What is this term 'analytical' ?


I see this routinely in reviews & comments and so do you:

It’s too analytical. It’s so analytical that it’s not musical. Etc.

What does this mean? You can actually hear stuff? You picture math problems on a chalkboard? A shrink’s couch?

Isn’t the entire point of this hobby to hear music clearly? But apparently: not too clearly?

128x128zufan

@tomcy6

Let me add, all the notes and details are there, they just don’t connect with you emotionally.

 

Yes, I’ve experienced this a few times at shows.

A quite strange experience.

Something is wrong, or something is missing.

In either case you’re not immediately sure what that might be.

 

The point of this hobby is to enjoy yourself. The idea that there’s a pure land that has perfect reproduction that everyone would enjoy is folly.  Same for the idea that there is such a thing as an objectively neutral speaker that is capable of reproducing some ideal as the mastering engineers heard it in all cases.

 

OP,

You are going to have to listen to different systems while learning the terminology. Here is a glossary of terminology.

 

https://www.stereophile.com/reference/50/index.html

 

 

Several weeks ago I wrote a review of a DAC that was mostly about sound reproduction generally. It seems to touch very closely to the issues raised in this thread. As only one line of it refers to the DAC in question I think it’s OK to let it appear here. I’m certain there are other DACs that can meet the standard that I find praiseworthy and the review says so.

"Analytical" is something I’ve been fighting ever since I got into this stupid hobby.

The arrival of "Digital" made things worse.