What is a reviewer?

[Ron Resnick]

I would guess most people with a stereo that cost $20K or more don't listen to classical or jazz.

huh?

 

[morricab]

I would guess most people with a stereo that cost $20K or more don't listen to classical or jazz. So live music to them is a whole lot different than live music to you. I am making an assumption that live to you is a symphony or something as such. Live to most people is a club atmosphere or stadium. Not the same.

You would be wrong at least outside the US.

 

[wil]

Mike, all of this seems reasonable enough, but what surprises me with your:

"proper references and tools = mature systems and higher level gear and media references."

is the complete exclusion of what I consider to be the most important reference - LIVE MUSIC.

I was experimenting a couple of weeks ago with a spare preamp. It sounded good but not great compared to my primary preamp. I then went to the BSO and heard Samuel Barber's Adagio for Strings. I went hope, found the LP and played it the next day. There it was, plain as day. The phase sounded off. This preamp has a phase switch. I turned it to 180 degree phase and that solved the issue. I then realized that my primary preamp inverts phase, and this one does not. So I reversed the speaker cables and switched back to 0 degree phase on the preamp, and I can now hear what that preamp can sound like.

This was a direct result of my reference to live music to know what something should sound like. Live music is the basis against which to judge the performance of a system or a component. For me, a reviewer must have this grounding as a minimum requirement to be able to write an effective review that adds value for the reader. A willingness, priority, and ability to describe what he hears from a component or system ,and how it relates to the sound and experience of a real performance, is essential to a successful subjective review.

Last night I heard Mahler's 8th Symphony at the BSO. I have not heard a system that can give me that experience. Whether or not it can come close, and in what ways, is what I want to read from a reviewer.

My experience with live music over the years (independent of genre) is all over the map, from exhilarating to meh... to very disappointing. While the very best musical experiences I've had have been live, they tend to be pretty rare.

Amplified music is usually too loud and distorted for me. And even acoustic music is often a let down.

I went to the Nashville Symphony last week. The Schermerhorn Hall has very good acoustics, but my experience was overall not great. When the opening strings kicked in on the Mazzoli "Orpheus Undone" it was breathtakingly rich and beautiful -- a sound no hifi system could ever replicate.

But things went downhill a bit with the Prokofiev Violin Concerto #1. The violinist was great, but the sound of the violin wasn't projecting enough (at least to our seats). Her playing was largely swallowed up in the sound of the orchestra as if she was just another violinist. Most recordings will mike the soloist to project more over the orchestra which feels more musically right to me.

Last, was the Dvorak symphony #7. Maybe it's just my ears, but I had my fingers firmly planted in them when the full orchestra started going crazy with baring horns and tympani . These extended sections had to be close to 110db at our seats.

My only point is that, for me, live music is an unpredictable and often disappointing experience ---- and not necessarily the gold standard of music listening. I often wish I were listening to the same music at home.

 

[morricab]

My experience with live music over the years (independent of genre) is all over the map, from exhilarating to meh... to very disappointing. While the very best musical experiences I've had have been live, they tend to be pretty rare.

Amplified music is usually too loud and distorted for me. And even acoustic music is often a let down.

I went to the Nashville Symphony last week. The Schermerhorn Hall has very good acoustics, but my experience was overall not great. When the opening strings kicked in on the Mazzoli "Orpheus Undone" it was breathtakingly rich and beautiful -- a sound no hifi system could ever replicate.

But things went downhill a bit with the Prokofiev Violin Concerto #1. The violinist was great, but the sound of the violin wasn't projecting enough (at least to our seats). Her playing was largely swallowed up in the sound of the orchestra as if she was just another violinist. Most recordings will mike the soloist to project more over the orchestra which feels more musically right to me.

Last, was the Dvorak symphony #7. Maybe it's just my ears, but I had my fingers firmly planted in them when the full orchestra started going crazy with baring horns and tympani . These extended sections had to be close to 110db at our seats.

My only point is that, for me, live music is an unpredictable and often disappointing experience ---- and not necessarily the gold standard of music listening. I often wish I were listening to the same music at home.

The point , for live unamplified music, is not whether it sounds good or bad compared to the usual stereo, it’s that it sounds DIFFERENT to basically all stereos. You will rarely mistake (and even then not for long) live sound from prerecorded playback…IMO that liveness is what to strive for but only the very best systems with the best recordings can really even hint at it.

 

[PeterA]

My experience with live music over the years (independent of genre) is all over the map, from exhilarating to meh... to very disappointing. While the very best musical experiences I've had have been live, they tend to be pretty rare.

Amplified music is usually too loud and distorted for me. And even acoustic music is often a let down.

I went to the Nashville Symphony last week. The Schermerhorn Hall has very good acoustics, but my experience was overall not great. When the opening strings kicked in on the Mazzoli "Orpheus Undone" it was breathtakingly rich and beautiful -- a sound no hifi system could ever replicate.

But things went downhill a bit with the Prokofiev Violin Concerto #1. The violinist was great, but the sound of the violin wasn't projecting enough (at least to our seats). Her playing was largely swallowed up in the sound of the orchestra as if she was just another violinist. Most recordings will mike the soloist to project more over the orchestra which feels more musically right to me.

Last, was the Dvorak symphony #7. Maybe it's just my ears, but I had my fingers firmly planted in them when the full orchestra started going crazy with baring horns and tympani . These extended sections had to be close to 110db at our seats.

My only point is that, for me, live music is an unpredictable and often disappointing experience ---- and not necessarily the gold standard of music listening. I often wish I were listening to the same music at home.

I’m sure everyone has had good and bad experiences with live music. My point is that one must listen to live music to know what an actual violin or voice or piano sounds like. If you don’t have that reference, how can you judge whether or not a component in the system sounds right? Live music, especially live acoustic music, presents the listener with a very broad range of how things should sound, but instruments and voices almost always sound real, not artificial.

I suppose, if the intent of the reviewer is to write about something other than whether or not a component makes a violin sound realistic, then he doesn’t need to know what a violin sounds like.

My comments are based on what I find to be an essential requirement for a reviewer for me to get something out of the review. I want a reviewer to have that live music reference and know how to describe and convey what he hears to the reader. I’m sure people can find ways to disagree.

 

[Rt66indierock]

What about Steve Guttenberg?

Posting about Steve Guttenberg puts you in an unserious category. He sold audio equipment at retail, so I’ve written him off. Not interested in the opinions of anyone who ever sold audio equipment in a retail store.

 

[Rt66indierock]

Michael Fremer is one of the reviewers whom I would've described as grounded, substantive and not flowery.

Michael Fremer promoted MQA, so you must question his hearing ability and expertise. The hobby and the industry would be better off without everyone who supported MQA.

 

[Rt66indierock]

FWIW, I was also a reviewer for Positive Feedback on and off for over a decade.

How terrible, I like David. We both grew up in Portland Oregon at about the same time and our paths crossed a few times. But as posted elsewhere today.

David Robinson’s career in education is not something I’d be proud of. His education and employment are a list of places my parents wouldn’t let me attend, I wouldn’t go to or let my children attend.

In audio David had his chance. I was taught audio by Tektronix engineers, and he knew many of the same people but didn’t take advantage of the opportunity.

Portland Oregon was a great place for audio education in the seventies. I’m glad I took full advantage of the opportunity.

 

[hopkins]

I’m sure everyone has had good and bad experiences with live music. My point is that one must listen to live music to know what an actual violin or voice or piano sounds like. If you don’t have that reference, how can you judge whether or not a component in the system sounds right? Live music, especially live acoustic music, presents the listener with a very broad range of how things should sound, but instruments and voices almost always sound real, not artificial.

I suppose, if the intent of the reviewer is to write about something other than whether or not a component makes a violin sound realistic, then he doesn’t need to know what a violin sounds like.

My comments are based on what I find to be an essential requirement for a reviewer for me to get something out of the review. I want a reviewer to have that live music reference and know how to describe and convey what he hears to the reader. I’m sure people can find ways to disagree.

People who share extensive experience of live music, and are sometimes musicians themselves, end up choosing very different speakers (and obviously sometimes the same speakers than those who don't specifically claim to have live acoustic performance as their reference). So how useful is it to use that criteria to select reviewers?

 

[treitz3]

How terrible, I like David. We both grew up in Portland Oregon at about the same time and our paths crossed a few times. But as posted elsewhere today.

David Robinson’s career in education is not something I’d be proud of. His education and employment are a list of places my parents wouldn’t let me attend, I wouldn’t go to or let my children attend.

In audio David had his chance. I was taught audio by Tektronix engineers, and he knew many of the same people but didn’t take advantage of the opportunity.

Portland Oregon was a great place for audio education in the seventies. I’m glad I took full advantage of the opportunity.

That's a low blow. I have heard Tektronix extensively but in no way, shape or form would I consider them a deciding factor for your comment.

Tom

 

[godofwealth]

My experience with live music over the years (independent of genre) is all over the map, from exhilarating to meh... to very disappointing. While the very best musical experiences I've had have been live, they tend to be pretty rare.

Amplified music is usually too loud and distorted for me. And even acoustic music is often a let down.

I went to the Nashville Symphony last week. The Schermerhorn Hall has very good acoustics, but my experience was overall not great. When the opening strings kicked in on the Mazzoli "Orpheus Undone" it was breathtakingly rich and beautiful -- a sound no hifi system could ever replicate.

But things went downhill a bit with the Prokofiev Violin Concerto #1. The violinist was great, but the sound of the violin wasn't projecting enough (at least to our seats). Her playing was largely swallowed up in the sound of the orchestra as if she was just another violinist. Most recordings will mike the soloist to project more over the orchestra which feels more musically right to me.

Last, was the Dvorak symphony #7. Maybe it's just my ears, but I had my fingers firmly planted in them when the full orchestra started going crazy with baring horns and tympani . These extended sections had to be close to 110db at our seats.

My only point is that, for me, live music is an unpredictable and often disappointing experience ---- and not necessarily the gold standard of music listening. I often wish I were listening to the same music at home.

Interesting take on live unamplified music, which I can completely relate to, but my conclusion is entirely different from yours. I view live unamplified music as the *gold standard*, and reproduced recorded music on typical hifi as a pale imitation. Having attended live concerts (symphony, opera, chamber etc.) for almost 40 years now, nothing comes close to live music for my ears, and no matter how many millions of $$ you spend on a system, it's always a bit like reaching the moon by climbing the tallest tree. Sure, you're getting closer to the moon by climbing Mount Everest, but there's a long way to go from here.

One measure of live music is that I vividly remember even now my first concert, when I was a grad student hearing the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra with guest conductor Michael Tilson Thomas playing the Sibelius Violin Concerto with soloist Cho Liang Lin, and after the intermission, Rachmaninov's grand Symphony Number 2. What a sound! It set me off on a 40-year expensive but futile quest to try to reproduce a tiny bit of that sound in the various homes I've lived in. I suppose if I saved the money I spent on hifi, I could have enough money to buy a lot of concert tickets, and even first-class airfare to venues all over the world! In 2017, when I was living in San Francisco, I went to the hear the San Francisco Symphony almost every weekend they were in season, and heard many memorable concerts (probably the most mind-blowing was guest conductor Charles Dutoit featuring Berlioz's magnificent Requiem with 500+ singers and brass arranged all around the auditorium -- I can't imagine any home system coming close to that experience!). Or a concert in Berkeley featuring the incomparable Chicago Symphony Orchestra with maestro Riccardo Muti performing the Brahms Second and Third Symphonies. The rich indulgent sound of the strings in the Brahms Symphonies are best experienced in the concert hall, IMHO. Of course, opera is entirely a different experience with the audio and visual elements.

Even a single grand piano, which I have heard numerous times from the likes of Alfred Brendel to many others, is something that lies completely beyond any home stereo I have heard. A Steinway in a concert hall has that rich wooden sound, and most high res recordings of piano music sound tinkly and glassy in comparison (undoubtedly because foolish recording engineers insist on sticking their mikes inside the throat of a grand piano, robbing the sound of its natural ambience).

Ultimately, I came to the conclusion that recorded music reproduced at home is primarily for listening to performers who I could never listen to live any more, and of course, for convenience. I think the old Absolute Sound under Harry Pearson expressed this philosophy far better than I could ever, and for HP, live unamplified music was the gold standard. Amen to that.

 

[Rt66indierock]

That's a low blow. I have heard Tektronix extensively but in no way, shape or form would I consider them a deciding factor for your comment.

Tom

Tom, you listened to test equipment? I’m talking the company that made things like oscilloscopes.

Maybe you should read “A Tiny History of High Fidelity by Lynn Olson.

 

[treitz3]

That's honestly laughable. Did you just hear yourself ask that question?

No one can listen to test equipment. No one can listen to oscilloscopes.

Sir, I don't mean to be mean or offensive but did you seriously think about what you posted before you actually posted?

Tom

 

[Ron Resnick]

That's a low blow.

+1

 

[Ron Resnick]

I was taught audio by Tektronix engineers,

I assume you mean you were taught audio measurements.

 

[Another Johnson]

My sense is that Elliot continues to be frustrated by reviewers who can make or break a new product even though they have no formal training or certification from any recognized sanctioning body or board.

I agree with him if this is his thinking. Reviewers are, for the most part, just enthusiasts with the confidence to go on record with their personal opinions. Even the guys who measure things give their opinions about what the measurements mean.

Elliot has a LOT OF SKIN in the game. I understand his frustration. People who really are Nobodies pick apart and make proclamations about 6 figure speakers … and the sheep/lemmings quote them as authorities.

I would like to think that anyone with pockets deep enough for high end purchases will listen rather than read before pulling the trigger. But in some cases, especially among the uber wealthy, they don’t.

There is no way of fixing this except by creating an official “audio component review board” where membership requires formal training and certification. I don’t see it happening… but Elliot may be in the position to try to create such an entity. I would expect that manufacturers and importers might get behind it.

 

[Robh3606]

My point is that one must listen to live music to know what an actual violin or voice or piano sounds like.

Depending on where you are standing and the frequency bands. Musical instruments have very complex radiation patterns/directivity with frequency. One of the reasons no stereo can ever accurately reproduce an instrument is rooted in this. I do live shows all the time and find them to be completely hit of miss. The last live acoustic show was a person singing and playing a lute about 15ft away from me. There isn't a stereo on earth that could reproduce that.

Rob

 

[Mike Lavigne]

How terrible, I like David. We both grew up in Portland Oregon at about the same time and our paths crossed a few times. But as posted elsewhere today.

David Robinson’s career in education is not something I’d be proud of. His education and employment are a list of places my parents wouldn’t let me attend, I wouldn’t go to or let my children attend.

In audio David had his chance. I was taught audio by Tektronix engineers, and he knew many of the same people but didn’t take advantage of the opportunity.

Portland Oregon was a great place for audio education in the seventies. I’m glad I took full advantage of the opportunity.

well; Steve Hart from Scottsdale, why are you being such a Troll? how long did you have that attack on David Robinson in your back pocket looking for a chance to throw it out there. then you used the pretense of Brad's Positive Feedback reference. that underhanded, hurtful, vile swipe at David, who is not here to defend himself, is pathetic. what might you gain from such a move? what exactly did David do to you? or is that just your way?

i wondered just what might possess anyone to be such an arse. so i looked at all your 159 posts here. what a pile of crap. it is your way. you are a Troll among trolls. Troll of the year maybe. true; the David-attack did not violate our TOS. but it did violate any level of decency.

please crawl back under your rock.

and have a nice night.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Depending on where you are standing and the frequency bands. Musical instruments have very complex radiation patterns/directivity with frequency. One of the reasons no stereo can ever accurately reproduce an instrument is rooted in this. I do live shows all the time and find them to be completely hit of miss. The last live acoustic show was a person singing and playing a lute about 15ft away from me. There isn't a stereo on earth that could reproduce that.

Rob

I don't think this rebuts or contradicts Peter's point.

 

[Ron Resnick]

that underhanded, hurtful, vile swipe at David, who is not here to defend himself, is pathetic.

the David-attack did not violate our TOS. but it did violate any level of decency.

+1