Hi Michael, yes the 19kHz pilot tone was a problem in the days of cassette tape and interfering (beating) with the bias oscillator. It is quite precise though at 19.0kHz. This problem tone I and others observed is around 19.2kHz, the fact it is on a CD and can also be generated by a cheap soundcard suggest it is a "magic" number related to sampling and digital processes used in audio production.
Yes I mentioned this in detail in post #31. I asked for clarification as there is ambiguity in this case. As a former EMI employee, I would hate anyone to think that there was an inherant issue with our recordings.
Your first testfiles, consisted 4 music, one of them was a jazz trio. Jazz trio has sufficiently complex passage and speed, where we know that only good stuffs can produce it well. The more the instruments, the more we can hear the musical relation between the instruments.
I think jazz trio plus vocal (such as Diana Krall with her unique sound) will do. May be. But Pavel's OLD musics had that "musicality" that will invite foot tapping (your tape files too).
I think one of the suggestions was that band/music from Mark Knoppfler, which is used worldwide for testing (I have all CDs from Knoppfler, either his solo or when he was with his band, Dire Strait). I like his voice, and the band musicality.
ADD: BTW, I often found Eric Clapton's to sound horrible with bad systems, but when it's good, it's very good.
Last edited:
Sorry 🙂 I missed that particular post for some reason.
I'm from a repair background so am very very familiar with line pickup.
The original disc I have is a Japanese pressing (A&M label).
I just downloaded the track but windows media player is saying it needs a codec to play it... weird, I'd have thought it would be fine with a .wav
Tony.
Tony.
to Love over gold, specifically Private investigations... However I don't think I've ever heard it sound bad on a system 😉 One of my favourites for Testing is the verve remaster of Ella and Louis. Any track off that 🙂
I think a great track for showing inadequacies in a system is White Stripes Black Math off elephant. If you can get that sounding good then you are definitely doing something right (I still haven't got there yet).
Tony.
Does it play in Audacity Tony ? Its OK on my ancient Vista laptop and that has no added codecs. Dunno on that one !
It just played ok in foobar, I don't have audacity on this laptop (work one so I've been trying to be good and not install random stuff on it).
I've only listened with the headphones. Very first impression was that the piano sounded a bit twangy, and when the vocals got more intense It sounded a bit distorted to me. This could well be deficiencies in the logitech USB headphones.... I'm not sure how they work but I assume they have their own DAC in them, which is no doubt very cheap and nasty 😉
I have a sneaking suspicion that dense music isn't too kind to sub par dac's, and at the moment that's all I have (iether cheapy headphones or on board sound)...
Tony.
I've only listened with the headphones. Very first impression was that the piano sounded a bit twangy, and when the vocals got more intense It sounded a bit distorted to me. This could well be deficiencies in the logitech USB headphones.... I'm not sure how they work but I assume they have their own DAC in them, which is no doubt very cheap and nasty 😉
I have a sneaking suspicion that dense music isn't too kind to sub par dac's, and at the moment that's all I have (iether cheapy headphones or on board sound)...
Tony.
Foobar wins out... wonder why that plays it OK and other stuff doesn't. Great to hear your listening impressions anyway, and maybe it isn't an ideal sort of test track. Its difficult knowing what to pick tbh.
Of course having better speakers will help, I'm just coming from the angle that simple, cheap speakers will do a remarkable good job, if the right approach is taken. And the latter aspect is where having better drivers will pay off, cheap drivers need to be strongly conditioned from cold, every time - this is a nuisance - high quality units should come on song within 5 minutes or so. Also, the classic audiophile type, girl and guitar type recordings come off better with 'classy' speakers - the sound is so sparse in these recordings that every speaker related anomaly shows up strongly.
I have a bunch of Peerless speakers still in cupboard boxes in front of me right now, a Round Tuit project - as I've said many times, I'm on an exploration into what are the lowest denominators of satisfying sound - what is essential, and what isn't. I hear speakers with brilliant drivers every so often, and the sound is just, yuck! - not because the speakers are off, but because important system details are not right, and the latter is what I'm interested in sorting out.
@nico I just listened to it (Black Math) through these headphones, and think I can safely say that the problem with Mooly's track is almost certainly my headphones not the track 
@mooly, no I think it is a good track, but I think it WILL show up deficiencies in what is being used to listen to it. I'll have a listen on the main system for comparison. The best test track is one that the listener is very familiar with... This is something that will be almost impossible in this venu 🙂
Tony.
@mooly, no I think it is a good track, but I think it WILL show up deficiencies in what is being used to listen to it. I'll have a listen on the main system for comparison. The best test track is one that the listener is very familiar with... This is something that will be almost impossible in this venu 🙂
Tony.
Please, not Dire Straits, it's recorded 'too well', meaning it will always sound fine. Supertramp is a goodie, because it makes it easy to hear variations, the 'density' highlights problem areas.
So who are we going to pick apart this time, the recording engineer? I do not think we need a full-length recording, a minute or even less is sufficient, if you cannot hear flaws in the first few seconds you cannot say there are any. Also nobody scrutinise music, you listen to it and either enjoy it or you don't.
Frank, to listen deeply, what do you mean, do you go over it several times and try to hear something hidden? Should a flaw or difference not jump out at you clear as daylight.
Frank, to listen deeply, what do you mean, do you go over it several times and try to hear something hidden? Should a flaw or difference not jump out at you clear as daylight.
Last edited:
These are two tracks off Ella and Louis that I personally think are great evaluating a system, whether they would be good for picking subtle differences I'm not 100% certain, but I do know that Louis Armstrongs voice can get very edgy if things are a bit off.
Ella and Louis Tenderly - YouTube Tenderly
Ella and Louis Stars fell on Alabama - YouTube Stars Fell on Alabama
Tony.
Ella and Louis Tenderly - YouTube Tenderly
Ella and Louis Stars fell on Alabama - YouTube Stars Fell on Alabama
Tony.
OK I just listened to the track on my main system and it is MUCH better. The piano sounds a lot more real and when the vocals get more intense I'm not getting the feeling that they are distorting. Lesson learnt. Dont use the cheapy logitech USB headset for doing listening tests 😉
Also listening to the "stars fell on Alabama I linked to above and it would seem to be a good rip of it"
Tony.
Also listening to the "stars fell on Alabama I linked to above and it would seem to be a good rip of it"
Tony.
Deep as in "looking" into the soundstage. When a system is working well one can hear that the sounds have a distance aspect to them, one's ears are picking up the echo cues which translate into 'deepness'. The Supertramp track has a great deal of that element in it, the better the system is the further back one can hear apparent sounds coming from.
The PC normally has very little depth to the sound, it requires lengthy conditioning to hear the deeper echoes cleanly ...
Frank, Sorry to ask again , and there is no joke in it - at what point does one decide that there is no further apparent sounds or distance.
You mention "apparent" therefore it is not necessarily real and an illusion. At what point does one decide that illusion has reached its limit, what if you think you hear things that really does not exist.
For instance you hear depth and width and instrument placement in space while each was recorded individually in separate booths in the studio as is very often the case.
More so for live recordings because the crowd is not recorded propely and the width and depth really is an illusion. For instance Jazz at the Pawn shop - the instruments seems very realistic but when listening to the audience of which the listener should be part of and listening from that perspective it is a total failure. There is no reality in the width and depth or placement of anything, the mikes are amongst the musicians.
You mention "apparent" therefore it is not necessarily real and an illusion. At what point does one decide that illusion has reached its limit, what if you think you hear things that really does not exist.
For instance you hear depth and width and instrument placement in space while each was recorded individually in separate booths in the studio as is very often the case.
More so for live recordings because the crowd is not recorded propely and the width and depth really is an illusion. For instance Jazz at the Pawn shop - the instruments seems very realistic but when listening to the audience of which the listener should be part of and listening from that perspective it is a total failure. There is no reality in the width and depth or placement of anything, the mikes are amongst the musicians.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.