One of my go-to tests for fidelity is whether I can discern the brand of acoustic guitar(s) being played. Gibsons and Martins sound very different in real life. Other quality brands occupy the middle ground between them.Thanks for your very good suggested examples...
How can a system be judged with highly processed, non acoustic music?
I basically know what an instrument or human voice sounds like. I understand that almost all recordings, analog or digital, go through some level of processing. I also know that there are many, many recordings which strive to present a natural, real sound. To me, I can best judge a system playing lightly or non processed acoustic music.
This is also my preference for listening in general. And for me, it is vinyl.
This is also my preference for listening in general. And for me, it is vinyl.
- ...
- 59 posts total
Just a note...Nobody can tell the difference as Gibsons and Martins can sound very similar or dissimilar depending on the tone woods, age, model, manufacturing techniques, etc. I've owned and played both brands extensively for decades so I know what I'm talking about. In real life. What does an Olsen sound like? A Bourgeois? Froggy Bottom? Santa Cruz? Also, if you're a huge hippity hop or EDM fan you might have discerning tastes regarding the sound of that even though it's not "acoustic." So what? Mic cables, mixing boards, ear wax, microphones (first Stereophile test CD had a great thing where somebody read into a bunch of different microphones...check THAT out), engineers, the acoustics of a live venue, the engineer's ear wax, on and on all have a big influence on recordings. If it sounds right to you, whatever you're into, it's right. |
Depends. If you listen only to non-acoustical music then yes, but one should test the system with music they prefer and maybe a good idea to test highs, mid, bass. If you listen to acoustic music then it’s probably foolish to not test with such music especially at the usual lofty prices we pay for our hobby. Then it’s hit or miss whether the system will be to your liking or not when you play acoustical music. |
fwiw john darko, well known, and imo, a very good audio gear reviewer in print and online (much on u tube) puts right up front he pretty much exclusively listens to electronica, old and new, and indie rock music https://darko.audio/2011/04/electronica-for-audiophiles-part-1/ despite this, and while i don’t agree with some of his points of view, by and large i find his equipment reviews very much on point and accurate in describing the sound of his review subjects, be they speakers, amps, dacs and so on |
People have no idea generally of the weight of acoustic on audiophile experience.... They listen to their gear, compare it to other, without knowing that no gear has a sound of its own ONLY but must be embedded mechanically, electrically and acoustically especially to shine by itself... Especially many reviewers are there to sell, not to explain how to create audio experience at no cost... No acoustician use electronica FIRST AND ONLY to asssess a Hall or a room....Hall or musical room are designed for centuries FIRST for natural human voices and natural non electrified instruments...This is the point about "timbre " perception... But Who dont want to understand will not.... 😁😊 Too much work to understand anyway.... It takes me 2 years full time listening experiments in my room to figure out acoustic for audio, i will not try to convince someone to do that... If you had money anyway you will buy ready made passive treatment and think the job is done.... Most of the times the job is not done especially in small audio complex room... It takes me active mechanical control devices to ADAPT the room to the speakers system....Passive treatment was not enough at all here... Anyway.... My best to all... |
- 59 posts total