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
May I add?
Mean - really mean - is another LSC: 2225 Witches' Brew.
I know a lot of test record users, those record is not listenable on their Systems.
When done right, the listener is a few yards above the orchestra (as a microphone) and the performance is below in a endless deep soundstage. The deep Bass is brutal, really shaking the room and all other instruments are in sharp focus. Here you can hear the quality from your Tonearm, most won't do it.
This is a tour de force for the whole reproduction System.
Congratulations on your system set-up Syntax and a nice tip about Witches Brew.
I agree with you that tonearms are critical in the ability to handle 'difficult' records......regardless of the cartridge.
You know, another TAS-lister that makes me scratch my head is the Mercury Rodrigo Guitar Concerto. I have the RFR1 pressing, non-vendor and the massed strings in the climax of the slow mov't are pretty edgy!
After your advice Jdaniel, I pulled out Witches Brew and listened to side 1 starting with Arnold's "Tam O'Shanter".
This is as demanding as The Pines of Rome and I suddenly realised that I had almost exclusively in the past, only listened to side 2 because of the pain.
This extended high frquency emphasis seems to be typical of these early LSC RCAs and I believe that their audio fame had a lot to do with reviewers listening through early tube electronics and sprung turntables like Linn which 'tamed' the prevalent 'highs' and gave the illusion of superb dynamics and detail to otherwise rolled-off amplifiers.
It would be interesting to know how many audiophiles are able to appreciate these early LSC-RCAs through totally solid state electronics being fed by turntables like Rockport, Raven, Walker, Caliburn?
Halcro

Could it be that these early recordings were mastered with nice tube electronics and sound as intended and therefore sound great with excellent tube gear?.

Being feed by SS amps will sound brighter and leaner in these mentioned upper frequencies as that is the overall tonal quality of SS amp's compared to great tube amps :-)