Audio science reviewers are not audiophiles?

[Robin L]

In a very non-scientific and very heuristic way, to me the difference in reviews is quite easy.

A Darko or Gutemberg review gives me no idea how a Godflesh or Napalm Death record will sound with some particular speakers, while a review from Amir, will allow me to figure out a bit of how will the same record (let's say Fear, Emptiness, Despair) will sound.

Too bar I don't listen to audiophile music.

Funny thing, though. As much as I detest Metal (sorry), that sort of music is a much better test of the performance capabilities of audio gear than the usual "Audiophile" fare.

 

[Petrushka]

Funny thing, though. As much as I detest Metal (sorry), that sort of music is a much better test of the performance capabilities of audio gear than the usual "Audiophile" fare.

I would argue that an acoustic recording of piano, violin and small chorus would be a better test, at least for people who’ve heard this combination live.

Electrified instruments have no real sound.

 

[Robin L]

I would argue that an acoustic recording of piano, violin and small chorus would be a better test, at least for people who’ve heard this combination live.

Electrified instruments have no real sound.

Piano, chorus and orchestra are better tests than most "Audiophile" recordings (like small combo Jazz). Small chorus is something where I've got a lot of experience, also have plenty of experience with big choruses (used to be a recording engineer of that kind of music). Can't say there's a difference between small and large choruses as regards difficulty of record/playback. And solo violin is easier to get right than massed strings. Recorded a lot of solo violin (actually, violin + B. C.) and a fair amount of orchestra. But Metal is a good "stress test", like Bruckner is a good "stress test".

 

[Petrushka]

Piano, chorus and orchestra are better tests than most "Audiophile" recordings (like small combo Jazz). Small chorus is something where I've got a lot of experience, also have plenty of experience with big choruses (used to be a recording engineer of that kind of music). Can't say there's a difference between small and large choruses as regards difficulty of record/playback. And solo violin is easier to get right than massed strings. Recorded a lot of solo violin (actually, violin + B. C.) and a fair amount of orchestra. But Metal is a good "stress test", like Bruckner is a good "stress test".

It depends on whether your goal is loudness or realism. Hearing human voices or familiar acoustic instruments is a better test of frequency response and room acoustics than electronically produced noise.

I’ve read posts where people are most interested in bass volume. It’s certainly difficult to get bass right. You have to have amps and speakers capable of moving air, and you also have to have the system tuned to the room. This can get expensive.

But it is irrelevant if you don’t actually enjoy the music.

Test with what you like.

 

[Petrushka]

My favorite test recordings are Time Out and Saint Seans Organ symphony. I also like to hear what a system does with 21 Trombones. Unfortunately, there is no digital release, and my FLAC copy not up to current audiophile standards.

 

[Robin L]

It depends on whether your goal is loudness or realism. Hearing human voices or familiar acoustic instruments is a better test of frequency response and room acoustics than electronically produced noise.

I’ve read posts where people are most interested in bass volume. It’s certainly difficult to get bass right. You have to have amps and speakers capable of moving air, and you also have to have the system tuned to the room. This can get expensive.

But it is irrelevant if you don’t actually enjoy the music.

Test with what you like.

One of the big issues is getting dynamics right. I've got this set of Beethoven symphonies - Osmo Vanska directing the Minnesota Orchestra on Bis, SACDs. They have wider dynamics than any other recordings of these works I've got right now (have five other complete sets in stereo of varying quality). The lowest levels are low enough that the sound of the room background sounds - refrigerator, the fan of the computer) - can mask the quietest passages if the loudest passages play back at a comfortable level. Funny how so many "audiophiles" complain about audio compression (brickwalling), but how impractical genuinely uncompressed recordings can be. BTW - the performances as directed by Vanska and performed by the Minnesota Orchestra are great.

 

[Petrushka]

I spent ten years in a church choir, so I know what a real pipe organ sounds like. If I can distinguish the pitch of the lowest notes, and it make the floor tingle my bare feet, at modest volume levels, I’m happy. If the same system makes rock music sound unbalanced and overly thumpy, so much the worse for the recording.

First get acoustic music right.

 

[Robin L]

My favorite test recordings are Time Out and Saint Seans Organ symphony. I also like to hear what a system does with 21 Trombones. Unfortunately, there is no digital release, and my FLAC copy not up to current audiophile standards.

I've got the Legacy remaster of "Time Out" on the Columbia Legacy imprint from 1997. I recall having a SACD version. Haven't heard my CD in years. The recording of the "Organ Symphony" in my collection is the old Munch/Boston Symphony Orchestra recording from 1959 on the BMG/Living Stereo SACD. The sound is a little compromised by modern standards, but the performance is wonderful. Can't say as I have "test recordings" anymore. Don't go to audio shows, tend to listen to a lot of older recordings anyway.

 

[Petrushka]

One of the big issues is getting dynamics right. I've got this set of Beethoven symphonies - Osmo Vanska directing the Minnesota Orchestra on Bis, SACDs. They have wider dynamics than any other recordings of these works I've got right now (have five other complete sets in stereo of varying quality). The lowest levels are low enough that the sound of the room background sounds - refrigerator, the fan of the computer) - can mask the quietest passages if the loudest passages play back at a comfortable level. Funny how so many "audiophiles" complain about audio compression (brickwalling), but how impractical genuinely uncompressed recordings can be. BTW - the performances as directed by Vanska and performed by the Minnesota Orchestra are great.

Did the music stop? I’ve heard that.

 

[Robin L]

Did the music stop? I’ve heard that.

Something like that. I know that there's a little bit of sound going on - if I jack up the sound, I can hear what's otherwise missing - but I wouldn't be able to maintain that volume level when the music crescendos. I've been at enough orchestra concerts as a recording engineer to know that this species of dynamics can only come from a very well-rehearsed and disciplined orchestra. This is something that would work much better in a concert hall, it would up the level of drama. In a typical domestic environment, there's just too much background noise for this level of dynamic difference to work.

 

[Anton S]

Something like that. I know that there's a little bit of sound going on - if I jack up the sound, I can hear what's otherwise missing - but I wouldn't be able to maintain that volume level when the music crescendos. I've been at enough orchestra concerts as a recording engineer to know that this species of dynamics can only come from a very well-rehearsed and disciplined orchestra. This is something that would work much better in a concert hall, it would up the level of drama. In a typical domestic environment, there's just too much background noise for this level of dynamic difference to work.

And don't even think about the background noise level in a moving automobile. Hence, compression. Although most commercial pop/jazz/rock releases take it way too far, because they produce everything to the lowest common denominator (i.e. clock radio/portable blaster, etc.).

 

[Petrushka]

And don't even think about the background noise level in a moving automobile. Hence, compression. Although most commercial pop/jazz/rock releases take it way too far, because they produce everything to the lowest common denominator (i.e. clock radio/portable blaster, etc.).

In the utopian future, mixes will be tailored to the destination.

No one talks about this, but hard of hearing people like dynamic compression. And that includes just about everyone over 60.

 

[Barrelhouse Solly]

I can't remember when I first read an article by Julian Hirsch. It was probably in the early '60s in what was then "Hi-fi Stereo Review." I like to sing. I like to play music. I like to listen to music. I'm a geek so I appreciate decision support tools that quantify things that can be quantified. I don't know if I'm an audiophile. I'm not a dedicated hobbyist or collector but I prefer to have the best audio system I can afford because the music sounds better.

 

[Anton S]

In the utopian future, mixes will be tailored to the destination.

No one talks about this, but hard of hearing people like dynamic compression. And that includes just about everyone over 60.

I'm 75 and, when playing commercial releases in the genre I previously mentioned, I use a DRE in my system. And my hearing is just fine, thanks. Some sensitivity falloff in the highest octave, but otherwise quite fit.

 

[Petrushka]

I'm 75 and, when playing commercial releases in the genre I previously mentioned, I use a DRE in my system. And my hearing is just fine, thanks. Some sensitivity falloff in the highest octave, but otherwise quite fit.

The highest octave is 10k-20k.

 

[Anton S]

Yes, I'm aware of that. Your point?

 

[DVDdoug]

I believe Amir considers himself an audiophile.

Although I fit the dictionary definition as a lover of good audio, I DON'T call myself an audiophile. Mostly because the audiophile community is dominated by "nuts" who are not logical or scientific. But also because I don't have golden ears (although I'm more picky than the average listener) and because I'm economical. I'm not going to pay more unless I can really hear a significant improvement. I also have no interest in vinyl or vacuum tubes!

 

[A.wayne]

I believe Amir considers himself an audiophile.

Although I fit the dictionary definition as a lover of good audio, I DON'T call myself an audiophile. Mostly because the audiophile community is dominated by "nuts" who are not logical or scientific. But also because I don't have golden ears (although I'm more picky than the average listener) and because I'm economical. I'm not going to pay more unless I can really hear a significant improvement. I also have no interest in vinyl or vacuum tubes!

Definitely audiophile pejoratives, yep you’re one for sure..

 

[Robin L]

The highest octave is 10k-20k.

I lost 15 kHz back around 1978 at a Neil Young concert. Very few adults older than 30 can hear 20kHz, the kind of hearing loss I have at 69 (limited to 13 kHz, or so it appears) is relatively slight. At least I don't have tinnitus.

 

[xray]

I believe Amir considers himself an audiophile.

Although I fit the dictionary definition as a lover of good audio, I DON'T call myself an audiophile. Mostly because the audiophile community is dominated by "nuts" who are not logical or scientific. But also because I don't have golden ears (although I'm more picky than the average listener) and because I'm economical. I'm not going to pay more unless I can really hear a significant improvement. I also have no interest in vinyl or vacuum tubes!

Nah, you're just a music lover with critical thinking skills and practical common sense.