Negative show report posts... enough is enough.
- Thread starter Peter Breuninger
- Start date
I wish so too. But the question is not what I hear but who do I trust? The game is... we have to choose the advisor and not hear the loudspeaker.
Last edited:
Let me say that I have not read any of this thread and, at this point, will not. I did find the OP provocative and thought I would contribute my 2cents.
When I cover shows, I tend to comment more on what is seen and said since, under the conditions of the show (and I assume that has already been thrashed over), it is extremely difficult to create really good sounding system from even good sounding parts. So it is unreasonable to crucify anyone if the sound is not superb. Moreover, even if it is singularly good or bad, one cannot single out any part of it (except fortune) as the cause. Yes, some people are more consistently successful than others but that's life. As a result, I try not to praise or condemn, just observe.
Similarly, I do read others blogs for factual information about shows that I do not attend and just discount all critical comments, positive and negative. FWIW.
When I cover shows, I tend to comment more on what is seen and said since, under the conditions of the show (and I assume that has already been thrashed over), it is extremely difficult to create really good sounding system from even good sounding parts. So it is unreasonable to crucify anyone if the sound is not superb. Moreover, even if it is singularly good or bad, one cannot single out any part of it (except fortune) as the cause. Yes, some people are more consistently successful than others but that's life. As a result, I try not to praise or condemn, just observe.
Similarly, I do read others blogs for factual information about shows that I do not attend and just discount all critical comments, positive and negative. FWIW.
At the end of the day a) It's not reasonable to assume people will curb their opinion wherever they fall on the spectrum of polite to arrogant/ignorant b) Critical listening SW does not definitively decide who has uber golden ears or not (I have the Harmon SW also and found it useful but that it doesn't hit on all aspects of sonics) c) There is no degree in Audiophile mastery so there are no true "Professional Critical Listeners" and d) Calling someone a coward(s) on any public forum never leads to positive outcomes. Saying it twice is exponentially foolish...
I have one more thought on all this, and it's sort of the antithesis of "golden ears"- if you have enough time to listen to a wide range of music in a controlled environment (where you are familiar with the other variables in the system), you can start to make meaningful judgements about how good the system is at reproducing music. "Show conditions," to me, are not just bad set-up or hotel room environments (both real issues), but all sorts of other things that interfere with meaningful listening for evaluative purposes. I think I have pretty "quick" ears (in the sense that I can get the measure how something sounds, and whether it sounds 'real' to me), but it still takes time, no distractions, and enough familiarity with the other parts of the system to make a judgement. That's why I discount show listening or reports.
This has nothing to do with the sophistication of the listener; to the contrary, I suspect most of those posting here aren't "wow'd' by audiophile "spectacular"- but the opposite of that - something that approaches genuineness in reproduction - isn't something that you can make a snapshot judgement about, with a couple of records in a crowded room with a system comprised of a bunch of unfamiliar components. (And, to the extent the party demonstrating the gear is not relying on the 'tried and true' demo record of the week/month/year- stuff, that to my ears, is often 'tweaked' sounding- it takes more time to meaningfully evaluate a system). That doesn't mean I won't have an "impression" based on what I hear in these circumstances, but I would be reluctant to make conclusive judgements in that context.
This has nothing to do with the sophistication of the listener; to the contrary, I suspect most of those posting here aren't "wow'd' by audiophile "spectacular"- but the opposite of that - something that approaches genuineness in reproduction - isn't something that you can make a snapshot judgement about, with a couple of records in a crowded room with a system comprised of a bunch of unfamiliar components. (And, to the extent the party demonstrating the gear is not relying on the 'tried and true' demo record of the week/month/year- stuff, that to my ears, is often 'tweaked' sounding- it takes more time to meaningfully evaluate a system). That doesn't mean I won't have an "impression" based on what I hear in these circumstances, but I would be reluctant to make conclusive judgements in that context.
It is a game too. Anyone willing to drop $20k on a loudspeaker without hearing one deserves what they get.
Now there are circumstances where I would do that. If it were a 2nd hand purchase of a $40k or more speaker I might do it with the expectation if it doesn't work out I can resell it to recoup the money. Only out the time, and bother to find out. While having gained a benefit of owning and using the speaker long enough to be sure of how I liked it. In fact having been disappointed with speaker suggestions that is usually what I have done. It isn't that an 'expert' is not to be believed, but that taste in speakers is quite variable.
Amir, why is training on the Harmon test better than training oneself by going to live concerts once a week, sitting in different positions in different halls, and listening to the tonality of brass, violins, vocals, and piano? I was going through the Harmon tests and it is very limited in terms of testing. Seems to be some ability to catch frequency differences between different bands, and compression.
I believe most of the equipment that sounds good at reproducing one instrument, or vocal, will fail when 50 - 100 instruments are thrown through it, i.e. the component is asked to play multiple frequencies at multiple voltage levels simultaneously. The Harmon doesn't seem to be testing that.
I started off using Led Zep and some rock on auditions. I still do use some Zeppelin, but my primary audition now is Bach chorals, Mahler 2, Mussorgsky Pictures (orchestral as well as piano), Scheherazade, Rachmaninov Symphonic dances. Sections of these bring out brass, violins, speed, thump, bass, dynamics, not to mention they highlight large gaps in these aspects as well as separation and fake tone. The Harmon tests seem to be ignoring a large aspect of testing
I believe most of the equipment that sounds good at reproducing one instrument, or vocal, will fail when 50 - 100 instruments are thrown through it, i.e. the component is asked to play multiple frequencies at multiple voltage levels simultaneously. The Harmon doesn't seem to be testing that.
I started off using Led Zep and some rock on auditions. I still do use some Zeppelin, but my primary audition now is Bach chorals, Mahler 2, Mussorgsky Pictures (orchestral as well as piano), Scheherazade, Rachmaninov Symphonic dances. Sections of these bring out brass, violins, speed, thump, bass, dynamics, not to mention they highlight large gaps in these aspects as well as separation and fake tone. The Harmon tests seem to be ignoring a large aspect of testing
Last edited:
You hit the nail on the head. Two things here:
1) I cannot shake off the impression from reading 'professional' reviews that many of the reviewers rarely or never attend concerts of unamplified live music (and as you say, different seating positions in different halls are really important too). How can you call yourself a competent reviewer of you don't regularly sharpen your ears on the real thing? How can you know what to listen for in the performance of a system if you only compare systems with one another and not with the golden standard, the real thing -- unamplified live music?
The apparent lack of experience with unamplified live music in all kinds of variations and settings is one key reason why I consider some 'professional' reviewers a total fraud.
2) The assumption that the ability to pass some 'golden ear' test to hear some miniscule differences between recordings is somehow more important for listener competence and the ability to judge a system than an intimate knowledge of the live sound of music is just plain silly.
Last edited:
To be fair, Peter B is an open-minded man http://www.theonion.com/article/open-minded-man-grimly-realizes-how-much-life-hes--19273
I am dismayed to be reading such words from an industry "critic". Those companies who choose to display their wares in a public forum and with sound emanating from the system are open to any and all form of critique. I want to know Peter, are you a critic of high end audio or are you a Fanboy of high end audio? If you are the former, then it is your duty to report on the rooms the way you hear them and if they don't measure up to report it as so. That is journalism and you are free to interject your what you speculate could be the reason for the sound you are hearing (good or bad). If you serve the public then it is to them that you owe this honest appraisal to. Most of us are adult enough to understand that it is your experienced opinion but not gospel truth.
If you are the later, you say things like your post above. So, should we now take your silence about a room as a negative comment? Seems pretty vague because maybe you just missed a certain room and are condemning it with silence. We are not children that need to be hidden from others opinions!
I actually had a fair amount of respect for your posts and shows until now but I see that you are the cowardly one that won't say what he really thinks about what he hears. Calling those who state an opinion on a room as cowardly is really looking at things bass ackwards! Since when has it EVER been cowardly to state an opinion in public? This is usually regarded as a very courageous act...stupid maybe, but courageous nonetheless.
I can see that you have been around and gotten too chummy with the industry manufacturers, distributors and dealers to retain a critical eye. I can now officially take you off the list of the few remaining respectable and unbiased reviewers out there.
Further, I disagree that it is hard for manufacturers to get good sound at shows...unless they have crap to work with! MOST high end is crap masquerading as good hifi for a high price. This can be heard at shows, private dealer demos and in many people's homes. The difference is that at shows usually they pull out the stops and put the very best they have to offer out there...so it SHOULD be judged. In people's homes, where they have budgets and are limited then you can be diplomatic and polite. At a dealer demo you are often looking into one piece or two and maybe don't like it so you can just leave without doing anything.
If this all sounds harsh, well I have to say your comments are shocking and IMO disqualify you as a professional hifi critic (if you ever considered yourself one).
the problem with "correcting" the room , passive , active , bass distribution or DSP is that it is *mainly* sweet spot specific..
Almost impossible to treat the room in every conceivable position , add in another 10 sweaty bodies and all your "correction" has gone to hell for 9 of them.
Almost impossible to treat the room in every conceivable position , add in another 10 sweaty bodies and all your "correction" has gone to hell for 9 of them.
Hi
I have read from many that there have been some good shows lately. T.H.E Audio show held recently at Newport comes to mind. So it is possible to choose a venue that results in adequate sound... I am sure Ferrari or Porsche would not showcasew the 911 or La Ferrari on an off-road track ... For the price of many of those High End Gear the same should apply....
I am somewhat disappointed by the the stance of the Original postert. His post was insulting. demeaning and pedantic. He persisted in this subsequent posts. He got away with that somewhat. He seems to have taken the view of a booster for High End Audio and not a journalist anyway. So be it but I believe that the WBF should hold Industry "Experts" to WBF standards.
I have read from many that there have been some good shows lately. T.H.E Audio show held recently at Newport comes to mind. So it is possible to choose a venue that results in adequate sound... I am sure Ferrari or Porsche would not showcasew the 911 or La Ferrari on an off-road track ... For the price of many of those High End Gear the same should apply....
I am somewhat disappointed by the the stance of the Original postert. His post was insulting. demeaning and pedantic. He persisted in this subsequent posts. He got away with that somewhat. He seems to have taken the view of a booster for High End Audio and not a journalist anyway. So be it but I believe that the WBF should hold Industry "Experts" to WBF standards.
It is not in a manufacturers interest to recommend room treatment and dsp .. and they all know the room is the most important component. If a consumer treats the room and does DSP or eq on the system , they might not buy the top of the range or have the yen to box swap to try correct room aberrations that cant be corrected by box swapping.
It's a pity tho..
It's a pity tho..
I think that I prefer 'Human Reproduction' by Plenty O'Tool ( Diamonds Are Forever )
Actually, there was a forced trade-off between Magico and I think it was Devialet (who occupied the adjacent room). They had to take alternate 20minute music slots because there was so much sound leakage between the rooms. The difference is Magico decided not to disclose this (for reasons I've never been able to truly fathom) and instead often had a room full of people scratching their heads wondering why there was no sound.
Having demonstrated with room treatment, the criticism tends to come from the end users. There's a certain irony in someone who not 10 minutes earlier showed me a picture of his modified Quad ESLs with exposed panels held in place by a rusting steel cradle, and wires trailing across the room to home made external crossovers, who then proceeded to dismiss a pair of relatively discreet bass traps as 'divorce makers'.
By the same instance, DSP is often dismissed as 'cheating' and 'ruining the sound'. Personally, I think the massive uncorrected 60dB spike in the frequency response of a room at around 70Hz is ruining the sound more than compensating for that in DSP, but apparently you can listen past such things...
Peter,
I know from bitter experience how difficult it is to make a good sound at a show. Even when you get it all right, there will be people who will not like the sound you are making, have heard too many systems in too short a time-frame to pass judgment (but still will), and there will be times when it goes all wrong. There is one guy who used to turn up at the shows in Manchester, England, who was some kind of sonic bio-weapon - every time he walked into a room, good sound walked out. It just happens.
Despite this, we should not treat companies so tenderly. IMO, there is way too much focus on the sound in rooms (the hackneyed motoring analogy breaks down here, because you don't get to test drive the cars at a motor show, any yet people use an audio show to tick off a number of products they have 'heard'), but if you make a sound at a show then that sound is (sadly) fair game. If you make a sound at a show, it should be the best sound you can make, otherwise all you are doing is forcing people away from your brand - the 'you want $100,000 for that car-wreck of a sound?' effect.
For the record, I think talking about the Best Sound at the show is as odious as describing the Worst Sound. It's often a crap shoot, but one we still have to play. The demonstration itself should simply be an introduction to the thing, as it is in almost every other expo aside from possibly wine-tasting, food festivals, and beer festivals.
By not exposing the bad bits of the business to oxygen, we just get the same old tropes. If no one complains, a demonstrator can stand in the room telling loud jokes to his buddies while the prospective buyers strain to hear what's playing. If no one complains, a demonstrator can get away with playing the same tracks he's been playing since 1976. If no one complains, a demonstrator can massively overdrive the room. If no one complains, $750,000 worth of equipment gets demonstrated on a trestle table with a sheet over it, with no literature or even a basic knowledge of how much the products playing cost in the local currency. If no one complains, it's perfectly fair to turf the paying customer out of the hot-seat because the sanctified reviewer has shown up.
The thing is, though, it's never 'no one complains'. People do complain. Volubly. And if we prefer such complaints to go away, precisely who are we serving - the people who buy the stuff, or the people who sell it?
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |