Yes, a sound system recreates music that was recorded, and then re-recorded. Yes, a less less revealing system may smooth over the defects of a recording which a more accurate system will reveal resulting in a more pleasing musical experience from the lesser system.
However, to the question: "When evaluating audio equipment and speakers by ear ... How do you know what you perceive as "better," is really better?"
The answer should not depend on how a system reproduces a poor recording. If the output from a good source reproducing a well recorded musical event sounds more like "live music," it is better. That is the desideratum.
At the back end of the chain of events is a musical performance. It is then recorded (recording no. 1), it is then mastered (modification no. 1), it is then re-recorded on some medium, tape, vinyl, CD, SACD, the master or some subsequent iteration may then be digitized (recording/modification no. 2) it may then be compressed, (modification no. 3), or recorded from digital to vinyl or CD, etc. Focus on the head of the chain (the musical event) not the cloacal end of the matter.
Get you a great analog recording (vinyl or tape, 1/4" or better) play it through an excellent system (cartridge, tone arm, turntable, phono stage, preamp, amplifier, speakers) or, if you are really flush, a master tape on an excellent reel to reel tape player, and enjoy.
Digital cannot match analog in reproducing the live musical experience. Of course a bad recording on vinyl in a poor system can't achieve this desideratum either. You can get closer, but never achieve the reproduction of a live musical event (it is possible the get really close for an excellent recording of guitar, or a small ensemble), especially of large scale regardless of the quality of the system and recording. You simply cannot move enough air. But you can get closer.
That is the quest.
Last edited by 2x6spds; 09/13/21 12:43 AM.
