What do you think are those qualities of the reproduction that other material cannot reveal?
A New Way to Evaluate Audio Systems
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
What do you think are those qualities of the reproduction that other material cannot reveal?
Absolute rubbish..Paul James published today an interesting article proposing a new way to evaluate audio systems:
A New Way to Evaluate Audio Systems
Dedicated music lovers would like to identify and use the best quality audio equipment. That way they could, potentially, have a richer musical experience. Yet, as Norwitz and Qvortrup identify in Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell?,” none of the methods frequently used to evaluate systems...www.resistormag.com
He proposes using an original vocals track and a cover of that track by a different artist, and evaluating on audio systems based on the extent to which they maximize the perceived sonic differences between the two recordings.
What do you think about this idea?
It is not new. Closely listening to voice recordings to evaluate systems is pretty basic stuff. That said, he is of course right that a system that is unable to play voice accurately, without smearing or rolling off, won't play anything well.
I'm not really onboard with this method, it seems more like listening 101 than the depths that I associate with comparative listening.
So this encourages me to bring up an old method that I am going to bring back for my upcoming listening sessions. Determining the Humor content of a system. This is something I used to do with my mates when doing comparative listening. We would listen to Monty Python records and see if a change made the skits funnier, and made us laugh more. The more laughs the better the change. Those old Monty Python records were recorded at the BBC and have very good sound. This really works in helping to determine how a system communicates emotion, subtlety, and dynamics and is particularly revealing when comparing different cartridges in particular.
So this encourages me to bring up an old method that I am going to bring back for my upcoming listening sessions. Determining the Humor content of a system. This is something I used to do with my mates when doing comparative listening. We would listen to Monty Python records and see if a change made the skits funnier, and made us laugh more. The more laughs the better the change. Those old Monty Python records were recorded at the BBC and have very good sound. This really works in helping to determine how a system communicates emotion, subtlety, and dynamics and is particularly revealing when comparing different cartridges in particular.
Last edited:
Paul James published today an interesting article proposing a new way to evaluate audio systems:
A New Way to Evaluate Audio Systems
Dedicated music lovers would like to identify and use the best quality audio equipment. That way they could, potentially, have a richer musical experience. Yet, as Norwitz and Qvortrup identify in Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell?,” none of the methods frequently used to evaluate systems...
He proposes using an original vocals track and a cover of that track by a different artist, and evaluating on audio systems based on the extent to which they maximize the perceived sonic differences between the two recordings.
What do you think about this idea?
Ron, what do you think of his way to evaluate the quality of a system, besides that it is interesting? Your method seems to be assessing your emotional engagement with pop vocal recordings. Have you tried his idea to compare your Fleetwood Mac with covers and listening for differences?
Last edited:
In effect, this is no different than Peter Q's argument that the more your system can contrast differences in different types of recordings, the more resolution and accuracy that system has. The more your system makes the recordings sound the same the lower resolution and less accurate the system is. This author has just, for an arbitrary reason, decided to look at different recordings from different artists playing a cover (of various styles) of the same song. The main point though has nothing to do with the cover or the artists doing the covers...it has to do with the difference in the RECORDINGS and therefore the same situation as Peter Q's suggestion. Maximizing contrast between recordings is getting closer to the truth, according to Peter Q and also according to the "new" way of evaluating a system...they are in effect the same.Paul James published today an interesting article proposing a new way to evaluate audio systems:
A New Way to Evaluate Audio Systems
Dedicated music lovers would like to identify and use the best quality audio equipment. That way they could, potentially, have a richer musical experience. Yet, as Norwitz and Qvortrup identify in Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell?,” none of the methods frequently used to evaluate systems...
He proposes using an original vocals track and a cover of that track by a different artist, and evaluating on audio systems based on the extent to which they maximize the perceived sonic differences between the two recordings.
What do you think about this idea?
Now, one can debate Peter Q's hypothesis and whether, in fact, AN gear and speakers actually do what Peter Q says is the ideal for a system, maximizing the difference in sound quality between recordings. IMO, it is an interesting approach but I can see easily how you might have a VERY selective system where all differences in recordings are easily revealed and yet NONE of them resemble the sound of live, unamplified sound. Precision but not accuracy. One could argue that a system may not be as revealing so as to show great contrast between recordings but that it creates a greater resemblance to the real thing...this would be accurate but with perhaps low precision. Of course the ideal system would be one that strongly contrasts recordings and with the best recordings bears a strong resemblance to the real thing.
He already has Leonard cohen and cover of Leonard Cohen to compare. I can also send him a video of me singing famous blue raincoat. What if my video sounds like his tape
While a well-recorded human voice has a high dynamic range, I don’t believe it’s sufficient on its own for fully evaluating a component or setup. However, the human voice is valuable for calibrating our brain and hearing, as it’s the sound we’re most accustomed to. Talking with someone between songs during an evaluation can help in this calibration. If you’re unsure of this or assume your perception is always perfectly accurate, then this approach may not be for you.
Looks like many attempts are now being made to salvage audio component reviews. Because the human elements of interpretation & perception are involved the process will always be flawed.
At best only a very generalized opinion can be given of any one component.
Meanwhile the hifi hobby itself has several other issues that need attention. Firstly, this is a dying hobby. The cost of hifi is now at a level of being ridiculous. Manufacturer revenues are down in the high-end market because prices are too high for what is being offered. The market will no longer bare the prices as before...
Most young people these days that want to get into the hobby are purchasing used vintage hifi vs new, unless they're born into money or are a trust fund kid,ect..
Even those adults with hifi make do with Chi-Fi or some low end tier Japanese hifi because they can't afford 5-6 figure prices of the boutique brick & mortar hifi shops or the online shops.
At the end of the day unless the current structure of the high-end hifi market is changed to something more compatible economically with the public market then the hobby will become a hobby of only a very few, like that of yacht ownership & yacht racing...
Just my opinions.
At best only a very generalized opinion can be given of any one component.
Meanwhile the hifi hobby itself has several other issues that need attention. Firstly, this is a dying hobby. The cost of hifi is now at a level of being ridiculous. Manufacturer revenues are down in the high-end market because prices are too high for what is being offered. The market will no longer bare the prices as before...
Most young people these days that want to get into the hobby are purchasing used vintage hifi vs new, unless they're born into money or are a trust fund kid,ect..
Even those adults with hifi make do with Chi-Fi or some low end tier Japanese hifi because they can't afford 5-6 figure prices of the boutique brick & mortar hifi shops or the online shops.
At the end of the day unless the current structure of the high-end hifi market is changed to something more compatible economically with the public market then the hobby will become a hobby of only a very few, like that of yacht ownership & yacht racing...
Just my opinions.
Last edited:
High-End Hifi has nothing to do with good sound or top performance, it is a show-off for oligarks and wannabes. Just like luxury watches , 10k$handbags and Ferrari.. The Boutique brands philosophy is to sell few items at very high price, easier to make money than selling many cheaply . Sound wise a Benchmark Amp and a Topping source and Roon is all you need, just add speakers…
Did I follow that advice,? No I got myself an Accuphase because I like it , love the exterior design and trust their technical expertise.
And now I am finished hifi shopping for life..
Apologies
Back to topic,,
Did I follow that advice,? No I got myself an Accuphase because I like it , love the exterior design and trust their technical expertise.
And now I am finished hifi shopping for life..
Apologies
Back to topic,,
Last edited:
I was going to use the term "voodoo" in my post but looks like you've included that in so many words.
I've never heard Accuphase components but I hear good reports. I purchased all of my components based upon sound. Most don't like my components or the type of sound that I desire...lol
Last edited:
Ron the original article by Leonard Norwitz and Peter Qvortrup of Audio Note UK “Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell?” And Pauls James article “A New Way to Evaluate Audio Systems” define the wrong side of the bell curve in audio.Paul James published today an interesting article proposing a new way to evaluate audio systems:
A New Way to Evaluate Audio Systems
Dedicated music lovers would like to identify and use the best quality audio equipment. That way they could, potentially, have a richer musical experience. Yet, as Norwitz and Qvortrup identify in Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell?,” none of the methods frequently used to evaluate systems...
He proposes using an original vocals track and a cover of that track by a different artist, and evaluating on audio systems based on the extent to which they maximize the perceived sonic differences between the two recordings.
What do you think about this idea?
I don't believe its an adequate way to assess the capabilities of a system. Like that nice Mr Lavigne says above, its too simplistic and one dimensional.
I do use a well recorded human voice, listening for tonality and ambience (Schubert lieder) but then a string quartet, then Bruckner, well recorded jazz, then 70's rock music. (a bity long winded but hey, I like all sorts).
Just human voice isn't going to tell me much about bass quality or extension or what the system does when the sound gets very loud and busy at the same time.
I do use a well recorded human voice, listening for tonality and ambience (Schubert lieder) but then a string quartet, then Bruckner, well recorded jazz, then 70's rock music. (a bity long winded but hey, I like all sorts).
Just human voice isn't going to tell me much about bass quality or extension or what the system does when the sound gets very loud and busy at the same time.
Similar threads
