User Manual

CABLE THEORY

Page 25

absence of technical detail who are most easily able to cut directly to the truth. However, even these

fortunate people need an appropriate context for the bare truth to come shining through. There are

pitfalls even for virgin ears.

The challenge for most of us immersed in this fabulous world is to reclaim the innocence we once

had when we rst felt the emotional and sensual thrill of a sound system that was better than we had

thought possible. Generally this ear opening experience took place around late adolescence. We then

proceed to spend the rest of our lives trying to recreate that experience. The crucial distinction here

is between “event” and “experience”. The “politically correct” paradigm for audio is to be preoccupied

with recreating an event which occurred at another place and time.

To heck with living in the past. Music is about how we feel in the present! The purpose of an audio

system (in the real world) is to evoke an emotional response here and now, not to give a history les-

son. Even though an audio system might be able to convey whether a recording was made in Carn-

egie Hall before or after the renovation, it might not be able to convey the pathos and power of the

music.

Music and data are not the same thing. If the recording and playback process were perfect, then mu-

sic and data would be equally well served. However, audio systems are a long, long way from perfect.

This vast discrepancy leaves room for some seriously warped priorities-what we call the “tyranny of

perceived resolution”.

In an attempt to more predictably quantify audio performance, there is an imperative to pay attention

to quantiable values. At its most base level this means measuring and comparing numbers. At the

listening level, this quantication xation often leads to the mono-theistic religion of “resolution at all

costs.”

In the articial context of listening to (focusing on) the equipment, any additional “information” creates

an imperative to follow that path, to use that equipment. If the purpose of an audio system is to be a

vehicle to enable music to stimulate the mind and body, more information should only be one of the

gods in a pantheon, not the only god.

For example: If two components are compared, and one presents a ne sounding quartet, but the

other one reveals that it is really a quintet, the “politically correct” will immediately and absolutely de-

clare the component conveying the quintet to be superior. However, what if the sound of the “quartet”

is enthralling and involving, but the quintet is fatiguing and irritating? Isn’t it more important to enjoy

the music?

This dichotomy highlights why a system designed for monitoring a recording session is often so differ-

ent from an entertainment system. Resolution is the purpose of a monitoring system. Sounding good

and being enjoyable have little value, hearing what is going on is the whole story.

Besides the danger of listening to equipment instead of music, the next most fundamental challenge

to useful evaluation is overcoming the amazing human ability to adapt.

• We are astonishingly capable of “seeing” through distortion. We (generally) don’t feel our clothes,

yet we are sensitive to even a single rain drop falling on our clothing. We can wear all colors of sun-