By Juan C. Ayllon
CHICAGO -- It was circa 2002 when I sank into the plush, cloth-covered chair in the low lit showroom with a bevy of expensive, black anodized aluminum cased electronics with green lights, knobs and buttons to the right and exotic speakers in various makes and sizes lined up along the walls, as if waiting their turn to audition for a starring role as small, blue green triangular acoustic pillows tucked in the top corners of the room, where the walls and ceiling met, bore silent witness. Perched proudly atop steel stands, a pair of small, mahogany veneered Proac monitors enveloped the space with heavenly strains of acoustic jazz recorded in an old church hall this time. This became my speakeasy, my getaway from the world with its troubles and my cheesy home system -- a Sony Discman, Panasonic receiver and Bose 301 speakers that I'd cobbled together on a college student's budget. Here in the dark lounge, I spend long hours, lusted and drank deep from the acoustic libations served up.
If you're like me, one of the reasons you got into this hobby is because at some point, you sat down and listened to a very nice stereo -- and you heard the difference good components made. You listen, you audition, you buy, listen some more, and when the magic wears thin, eventually trade up for something better. Or worse. It's what we do as audiophiles. In recent months, I have found myself involved in some lively online discussions with some more technically oriented enthusiasts that insist that you cannot trust your ears in evaluating audio gear, that most of the differences we perceive in components are Placebo in nature and should be vetted with double-blind tests, volume leveling and measuring with the right equipment. Their central tenet seems to be that with modern developments, truly transparent and accurate sound reproduction can be acquired with a minimal outlay of money and anything more is just a waste. Differences in sound via cables, expensive Digital to Analog Converters (DACs) or other pricey electronics are relegated as imaginary or -- worse yet -- "snake oil"! If you cannot measure it, it just isn't there, they say. It's crazy making. Granted, sometimes the differences between really good components' performances aren't very much and I would admit that in double-blind tests, I may not always recognize exactly which make and model is being used at the moment. However, there are differences and sometimes they are very palpable. Last summer, I was swapping in and out various cables with a very high end horn speaker system that I demoed for several months in my family room. I found that my silver coated copper interconnect cables sounded brighter and more sibilant than other pure copper ones, which yielded a warmer, more pleasant presentation. It was very obvious, yet when I made that point in an online discussion with some of these technophiles, my word choices were poked fun at and I mocked for my "imaginary" findings because, after all, wire is wire and barring a few things like thickness, for example, it really did not make a difference. Unless you could corroborate it with measuring devices, it simply didn't exist, they maintained. So much for choir directors, sound board operators and audiophiles everywhere who rely greatly on their ears, sans measuring equipment, to make on the fly informal observations and decisions. I could not dissuade them and eventually moved on. I sometimes can't help but wonder of that's how these people go about choosing doing relationships. Granted, there's something to be said about metrics, like those used by e-Harmony, for example, in assisting people in the selection process when it comes to online dating and, no doubt, various personality trait tests can help aid premarital counseling in showing areas of compatibility and areas that will need more work. However, when looking for a mate, do these people subject prospects to various measuring devices, questionnaires and tests before asking them out, or do they actively engage their minds, their heart and their senses and take their time to get to know them in a variety of settings? No doubt, objective and measurement of things like "random, harmonic, intermodulation, difference frequency and transient distortion" have their place (Temme) in formally evaluating components and equipment such as speakers and amplifiers -- especially in the production process, but for everyday listening and simple, basic decisions, some times -- most times, in fact -- our ears are good enough for many of us. Similarly, my wife and I, who'd met at church and had a wonderful whirlwind courtship, discovered that we had been e-Harmony matches back when we were single and looking. However, she didn't like that whole technology-based process and abandoned it, and I never saw her picture and didn't think much of it at the time. Yet, some time later, we let our hearts, mind and our senses (and our faith) inform us as we experienced the wonders of a growing love. The appreciation of audio can be that way, as well. Can you hear it? Work Cited Temme, Steve. "Application Notes -- Audio Distortion Measurements." BKSV.com. Bruel & Kjaer. N.d. Web. 23 December 2017.
3 Comments
12/23/2017 09:06:11 am
Juan just say very good read and a start of a great website for music and equipment. Good luck and I look forward to read more.
Reply
Wayne M Florczak
12/23/2017 09:33:14 am
I look forward to more reading.
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
ColumnistsJuan C. Ayllon Archives
March 2024
Categories |