Print

Print


Hi Kevin:

I'm sure we've all dealt with a "Golden Ears" with no taste. I have another friend who hand-built a 
really superb home-theater system and only likes to watch what I consider horrid mainstream dreck on 
it (including using one of the worst movies ever made, "Jumanji" (sp?) to demonstrate the 
bowel-loosening power of his built-in many-speaker subwoofer system).

There is a whole class of records, going back to the earliest days of "Hi-Fi", which are much more 
about the sound than the music. What I do like about the latest vinyl-reissue fad is that no one has 
budget to go and make new "WOW- CHECK OUT THIS SOUND" records, so they reissue stuff, and the market 
demands stuff, that is beloved and most of it is beloved for the music more than the sound. Some of 
it also got a really raw deal on the first round of CD reissues, and now it can be heard in better 
quality. This is very true of the stuff that Fantasy Group put out under Original Jazz Classics in 
the 80s. They were doing a Good Thing, reissuing a ton of great music at budget prices on the new 
mass media. But they couldn't achieve good sound with their early-era digital transfer and mastering 
systems. Now the best titles are getting the Chad Kassim treatment so we can really hear the great 
music.

One other friend story. My best friend is and has always been a true music nut. He's seen more live 
music than anyone else I know who's not a musician. Over the years, he's built up a very good 
collection of LPs and CDs, always buying for the music and not the sound. Until very recently, he 
was spending hours each week listening to one of those awful Crosly (sp?) "phonograph"/CD/radio 
contraptions. The turntable isn't as much of a groove-gobbling record-wrecker as an old Garrard 
changer, but it's not very good. I finally scraped together the pieces of a good little simple 
stereo system to fit his apartment (old Technics receiver that sounds better than it should, little 
Theile (sp?) speakers, older but well-made and gentle Marantz turntable with new Shure 97 cartridge; 
he uses his DVD player for CDs). He recently did me a big favor so the time was right to present him 
with the stereo. He says it really is better to listen in higher fidelity ("didn't realize all those 
records had such good bass to them"). He's definitely the guy with the crate of dog-eared LPs and a 
messy pile of CDs, and it is always fun to spin the music and pop the beer lids at his place, 
especially now that we can hear all the notes!

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nutt, Kevin" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] WSJ on "High end record collectors"


> Hi Tom--All good natured kidding, of course. Great story. You guys are good sports. But I had an 
> Uncle who had $30,000 of gear (or so he endlessly claimed) and it seemed the only records he had 
> were Kenny G and Yanni. He would always kidnap me during the holidays and I had to sit through all 
> that every year.
>
> Still, the rascal in my kind of wanted to see what would happen.....
>
> Kevin
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf 
> Of Tom Fine
> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:38 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] WSJ on "High end record collectors"
>
> Hi Kevin:
>
> While I sympathize with your general point, I know enough people who love music and have what 
> would be considered excellent-sounding systems (myself included) to say there's not quite a direct 
> adverse relationship between cost of system and appreciation of music. However, stereotypes (pun 
> intended, in this case) don't come about from a complete absence of real-world examples!
>
> One of my oldest "music buddies," a guy who has turned me on to countless good albums, used to be 
> a "high-ender" until his divorce forced a more modest lifestyle. He now has an iPod, a Mac Mini, 
> his large collection of CDs and a good pair of powered speakers that I recommended (the KRK 
> 3-ways, which can easily fill most listening spaces and move enough air for good bass). He listens 
> to more music now than ever, and admits it's much easier to just sit and enjoy music when not 
> having to fuss with and endlessly shop for finicky expensive gear. That said, he's now older and 
> his hearing ain't what it was when he was a "high-ender."
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nutt, Kevin" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 3:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] WSJ on "High end record collectors"
>
>
>> Yelling from the cheap seats: In my experience, almost always, the higher end the stereo system,
>> the lower the musical curiosity, taste (can't think of a better word for taste) and knowledge the
>> owner. If I see a beat up creaky-ass turntable and amp amidst piles of disordered vinyl, I know
>> it's gonna be a pretty interesting evening.
>>
>> Kevin Nutt
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>> Of Sam Brylawski
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 7:22 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] WSJ on "High end record collectors"
>>
>> The Wall Street Journal is running an article on rare rock collectors. It estimates annual sales
>> of rare records is $10 million. (Art: $10 billion.)
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/m88ogw2
>>
>> Sam Brylawski
>>
>> *
>> *
>>
>>
>
>