power and where accurate but dark.... WHAT??????

I could go on and on about the terms I have heard and I had to scratch my head and wonder what the hell are these crazy people talking about.

Hi fi to me is what many have already said. It's a system that can recreate a moment in music that allows you to listen to the music not the system.

Accurate is in my opnion a systems ability to recreate certain tones that sound like the orignal or as close as possible. Being a Musican helps to hear the tones in instruments. How they sound when played.

Sometimes I hate this hobby for all the opnions and not facts. Like spec's. What it comes down for me anymore is something I love and have alot of fun with. I so enjoy getting new parts to my system and hearing the differences my changes made. Good or bad, it's alot of fun.

Dan

TroyD

Hey, what do you know, a semi logical, peaceful discussion.

Who would have thought?

BDT

KentVaughn

I agree with you Troy, in that it's all a matter of opinion. I probably should have said that my opinion of accuracy was faithful sound/video reproduction. My personal opinion is that the best way to get "accurate" sound would be to purchase a set of quality studio monitors.

That's no fun though Great if you're in the studio, but no good for rattling walls during a movie.

TroyD

But, whose to say which studio monitors? I don't think that there is a consensus on them.

BDT

mantis

TroyD wrote:

Hey, what do you know, a semi logical, peaceful discussion.

Who would have thought?

BDT

Times have changes Troy. For the better I believe,

Dan

madmax

TroyD wrote:

Live performance? For one, it's never going to happen. Two, 'live' ain't always what it's cracked up to be.
BDT

I wouldn't actually go this far. I've heard several "live performances" on Jesse's system and a couple on mine. Of course the recording was right and they were "real" class performances with real drums and each instrument either acoustic or driven through their own amplifers (strat through a marshall or B3 through its leslie etc). I'm not talking about making yourself believe it could be live if only... When you hear live you know its live. I'm just saying I've been deceived a few times. When this finally happens you know it. There is no question. It can be done for sure.

madmax