Personally I use lots of different non-classical recordings to judge a system. I find I can judge much quicker and better by listening for specific things on particular albums. It's more important to know your reference, than it is to have a superb recording. If your reference has some kind of mediocre sound in some way, it should be clear that is so on any good stereo - reference.
Where as at shows they like to just play classical, jazz, and female vocals on the stereos because they're recorded real nicely, so you can't really tell how good the stereo is or is not... and maybe some annoying drum bass tracks to try and ruin your hearing on occasion.
Then personal preference is a whole other matter. I like lots of stuff, and only avoid albums I like if they sound downright real bad on a good stereo. There is no way in hell I'd waste my life listening to stuff I don't care about just because it fulfilled some kind of perfectionist engineering mentality. Also I know I'm not alone, so why would anyone go with the constraints of a condition that doesn't fit your listening preference?
Even if you're right and getting rid of feedback and using Triodes (probably a better example than SE) isn't important on the most superb recordings, it's just an exercise in possibilities with no real relevance to commercial products. The world of music production simply isn't about to cater solely to people with special Pavel approved stereos.
On getting rid of feedback and using triodes:
Triode plate resistance == internal negative feedback?
Triode plate resistance == internal negative feedback?
Complex music is a good test, full orchestra is hard to beat in this regard. Small combo jazz, folk, singer and guitar etc. are used to sell equipment because it's hard to make it sound bad. Familiarity is key, it doesn't always have to be the best recording, having said that I often use Zappa, because it's familiar, complex and well produced.
Hi Scottjoplin,
-Chris
Yes. They have better hearing and do not have any bias or expectations. Women who aren't that interested in audio things are also very good at pointing out issues they don't like. I'm lucky in that my wife is interested in audio and isn't worried about bruising anyone's ego. She also doesn't care whether the device is tube or solid state.
-Chris
Polite as I may be, I sincerely doubt the anecdotal assertions being made as of late. One need not look far into human behavior research to find out how easily, and oftentimes subconsciously, people are influenced. And even though Olive talks about untrained testees preferring low distortion and general neutrality of playback, we all bring biases to the table in socially cued, unblinded tests.
In short, reliability of third parties is the same as oneself, and that is not at all. Otherwise it's more sophisticated versions of the wife in the kitchen trope. (That is not to say one shouldn't include one's spouse in gear choice conversations!)
In short, reliability of third parties is the same as oneself, and that is not at all. Otherwise it's more sophisticated versions of the wife in the kitchen trope. (That is not to say one shouldn't include one's spouse in gear choice conversations!)
Last edited:
Thirded!!
Once again, familiarity with the material is important, and I like using two releases: the totally synthesized 'Jazz From Hell' specifically because of how clean the recording is having been played directly from a Synclavier, the dynamic range and lack of mic bleed through between 'instruments' and total lack of background clutter. This can really reveal speaker issues with cabinet resonances and other time-smear...plus I like the compositions, which helps get into the critical listening.
For general evaluation I also use his final non-posthumous release 'The Yellow Shark' which I think his crew did a great job recording.
And although it's ultimate fidelity is marred by the usual warts present in a live setting, the recording of his 1972 Petite Wazoo tour remastered by Joe Travers and Doug Sax titled: 'Imaginary Diseases' is a fantastic live album, with a lot of the energy of that big ensemble preserved. The combined brass in the title track will give any system a workout.
Frank left us some amazing work, our musical arts are so much the less for his passing...I think I'll have to do another memorial radio show in December, this year being the 25th since his untimely passing...
Cheers,
Howie
PMA, I disagree with you. I can't reproduce the GD with tubes, except for Mac350's (350W power amps) or direct drive electrostatic headphones like STAX. Single ended tube rock and roll reproduction, no way? BUT give me Ella Fitzgerald singing a sentimental song or a string quartet through single ended tube amps and I can fall in love, or at least want to hear more, and I do not even design with tubes!
I'm going to give you a sincere non answer: a huge portion of "tech/ concepts" is an attempt to corner market in a zero sum game. The standards war is a clear case of this, especially something as outright stupid as mqa.
There's a lot of tech that sincerely tries to solve playback deficiencies in new ways. There's the subset of designer products, which may be innovative, that are a manifestation of said designer's personal be beliefs, whether grounded in fact or fiction.
Then there's the majority of typically sensible designed products that sit all along the value spectrum built to a price point. Less interesting, maybe, but usually represent the best performance for the dollar. Especially if you buy into neutral, low distortion electronics.
I don't share any reservation about whether DSD is smart or dumb, but every time I've heard it, it sounds like mush. Yet people ran towards it, and I think many like it because it sounds like mush.
Sure, so it goes. However, there are many people who do not listen or do not like complex classical music, because it is not as easy listening as pop music. Many people even do not know the sound of live instrumental music.
Last edited:
So what, PMA? Just because you were raised on classical music, many, many audiophiles have not been, but enjoy it anyway up to a point. Usually the easy stuff, like ballet music, etc. In any case, audio reproduction has to be universally OK, not just for one type of music and this includes rock as well as full symphony orchestras.
Actually I wonder if many here are more interested in the 'construction' or 'execution' of a musical piece more than its actual fidelity? Many classical musicians are in this category. I usually listen to the 'sound' of the instruments more than the 'construction' myself.
Actually I wonder if many here are more interested in the 'construction' or 'execution' of a musical piece more than its actual fidelity? Many classical musicians are in this category. I usually listen to the 'sound' of the instruments more than the 'construction' myself.
Last edited:
Sure, vintage recordings sound best through vintage equipment 😉. That's how they were recorded and that's how they were intended to be reproduced.
BTW, I have many jazz vinyls from mid sixties as well.
They sound pretty good through modern equipment too, I think it's down to the purity of the recording mainly
Well, I'm not a classical musician, I play the piano a little, I watched Young Musician of the Year the other day, the sound on the TV is very poor, but under the circumstances it didn't bother me a bit.
Succinct definition of difference between audiophile and music lover?
I have a variety of music I use just to confirm things are working as expected. This includes some very dynamic Jazz to check amplifier headroom and motorhead. Don't laugh, but metal is good for checking how the speakers handle 'congested' music. But this is just final checks that nothing has been missed end to end and certainly no measure of 'goodness' 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.