High-end Music?

[puroagave]

Is there such a thing as 'high-end' music? I'm not referring to audiophile recordings or 'demo' music, but genre specific. It can also be Acoustic vs amplified, instrumental vs. the human voice or combining some or all of those subsets. In literature we have writers whose books are considered 'classic' against those that aren't. This goes for any of the arts (painters, sculptors) in the culinary world we have haute cuisine and then there's fast food - everyone knows the difference.

If there's a hierarchy in the way you view music, what is it?

 

[Mike]

Not me, but many consider Classical to be "high end". I guess RAP would be at the bottom (hard to argue with that).

 

[mep]

If classic jazz isn't considered high-end, I don't know what is.

 

[BlueFox]

I suspect trying to equate a music genre with 'high-end' just adds to the stereotype of high-end audiophiles having their nose in the clouds. High-end should be about trying to listen to your music, whatever it may be, with the best sound possible.

 

[MDP]

I agree with Bud !

 

[mep]

I agree with Bud !

That's the motherhood and apple pie answer. If the real purpose of the question is to ask which genre of music consistently has the highest sound quality, one of the nods has to go with jazz. I don't know anyone who is trying to scale the high-end mountain so they can play back poorly recorded music on a routine basis. If that's your bag, there is no need to spend money on a high-end system. Any cheap receiver and cheap speakers will get the job done.

 

[still-one]

If you like the music you will listen to it on any system. If you don't like it you won't listen to it on a million dollar system.

 

[Mike]

If classic jazz isn't considered high-end, I don't know what is.

Perhaps today, but that was not always the case. In contrast, classical has always been associated with the upper class who have attended symphony performances for centuries.

 

[o0OBillO0o]

Is there such a thing as 'high-end' music? I'm not referring to audiophile recordings or 'demo' music, but genre specific. It can also be Acoustic vs amplified, instrumental vs. the human voice or combining some or all of those subsets. In literature we have writers whose books are considered 'classic' against those that aren't. This goes for any of the arts (painters, sculptors) in the culinary world we have haute cuisine and then there's fast food - everyone knows the difference.

If there's a hierarchy in the way you view music, what is it?

Not me, but many consider Classical to be "high end". I guess RAP would be at the bottom (hard to argue with that).

Mike- you can argue taste... but not genre.:snicker:

There are only recordings with the highest technical polish that could approach a made up definition of "high end" music.

 

[Albert]

When I was in University I used to go to classical concerts in my jeans and t-shirt. I went to listen to the music, not to make a fashion statement. You should have seen the dirty looks I got from the well dressed people. I think most of them were there to just be seen and not so much for the music. HIgh end for them must have meant the high end of the income bracket.

As for listening to less than ideally recorded music, I find that the better my system gets the worse the music sounds. Some of my rock albums from the 80's sound bright, compressed and lacking in bass. Yet on a more modest system they sound alright. I think a more revealing system can show the flaws more in lesser recordings that may be more common in some genres than others.

So in respect to sound quality, some genres like Jazz and Classical may in some cases be considered higher end than Rock or Pop. I listen to all of them though as there is more to music than how well it is recorded.

 

[MikeCh]

Instead of focusing on a specific genre of music as "audiophile", I have always prefered to seek out artists (modern music) that embrace well recorded / produced results. The likes of Yello, Michael Jackson (Quincy Jones is a genius), Little Feat, the Dead, Steely Dan, and many others have historically provided music with a better quality of sound than the majority.

90% of the time I now find myself listening to various Classical music styles / compositions and some of them are indeed crappy recordings or performances compared to others. The thing is, you can spend a lifetime exploring Classical music / performers / composers and the new-and-exciting discoveries just keep coming, including some exceptionally well recorded performances that would by all means be considered "audiophile" quality.

I think you can find audiophile quality recordings in all types of musical genres but that does not automatically mean a given musical genre will be comprised of a majority of audiophile quality recordings.

 

[socfan12]

I think some of us may be mixing up the OP's original question. Some of the discussion seems to mixing Rob's "high end music" with high end audio. High end audio as we typically refer to it is the elevated state of reproduction of music (any genre music), and that repro system includes the equipment and process for the capture and replay of music (any genre of music).

I think what Rob is asking is there a style/genre of music that is 'high end' like certain restaurants are 'haute cuisine'. The music itself, regardless of reproduction system. You can play 'crappy' music on a high end system, and that would be high end audio, but not high end music. You can play high end music on your iphone, but it would still be high end music.

If I understand the question that way, my answer would be I think there is pecking order in music. I think music that is more viscerally involving (rhythmical, something that gets your body moving and dancing say) is more low end music while music that is more cerebrally involving is considered more high end (classic jazz, classical music, etc). Vocal-less music would also be higher end than that with vocals (pop music say) because you need to use your imagination more to understand and appreciate the meaning of the music/song.

Anyway, just my $.02.:S

 

[MikeCh]

I think some of us may be mixing up the OP's original question. Some of the discussion seems to mixing Rob's "high end music" with high end audio. High end audio as we typically refer to it is the elevated state of reproduction of music (any genre music), and that repro system includes the equipment and process for the capture and replay of music (any genre of music).

I think what Rob is asking is there a style/genre of music that is 'high end' like certain restaurants are 'haute cuisine'. The music itself, regardless of reproduction system. You can play 'crappy' music on a high end system, and that would be high end audio, but not high end music. You can play high end music on your iphone, but it would still be high end music.

If I understand the question that way, my answer would be I think there is pecking order in music. I think music that is more viscerally involving (rhythmical, something that gets your body moving and dancing say) is more low end music while music that is more cerebrally involving is considered more high end (classic jazz, classical music, etc). Vocal-less music would also be higher end than that with vocals (pop music say) because you need to use your imagination more to understand and appreciate the meaning of the music/song.

Anyway, just my $.02.:S

Hi Allen,

If I take Rob's question as an absolute (as in the difference between say a famous Bistro's cuisine vs. a Burger King hamburger) and try to apply that to "high-end music" then my answer would be NO, to Rob. There isn't any equivalent absolute comparison regarding music that I'm aware.

 

[o0OBillO0o]

I think some of us may be mixing up the OP's original question. Some of the discussion seems to mixing Rob's "high end music" with high end audio. High end audio as we typically refer to it is the elevated state of reproduction of music (any genre music), and that repro system includes the equipment and process for the capture and replay of music (any genre of music).

I think what Rob is asking is there a style/genre of music that is 'high end' like certain restaurants are 'haute cuisine'. The music itself, regardless of reproduction system. You can play 'crappy' music on a high end system, and that would be high end audio, but not high end music. You can play high end music on your iphone, but it would still be high end music.

If I understand the question that way, my answer would be I think there is pecking order in music. I think music that is more viscerally involving (rhythmical, something that gets your body moving and dancing say) is more low end music while music that is more cerebrally involving is considered more high end (classic jazz, classical music, etc). Vocal-less music would also be higher end than that with vocals (pop music say) because you need to use your imagination more to understand and appreciate the meaning of the music/song.

Anyway, just my $.02.:S

Hi Allen,

If I take Rob's question as an absolute (as in the difference between say a famous Bistro's cuisine vs. a Burger King hamburger) and try to apply that to "high-end music" then my answer would be NO, to Rob. There isn't any equivalent absolute comparison regarding music that I'm aware.

I think you both got that right- I agree with your comments.

p.s. Albert, keep wearing your jeans & T-shirt.

 

[MDP]

That's the motherhood and apple pie answer. If the real purpose of the question is to ask which genre of music consistently has the highest sound quality, one of the nods has to go with jazz. I don't know anyone who is trying to scale the high-end mountain so they can play back poorly recorded music on a routine basis. If that's your bag, there is no need to spend money on a high-end system. Any cheap receiver and cheap speakers will get the job done.

Mark, that's just not correct. Just because someone listens to Rock or some other genre that's not considered audiophile quality doesn't mean the sound can't be much better through a quality system.

Sometimes I can't believe the things you say.

 

[mep]

Mark, that's just not correct. Just because someone listens to Rock or some other genre that's not considered audiophile quality doesn't mean the sound can't be much better through a quality system.

Sometimes I can't believe the things you say.

That's because you misinterpreted what I wrote. In hindsight, the answer to Rob's original question is "no." There is no such thing as "high end" music and any discussion along those lines is doomed to failure.

 

[MDP]

That's because you misinterpreted what I wrote. In hindsight, the answer to Rob's original question is "no." There is no such thing as "high end" music and any discussion along those lines is doomed to failure.

Now that,I agree with.

 

[Julot]

At first I shrugged at the question but then I realized that there is a reason jazz or classical would be considered high end, and it's not because of the sound quality of the associated records, or because fancier, richer people listen to it. It's because it requires an investement, is intrinsically sophisticated, and gives profound, almost intellectual rewards beyond simpler satisfaction. Of course there are exceptions, as there are deliciously sophisticated pop songs as well as Strauss waltzes. But basically, yes, some music is more serious and richer. That doesn't make it better, but it does make it more high end.

 

[Shadowfax]

At first I shrugged at the question but then I realized that there is a reason jazz or classical would be considered high end, and it's not because of the sound quality of the associated records, or because fancier, richer people listen to it. It's because it requires an investement, is intrinsically sophisticated, and gives profound, almost intellectual rewards beyond simpler satisfaction. Of course there are exceptions, as there are deliciously sophisticated pop songs as well as Strauss waltzes. But basically, yes, some music is more serious and richer. That doesn't make it better, but it does make it more high end.

I find that when the players are more skilled, the music is more involving, then the production/recording is better done. This crosses over several genres so the answer to Any One Genre is NO.

I have lots of Smooth Jazz disks done well by GRP and other labels. I have lots of Prog and Fusion recordings that are very good as well as have captivating music and virtuosic performers.

I have been luck to have been introduced to lots of music from all over the world back in the comp trading days and there is plenty done outside of the US that is well recorded and top notch music.

Now that said, we all have a different approach and view as to what is top notch or virtuosic. Many like and view a female vocalist tickling the piano to be it. I prefer a super group like Transatlantic, where each player was a star from another great band and they are all playing more notes than the average listener can comprehend. Outside of groups like this, mainstream listeners cannot handle when 4 instruments are not all playing the same notes while the drum beat may as well be a machine.

I have music I like, but rarely listen to it because the recordings are horrid. I have other music I may like less but it sounds so good I listen to it and enjoy it.

Very tough question by the OP and no real way to accurately answer it.