"If It Sounds Good To You...It is Good" Eh You Know I Got Issues With This Idea

Mister Pig

Pigamus Maximus
I have read this if it sounds good to you idea quite a few times in various threads in AK. On the surface it makes sense, but then I started to think about it, and thats where things go off the rails.

Actually if you like the sound of a piece, or even a combination of pieces..well thats one thing. However that does not automatically make it good. It might be good for you, and to an extent that certainly matters.

However, not all stereo gear is good, or equally good. Some gear is awesome, some OK, and some is unfortunately terrible. Not all gear is created equal, priced equal, or performs equally.

So how do we evaluate and rank gear? Thats an interesting question, and a tough one to answer.

In my opinion, and that really is all it is.

Excellent gear will

1. sound like music
2. faithfully recreate the recording
3. possess excellent measurements
4 recreate test tones/measurements without altering them

Perhaps all of them are relevant and required. Maybe only some of them? Or could I be completely off base and none of them are.

So if you were to evaluate the performance of equipment with something other than the "well it sounds good to me" method, what would it be?

Regards
Mister Pig
 
1 and 2 for me. Though some of 3 and 4 will be accomplished if the first two goals are met, if the right things are being measured. But some measurements mean little to me, like THD in an amp or most turntable specs beyond a certain threshold of speed stability and rumble.

I think most people judge gear based on what they've heard, and their past listening experience with both live music and gear can have a great affect on their evaluation of audio gear. "Best" is relative to each of us according to the best system any of us have heard. Somebody may have only heard a clock radio, so the Bose Wave Radio is a revelation.
 
Ah but this is not a definition of what one likes......that is discussed. The intent is how to get to a discussion of performance with some degree of objectivity.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
I guess you are back to looking at specs. If it specs good, it must me be good.:scratch2:

Rob
 
I don't really care if anyone else likes my system. I bought it and paid for it and it is located in my home.

Academic discussions with others who disagree with my choices are like trying to teach a pig to sing, it wastes my time and aggravates the pig.

The simple facts are that people hear differently, and people listen differently. I learned this a long time ago when I was selling stereo gear.

I have some very nice gear that can deliver measurably good performance. That doesn't mean that it will sound good to anyone else, not that I care.

The human ear can hear things that equipment can't measure, and the opposite is true as well.

The whole "listening to music at home" experience involves a lot more than excellent measurements, as you stated in your first premise.

Academic discussions are good for academics. And possibly a good grade. Real life is a lot different.
 
I would say that 1 and 2 are more important. When 1 and 2 sound right, 3 and 4 (SET's excepted) will almost always measure well. Conversely, measuring (3, 4) well doesn't necessarily mean that you've got (1, 2) good sound.

I'm waiting for the "everyone hears different" (NOT) disciples to chime in. Everyone hears in exactly the same way. Preferences in what or how you want to hear things are the only differences.
 
Here you go then. It would seem to me that any system is only as good as it sounds to any one individual. Consider, that we all hear differently, many of us have tinnitus or other hearing issues, and most our listening rooms are far from ideal. The only thing important then is how the music sounds. Measurements make interesting reading but don't mean alot.

cubdog
 
That sounds like a vote for category 1

Regards
Mister Pig

Here you go then. It would seem to me that any system is only as good as it sounds to any one individual. Consider, that we all hear differently, many of us have tinnitus or other hearing issues, and most our listening rooms are far from ideal. The only thing important then is how the music sounds. Measurements make interesting reading but don't mean alot.

cubdog
 
Saying we all hear differently is the same thing as saying we all see differently. Even those with tinnitus hear exactly the same way as those without. That what they hear may be masked or obscured by the tinnitus doesn't change the way things are heard.

Ears, your's mine and everyone elses work exactly the same way. To hear differently is to say your ears work differently (NOT).
 
I don't really care if anyone else likes my system. I bought it and paid for it and it is located in my home.

Academic discussions with others who disagree with my choices are like trying to teach a pig to sing, it wastes my time and aggravates the pig.

The simple facts are that people hear differently, and people listen differently. I learned this a long time ago when I was selling stereo gear.

I have some very nice gear that can deliver measurably good performance. That doesn't mean that it will sound good to anyone else, not that I care.

The human ear can hear things that equipment can't measure, and the opposite is true as well.

The whole "listening to music at home" experience involves a lot more than excellent measurements, as you stated in your first premise.

Academic discussions are good for academics. And possibly a good grade. Real life is a lot different.

I tried to compose a response, but this one echo's my thoughts on the subject. Especially the opening statement "I don't really care if anyone else likes my system. I bought it and paid for it and it is located in my home."
 
Saying we all hear differently is the same thing as saying we all see differently. Even those with tinnitus hear exactly the same way as those without. That what they hear may be masked or obscured by the tinnitus doesn't change the way things are heard.

Ears, your's mine and everyone elses work exactly the same way. To hear differently is to say your ears work differently (NOT).

The mechanics are the same but in reality we all have different hearing response. My girlfriend has particularly good hearing as she's protected her ears from nearly any loud sound she's ever come across. She can hear things in the treble that have long been damaged out of my hearing range. Speakers that don't sound bright to me, annoy her. Its still subjective, but we all don't hear the same frequencies equally. Just like a color-blind person sees different than someone who is able to discern all colors.
 
Ears, your's mine and everyone elses work exactly the same way. To hear differently is to say your ears work differently (NOT).

The fundamental process may be the same, but that's where the similarity ends. There are many people who have hearing adequate to function normally in day to day life, but are completely deaf of certain frequencies. They may have nothing below 500hz, or nothing above 12,000. There are also individuals who have giant holes at certain frequency ranges but can hear perfectly well both above or below that range.

There's also tone deafness, hearing's version of color blindness, where individuals cannot hear a difference between two different pitches. Sometimes the effect is mild, just a few cents flat or sharp, making it difficult to tune an instrument by ear; At other times the deafness is profound, and no difference in pitch can be detected. Very often those who are tone deaf don't even know they are because they don't play musical instruments, or get called out about it when they sing. Ever watch American Idol auditions? There are a lot of profoundly tone deaf people out there.

Then we come to preferences in sound. I've often suggested that if the hearing of a listener were thoroughly charted, and the speakers they preferred measured as well, the two charts would likely look like a reverse of one another; like adjacent pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. What might be a perfectly acceptable system to a person with great hearing, might seem inadequate to those with weaknesses in certain areas of their hearing.

My point is, that while our ears may be functionally the same, our ability to access that information and interpret it is not. Effectively making one person's hearing different from another in practical application.
 
Extensive reading on AK will show that many people enjoy listening to something other than faithful reproduction. I think it makes sense to aspire to faithful reproduction as a starting point. If you get there and after giving it an honest chance still prefer distortion, then it is time for you as an individual to start introducing distortion or seasoning to taste.
 
Extensive reading on AK will show that many people enjoy listening to something other than faithful reproduction. I think it makes sense to aspire to faithful reproduction as a starting point. If you get there and after giving it an honest chance still prefer distortion, then it is time for you as an individual to start introducing distortion or seasoning to taste.

I just replaced a modern high-end turntable in my tube system with a Bogen/Lenco L-70 running the first Shure stereo cart they ever made, the M3D, tracking at 3 grams. Does it sound as perfect as before? No. But I play a lot of '50s/'60s rock and roll in this system, and this turntable/cart combo sounds more subjectively right, and interacting with it as a machine is way more fun.

I got to what I considered the best sound I could afford, and now I'm bored and want to just play around with differences.
 
I never heard gear (including little transistor radios, portable 45rpm record players and wind-up Victrolas) that failed to sound like music.
 
I don't really care if anyone else likes my system. I bought it and paid for it and it is located in my home.

Academic discussions with others who disagree with my choices are like trying to teach a pig to sing, it wastes my time and aggravates the pig.

The simple facts are that people hear differently, and people listen differently. I learned this a long time ago when I was selling stereo gear.

I have some very nice gear that can deliver measurably good performance. That doesn't mean that it will sound good to anyone else, not that I care.

The human ear can hear things that equipment can't measure, and the opposite is true as well.

The whole "listening to music at home" experience involves a lot more than excellent measurements, as you stated in your first premise.

Academic discussions are good for academics. And possibly a good grade. Real life is a lot different.

+1:thmbsp:

I also like to add, most of the time, I don't do any critical listening. I play back music for background. Especially if I'm cleaning the house or working on something. Music does not have to be a faithful reproduction in order to enjoy it.
 
get some people in a room with a stereo and you will probably have many different opinions on whether that system is accurately reproducing music - so who is right ?

Let's take ESL speakers. For me and only my opinion, most box speakers do not even come close to the realism an ESL can give you. Yet many people have heard them and don't like them,maybe not enough bass or in the case of a hybrid, saying the transition to the cone isn't good enough - who's right.
The best I can do is say it is right for me.

It really doesn't make any difference how high up the ladder the gear is, if the person using that gear feels it is good enough for them - who am I to say they are wrong.
With what you are saying, you would really want me to say no, I'm sorry, but my system is superior to yours and you have no idea what faithful reproduction is -
that would be something I would never be willing to say, nor anything I believe.

The best you can do when seeking opinions for the direction you are headed is to seek out those who may have similar gear, or gear you aspire to and put more weight on their opinions then someone who has taken a path that you feel is not right for you.
I do not have any gear that could be considered this way, but there are already many people who believe buying more expensive gear is basically snobbery - now you basically want those people to tell many others that their system is substandard ? Have fun with that.

I honestly do not care if it is a Yorx - if it sounds good to them, I am happy for them. I personally am not a huge fan of many of the most popular speakers I read about here - so maybe I am the one who is wrong.

Now I do believe you make a case for what an Audiophile is. In my day, an audiophile was someone who put together a system using very high quality components - something to be aspired to.
That word has changed over the years and now it is basically just a music lover. I am old school and still think of it as the person who has the very high quality gear and when listened to, sounds about as real as it gets.

But if someone asks if brand x is good and they are happy with it - who am I to say that it isn't.
Everyone has a different goal in mind and my ideal may not be your ideal.

oh, forgot - I am not one for putting a whole lot of weight on specifications either. Some gear can not look that great on paper, but it could match up perfectly with what you have. For the most part, pretty much any gear we are interested in has excellent specs on paper. It's when it gets to the ear that counts.
using test specs like you mentioned, a Marantz 2215 using a pair of say small AR speakers could do very well - which just reinforces the sound is in the ear of the beholder. (I am not saying the Marantz 2215 and AR is not good - it was just an example of the lower end of the spectrum)
 
Last edited:
Perhaps all of them are relevant and required. Maybe only some of them? Or could I be completely off base and none of them are.

So if you were to evaluate the performance of equipment with something other than the "well it sounds good to me" method, what would it be?

I'm usually searching for gear that is constructed well. If there is a failure here, I usually pass on it. If it looks nicely laid out and overbuilt, I will read as much as I can about it. Sometimes the engineer will have much to say about how they arrived at this final product. Sometimes going as far as commenting on how marketing mucked it up. I like to hear what everyone as a consumer has to say about it as well.

I originally wanted something that would deliver SPL. As my thoughts progressed into what I really wanted, things started changing. After SPL came clean dynamic attack and proper imaging. To elaborate on imaging, sound seems to come from the environment and not identifiable as coming from speakers. After searching for gear as stated above this is now what I have. All of it is less than perfect and it's been a journey on a budget.

I want to comment briefly on measurements. I have seen a graphs of measurements on my speakers and another set I would love to hear. The graph of my speakers look nice and flat through nearly all of the audible region. The graph from the set I want to hear looks like absolute hell in the horn region. People that have heard both commented that this horn speaker is their holy grail.

After all of this, I know I am creating what I want to hear and not even close to replicating a live venue. I am simply explaining what I think is good and why. Does it sound good to me?.....absolutely:thmbsp:
 
Back
Top Bottom