Are our 'test' records adequate?


Most of us have some favourite records with which to check the health of our systems, or to assess a new component within our systems.
These records are often carried with us whenever we wish to assess a completely foreign system in a different environment. I have my favourite ‘test’ records, some of which I continue to use even after 30 years. I know them (or parts of them), so intimately that I feel confident in my ability to assess a component or complete system after just one listen.
I know other audiophiles who have specialised their ‘test’ records to such an extent that they have different discs to evaluate for Voice, Bass, Large Orchestral, Chamber, Piano, Strings, Drums, Jazz, Rock.
Almost invariably, these vinyl discs are superbly recorded and sound stunning, not just on very fine systems, but also on average systems.
Of course, because each of us knows his own discs so intimately, it is possible to assess the 'omissions'in a foreign system by memory, often to the puzzlement of those to whom the discs are not so well known and to whom the sound had been thoroughly satisfying and impressive?
But I have begun to wonder recently, if this is in fact the most reliable method of evaluating components and systems?
I am sure most of us have heard records on our systems which are almost unlistenable or certainly unpleasant and we have simply placed these discs in the 'never to played' shelf of our storage unit?
But perhaps some of these records might be more revealing than our fabulously recorded 'test' material?
For some time I have been disturbed by two records in my collection, which despite their fame, have sounded poorly (in various parts) despite improvements to my turntable, speakers, amplifiers and cartridges.

Harvest by Neil Young on Reprise (7599-27239-1) has some nicely recorded tracks (Out On The Weekend, Harvest, Heart Of Gold) as well as 2 tracks (Alabama, Words), which have confounded me with their leaness, lack of real bass, vocal distortion and complete lack of depth. The album was recorded at four different venues with three different Producers and those two tracks share the same Producers and venues.
After mounting a Continuum Copperhead arm as well as a DaVinci 12" Grandezza on my Raven AC-3 and carefully setting arm/cartridge geometries with the supplied Wally Tractor and Feikert disc protractor, I was actually able to listen to these tracks without flinching, and could now clearly ascertain the 'out-of-key' harmonies of Stephen Stills together with the clearly over-dubbed lead guitar boosted above the general sound level on the right channel and the completely flat soundstage.

Respighi Pines of Rome (Reiner on the Classic Records re-issue of the RCA LSC-2436) had always brought my wife storming down the hallway at the 'screeching' Finale whilst I scrambled for the volume control to save my bleeding ears.
Again with the two stellar arms and strict geometry, the 117 musicians could not hide the shrill, thin and overloaded recording levels of the horns (particularly the trumpets).
But the wife stayed away and my volume level remained unchanged.

My wonderfully recorded 'test' records had sounded just fine with my previous Hadcock arm but it's only now, when two 'horror' discs can be appreciated, that I truly believe my system 'sings'.
Perhaps we could re-listen to some 'horror' discs in our collection and, with some adjustments to our set-up, make them, if not enjoyable, at least listenable?
128x128halcro

Showing 7 responses by rauliruegas

Dear Halcro: That depend, " adequate " to what? what are you trying to test? how deep is your music ( live event ) know-how/experiences? and your priorities? do you know the limits of the audio system? do you already heard other home audio systems that are better aand lot better than yours? which are your references? do you have an estrategy/method to make the testing work?. IMHO I think that these and many other questions are important to have our each one answer.

Of course that when you are a real expert about it is extremely easy ( almost automatic ) to make the right tests to achieve conclusions about.

I choose my test LP tracks for normal or audiophile recordings where my ears and music/sound experiences tell me that the sound is near the " real " sound of that instrument or notes/harmonics in live event but recorded through a micro.
Each one of us have a different estrategy. I choose some of those LP tracks to fix ( first ) the frequency extremes, normally ( not always ) when those frequency extremes are on target ( special de bass range ) the tonal balance is on target with a " real " midrange response.

I'm very sensitive to those frequency extremes and I always look for it. A great midrange with a low frequency extremes performance don't makes any sense to me, the music is not only midrange but alot lot more than that.

What to look for?, well first that an ( example ) alto sax sounds like an alto sax or that a cello souns like a cello and not like a doublebass, so timbre accuracy is critical. Second, transients all over the frequency range but very special on the hig frequency instrument response. Third, definition/precision here too specially at both frequency extremes: that the bas-low bass sounds are defined/tight and with no overhang where I can discern between bass notes and on highs ( cimbals or the like ) that I can hear with almost there clarity how/where the sticks hit and the harmonics decay. All these steps normally take me to achieve a neutral tonal balance that IMHO is a must to have in almost any home audio system.

There are other steps during my evaluations in my home system but maybe I need a book to write about, things are not so easy like I write here, many of these steps have an intimate relationship between them but what I posted could help to understand how I make my quality performance evaluations in any audio system.

Obviously the set-up is in " pristine " condition ( no doubt about ): nothing less nothing more.
When my conlcusions are that everythig is " dancing " in the right way I can enjoy every single LP I heard/hear including those " dificult " ones.

Halcro, you start to enjoying when you put those great tonearms and when you was sure that the set-up was right on target, with that job you asure ( at least ) that the whole analog rig distortions goes lower so now the LPs ( everyone ) sounds with less distortions, more clarity, more transparency, more neutral and with a new " life ".

That " dificult " LPs that now you are enjoying are telling you that your " job " was first rate: congratulations!!!

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Dear Halcro: I think that only Jaybo can/could give you the precise answer about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Dear Halcro: I forgot: Yes, IMHO mines are " adequate ".

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Dear Jaybo: With all respect IMHO that's a " legendary myth " ( nothing more ) like many other ones that exist in audio.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Dear Doug: Btw, no hi-jack here it is only that Doug point out something important about.

+++++ " is that as we listen to more music and as our systems evolve our audio memory improves, as do most brain functions when exercised. " +++++

our memory is extraordinary if we make " excercise " with it, Doug is totally right on it or at least I gree with.

There are many audio myths that are only that: audio myths ( false assumptions ) and the " very-short audio memory " is IMHO one of them.

Thanks to that " VSM " ( that really is a long-term memory and improving it ) we can grow up on the up-date system set-up/tunning and taht's how we make system or audio item comparisons, IMHO there is no other way.

What is true is that that VSM/LTM is different on each person due mostly to its self audio/music experiences ( audio/music exercise ), so exist persons with " poor " VSM on audio/music as exist people with great/accurate audio/music VSM and people on the middle of these extremes.

Other IMHO very important subject that Doug point out was: +++++ " inaccuracies in the other one's preamp in a matter of minutes, inaccuracies neither owner had ever noticed. " +++++

this almost always happen, our ears are " equalized " by what we are hearing and sometimes we can't identified little problems that exist in our systems, that's why I really like to make the exercise that other people comes and hear my system and in the same way I try to hear as much I can other home systems and obviously attend as much I can to live events.

Btw, Doug IMHO: Paul and I have ( not the same ) similar audio memory and that's why both detect the other each product " inaccuracies ".

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Dear halcro: I respect your opinion ( maybe I'm wrong ) but IMHO this is on topic, don't you think?:

++++ " You say " I sorely miss detail and information " and this statement is very common when we switch from MC to MM cartridges but IMHO if we give time to the MM alternative you will take in count that all the recording information is there but with a little different presentation and with lower distortions due that ( between other things ) the MM cartridge signal goes/pass to less gain stages, the MM signal " suffer " less electronic manipulation. You are hearing this.

+++ " The more accurate system is the one which reproduces more differences – more contrast between the various program sources. " +++

well, I say: the one that reproduce the recording with less/lower distortions ( any kind ). This system will make: " some poorly recorded material more listenable .. " +++ because it add lesser/lower distortions in that poorly recordings. +++++

Less/lower distortions are a " form " of accuracy.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Dear Halcro: I know very well that P-77 in several tonearms but not in any of the ones you own so I can't say for sure if the P-77/tonearm combination that you are using is a good one to show the real P-77 quality performance but I assume is ok .
I know very well too your electronics/cables/Raven(one motor) specially the DM-10 that I heard several times and at least three times in my system. Btw, your phono stage invert polarity so it is worth to try the DM-10 polarity control to find the best quality performance.

Well, I assume you are running the P-77 at 60K impedance position ( I work with at 100K ) and at the lower capacitance setting, well you have to try on capacitance to achieve the desired quality performance.

You say " I sorely miss detail and information " and this statement is very common when we switch from MC to MM cartridges but IMHO if we give time to the MM alternative you will take in count that all the recording information is there but with a little different presentation and with lower distortions due that ( between other things ) the MM cartridge signal goes/pass to less gain stages, the MM signal " suffer " less electronic manipulation. You are hearing this.

+++ " The more accurate system is the one which reproduces more differences – more contrast between the various program sources. " +++

well, I say: the one that reproduce the recording with less/lower distortions ( any kind ). This system will make: " some poorly recorded material more listenable .. " +++ because it add lesser/lower distortions in that poorly recordings.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.