 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.131.122.150
...Just not being 'tone deaf' shouldn't be enough. "The Van Gogh ear" kind of reviewer. I kind of view them as 'curators' at the museum describing the painting. They don't need to be masters but, but to posses the deep understanding of the entire process, from mixing the paint, surfaces and their desired effect and finally the final product - what they 'see' and what the audience should see.
Still, besides all the hype - in my opinion Van Gogh was a mediocre painter. :)
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
Follow Ups:
I mean if every reviewer has to have a relative pitching in the majors.. And how close a relative?
Uncle, cousin? by marriage OK?
tough love I would say..
I read this on a blog not long ago written by Andrew Bolt. It moved me:Vincent van Gogh is 27. He has utterly failed at everything - as an art dealer, teacher, student, preacher, even suitor. He is living in utter poverty, with no job and no home, and is estranged from his parents, friends, mentors and relatives.
He does not know what next to do. He certainly does not know he will be an artist. Indeed, he has not completed a single serious painting in his life, and done not one competent drawing to reveal his talent. What’s more, he does not know he has just 10 years left to live.
At this point, he breaks a long silence with his beloved brother Theo by writing one of the saddest, bravest and most inspiring letters I have ever read.
He admits he is in despair:
How then could I then be of any use to anyone? And so I am inclined to think the best and most sensible solution all round would be for me to go away and to keep my distance, to cease to be, as it were.
He knows exactly how far he’s fallen:
It is true that I have forfeited the trust of various people, it is true that my financial affairs are in a sorry state, it is true that the future looks rather bleak, it is true that I might have done better, it is true that I have wasted time when it comes to earning a living, it is true that my studies are in a fairly lamentable and appalling state, and that my needs are greater, infinitely greater than my resources. But does that mean going downhill and doing nothing?
He feels a misfit:
I am a man of passions, capable of and given to doing more or less outrageous things for which I sometimes feel a little sorry. Every so often I say or do something too hastily, when it would have been better to have shown a little more patience… Now, one of the reasons why I have no regular job, and why I have not had a regular job for years, is quite simply that my ideas differ from those of the gentlemen who hand out the jobs to individuals who think as they do.But he knows there is within him a hunger to know, to understand, to impart, to do something great - but what?
And I must continue to follow the path I take now. If I do nothing, if I study nothing, if I cease searching, then, woe is me, I am lost. That is how I look at it - keep going, keep going come what may.But what is your final goal, you may ask. That goal will become clearer, will emerge slowly but surely, much as the rough draught turns into a sketch, and the sketch into a painting through the serious work done on it, through the elaboration of the original vague idea and through the consolidation of the first fleeting and passing thought.
It simply cannot be that he had nothing to offer, no matter how often he has been told so:
...one cannot rid oneself of melancholy, one feels emptiness where there might have been friendship and sublime and genuine affection, and one feels dreadful disappointment gnawing at one’s spiritual energy, fate seems to stand in the way of affection or one feels a wave of disgust welling up inside. And then one says “How long, my God!”
Well, that’s how it is, can you tell what goes on within by looking at what happens without? There may be a great fire in our soul, but no one ever comes to warm himself by it, all that passers-by can see is a little smoke coming out of the chimney, and they walk on.
All right, then, what is to be done, should one tend that inward fire, turn to oneself for strength, wait patiently - yet with how much impatience! - wait, I say, for the moment when someone who wants to comes and sits down beside one’s fire and perhaps stays on? Let him who believes in God await the moment that will sooner or later arrive.
Well, right now it seems that things are going very badly for me, have been doing so for some considerable time, and may continue to do so well into the future. But it is possible that everything will get better after it has all seemed to go wrong. I am not counting on it, it may never happen, but if there should be a change for the better I should regard that as a gain, I should rejoice, I should say, at last! So there was something after all!
He’s called an idler, but he knows he is working furiously in his mind, reading, thinking.... He has a great purpose - if only he could find it!
Then there is the other kind of idler, the idler despite himself, who is inwardly consumed by a great longing for action who does nothing because his hands are tied, because he is, so to speak, imprisoned somewhere, because he lacks what he needs to be productive, because disastrous circumstances have brought him forcibly to this end. Such a one does not always know what he can do, but he nevertheless instinctively feels, I am good for something! My existence is not without reason! I know that I could be a quite a different person! How can I be of use, how can I be of service? There is something inside me, but what can it be? He is quite another idler. If you like you may take me for one of those.
Not long after this van Gogh decided to learn how to draw. His efforts at this time showed little of what was to come:A decade later van Gogh was dead. What glories he had done.
"You have to leave something to your imagination"
Edits: 12/14/14
Everyone knows it took the efforts of many Angles and a visit from Dr. Who to turn him around and release the talent.
That's nothing compared to Michelangelo, Heaven deployed substantial resources to ensure there's not be a wasted minute. ;)
is the answer is ... No,
generally followed by an analysis that suggests the OP is an idiot for asking.
It ain't always easy being an audiophile .. ;) ;- <
nt
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
... no pity for Van Gogh haters! None!
*
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
Yes, relative pitch.
They are the only ones. Words, even your own, can not convey personal satisfaction and, if they can, they don't necessarily fit together with your preferences when they come from others.
Reviews are a form entertainment. I like to be entertained.
Observe, before you think. Think before you open your yap. Act on the basis of experience.
which would be the bottom line to almost everyone involved in the process.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
NT
-Wendell
Should musicians have perfect pitch? It seems it would be even more important for them than for audio reviewers. And then there wouldn't be that much music. Perfect pitch isn't that common.
Any way it's not how well your ears hear but how well your brain 'hears' and then how well that is put into the printed word. Perfect pitch is probably nice but almost irrelevant to reviewing.
...they should have "super hearing", like a "super taster" who tastes chemical additives designed to taste like food or a "super smeller" who makes perfumes.
If they are unable to hear things in the music that the average audiophile doesn't, what good are they :-)
most important: they can jump tall buildings in a single bound.
Which proves once again that "in matters of taste, there can be no dispute".
Van Gogh's paintings are an expression of genius.
he might have been joshin' since he put a smiley face after it in his OP
E
T
That blasphemous statement scorched my mind; rendered me incapable of sensing subtlety.
the lack of face to face interaction can leave one guessing a bit as well as the lack of knowing his or her "constitution" if you will.
E
T
...the 'experience' of being working class and laborer most of my life literally beat any pretense out of me. Since I used fucked around with 'Art'
and, I am not so easily fooled.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
...for the: "in matters of taste, there can be no dispute".
Unfortunately, Van Gogh is loved all for the wrong reasons. I am genius too, except nobody knows it - but me! I am sure Vincent felt the same way.
“Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn’t. - Charles Bukowski
It's mostly commercial pitch...
I think that audio reviewers should be judged by the usefulness of their writing. Period.
Does Writer X's writing help you choose equipment more wisely? Does he or she introduce you to worthwhile new music? Does he or she increase your understanding and appreciation of music you already are familiar with? Or are you stuck reading the prose equivalent of "The Six Tenors" warming up in their dressing room: "Me me me me me me me!"
The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
I know musicians who can hear the difference between A 440 and A 442. However, I doubt that they could write the kind of loudspeaker review that audiophiles are used to reading, because as far as I can tell (with one exception, that being Hyperion Knight) most musicians listen to stereos just to hear how the performance takes shape, but they have very low expectations for (or even ignorance of) the epiphenomena (or as JA says, second-order effects) that audiophiles crave, such as imaging and a soundstage.
This question strikes me as a variant of the hearing-test canard.
I think that an audio reviewer has to have ethics and a certain amount of humility, be capable of turning in good prose on time, and have a greater-than average awareness of the history of audio (both technology and its place in society) and understanding of basic audio engineering.
However, I do not think that it is necessary that an audio reviewer have a greater than average educated layperson's grasp of music theory or even music history. The right writer and the right audience will find each other--or not.
Anyway, the notion of "perfect pitch" is chimerical. What most people mean is piano pitch, which is 100% imperfect (within the octave--octave unisons are perfect, at least in the middle of the piano, but at the top they easily go off because of string enharmonicity). There's a lot of music, not all of it antique, that requires pure non-tempered intervals. As I understand it, the number of people who have perfect pitch both for piano intervals and justly-tempered intervals is rather small.
Ciao,
John
John Marks said, "I think that audio reviewers should be judged by the usefulness of their writing. Period.
I'm finding John Marks response rather provactive and not in a good way.
Many of us realize that this is the age of the Communicator. A charismatic writer or speaker who can put an audience in a trance just listing to them or reading their writings. An observer asks, "what is he writing about?" and the reader says, "Shhhh, I just like the way he writes." Even if he not saying one bloomin' thing. He's just writing.
I see Marks response as a potentially poor response. Marks should know as well as anybody that some-to-many reviewers became reviewers solely because the editor had a need and thought they had a gift for writing and not for their discernment or their well-trained ears. And if a magazine hires such a one and develops a following, who cares if he really knows what he's hearing or talking about?
I suppose if one considers all aspects of this industry merely as forms of entertainment only, Mark's philosophy might suffice. However, many of us know that the magazines treat this industry as a business first and foremost. However, we also know there are many mfg'ers and consumers dollars at stake for this to be for entertainment only.
Now I'm not saying that Marks is implying this, but his philosophy and response would be an excellent one if a magazine's purpose were to keep enthusiasts dumbed down, i.e. keep the reader less informed and less educated than the reviewer as this would make for greater number of followers and hence easier sales.
However, in the 21st century many businessmen have taken the philosophy that the end justifies the means. Hence, without hesitaiton I would go so far as to suggest that the philosophy of judging a reviewer's usefulness solely by their writings could potentially be an ongoing strategy by industry leaders. Either knowingly or unknowingly.
For example, many of us know at least one fellow enthusiast who couldn't punch their way out of a musical bag if their life depended on it. I know several and I also know some reviewers who are no better. In the forums I think I've encountered many. There are also many who have completely abandoned their "untrustworthy" ears in favor of measurements to define SOTA-level playback systems today. Thus abandoning the absolute sound as the Holy Grail and instead have made measurements the new Holy Grail. Which I suppose is a great strategy if one wanted to be a paper tiger in the forums but does nothing for their playback system's level of musicality.
In other words, in this very thread, I don't recall anybody yet mentioning that a reviewer should as a minimum requirement, possess some basic ability to audibly discern what he is hearing.
I'm not surprisd but it is sad.
Did you read this?????
START
Does Writer X's writing help you choose equipment more wisely? Does he or she introduce you to worthwhile new music? Does he or she increase your understanding and appreciation of music you already are familiar with? Or are you stuck reading the prose equivalent of "The Six Tenors" warming up in their dressing room: "Me me me me me me me!"
END
THAT is my definition and negative example of the "USEFULNESS" of audio writing.
HOW can a writer help you choose equipment "more wisely" EXCEPT by listening?
It was so obvious to me I did not think it needed mentioning.
And it seems to me that most people who read that took it the same way.
I might as well have had to assure people I listened to things I wrote about.
Oops, my bad, perhaps that not is always the case with audio writers?
JM
JM said, "Oops, my bad, perhaps that not is always the case with audio writers?"
I agree with that point.
On the other hand, your previous comment about reviewers being judged by the "usefulness" of their writings alone, you were speaking generically for all reviewers and for all readers, not just yourself and your followers.
So yes, when it comes to "high-end" audio, I think it only makes sense to know one's perspective audience and qualify one's statements to ensure your message is clear. Especially when enthusiasts and "experts" are potentially all over the map. As you should know.
And, thanks for helping with a description of what it is I have come to dislike about modern grand pianos!
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
Usefulness yes and it includes a lot of things not mentioned anywhere (yet, it may change) in this thread. Of course "we" want to know primarily about the performance of a piece of gear and how it stacks up to the competition both in and out of its price range. At least I want that.
As to reviewing music I feel it is so personal I never read music reviews. Let me rephrase that, I don't seek out music reviews, if it is front of my face I might read it. Even if I found a reviewer that seems to like a lot of what I like I would not seek out his or her writing today where the net will provide the tune or at least a snippet for me to evaluate. I've often said music is far too personal like choosing a mate, a meal or a bottle of wine. I don't think anything near perfect pitch is required to review music, but gear I think does require a very good ear at a minimum. Rather than a music review I'd rather see or hear a list of new releases so I know what's out there.
I'm going to dissect this next section:
""I think that an audio reviewer has to have ethics and a certain amount of humility, be capable of turning in good prose on time, and have a greater-than average awareness of the history of audio (both technology and its place in society) and understanding of basic audio engineering.""
1) "I think that an audio reviewer has to have ethics and a certain amount of humility" - yep, that's very good
2) " be capable of turning in good prose on time" -I don't read for writing prowess I read for information. Too often a review(er) gets lost in writing technique and loses grip of the real reason it was written: to inform us about something. Just my opinion, prose is defined as ORDINARY speech or writing. I almost never see that.
3) "and have a greater-than average awareness of the history of audio (both technology and its place in society) and understanding of basic audio engineering." - Sure, that will help too.
Those are very good criteria John.
So I'm not picking on John at all, just citing some differences in the way I see it. Most reviews of both gear and music have a gasbag factor to me where they are "dressed up", overwritten or too wordy. (perhaps like my post)They have given us terms and phrases that are often very easy to draw laughter. We've had threads on that very subject.
E
T
Hi-
Beau Brummel was supposed to have coined the phrase, "If you notice a man's clothes, he is not well-dressed."
My idea of great prose style is that the prose does not seem to have a "style." I try to write in order to inform. And if I can get that done, not much else matters (assuming that my observations are worth learning about).
I felt good the other day when a company whose product I recommended asked JA for permission to quote from my write-up; to my surprise they made it the first thing you see on their home page:
"This totally charming, petite, retro timekeeper, only 6.75" wide by 3" high by 2" deep and weighing just 13oz, is the perfect gift for the tube lover in your life—or for anyone who delights in the mid-century design style exemplified by the Eames molded-fiberglass chair and the Nelson Ball Clock."
# # #
While there is a personal opinion of mine in there, it is my opinion about how other people (potential gift recipients) would react and not a statement about my personal emotions. I think that readers can figure out for themselves that I approve of the product and its value proposition by the mere fact of its inclusion on the list.
But purging earlier drafts of fluff, jargon, and self-referential asides is work. I agree that many audio writers seem to think that they have to speak in a code.
As far as music reviews go, we will have to agree to disagree. "Personal reactions" are great, but I think that there is a little bit of Romantic-Era "Noble Savage" behind the idea that one should just approach a work of art with no information that might form preconceived notions. Over the past several decades I have relied upon the educational aspect of reading classical reviews by great classical reviewers such as Harris Goldsmith (RIP).
For example, if it has never been pointed out to you that Debussy was gently making fun of Wagner's pretentiousness in Debussy's "Children's Corner Suite," but you catch that anyway, my hat is off to you, because I needed that to be pointed out to me--even though it is painfully obvious once you know what to listen for!
The essence of "Cultural Literacy" is to be aware of the source materials (like "Tristan") that "content creators" (like Debussy) not only use, but for the most part assume that their audiences will recognize.
In my view, for classical music, recording reviews are a huge trove of that kind of information. Assuming a very high level of professionalism, of course, and not just a recital of "How this recording made ME 'feel'. " There's an objective world out there, and too much audio writing makes subjectivity the only virtue. (While also usually proclaiming that all subjective reactions are equally valid. But that's another can of worms.)
ATB,
JM
Classical music is a different animal and I should have pointed that out. It is because it is not a category I use much at all. When you have tens to perhaps hundreds of different renditions and interpretations of the same piece of music over time, there is value in detailed discussions of these performances more so than most other genres. Thanks for pointing that out. Another good thread for me to learn something. Sometimes it is so hard to strep back and look through a more general eye than my own filtered view.
E
T
Merry Christmas, John.
"I think that audio reviewers should be judged by the usefulness of their writing. Period....I think that an audio reviewer has to have ethics and a certain amount of humility, be capable of turning in good prose on time, and have a greater-than average awareness of the history of audio (both technology and its place in society) and understanding of basic audio engineering."
Amen. And I think it's greatly appreciated by his editor (not to mention manufacturers) if said writer adheres to a style commensurate with that of a great salesman. In other words, write something so delicious in style and substance that the reader feels compelled to get off his butt and go hear the product. Make the reader **want** the product.
Cute, too cute by half.
> the notion of "perfect pitch" is chimerical. What most people mean is
> piano pitch, which is 100% imperfect.My friend Ivor Humphreys, who plays the flute and was my deputy at Hi-Fi
News and was then for many years technical editor at Gramophone magazine,
has true perfect pitch. He finds it very difficult to enjoy piano music,
which to him sounds out of tune all the time. But perhaps because of
having perfect pitch, he was excellent at detecting polarity inversions.> This question strikes me as a variant of the hearing-test canard.
Indeed. For what it is worth, I have very good relative pitch and used to
be an excellent sight reader when I was a professional musician, but
neither has any bearing on my abilities as a reviewer.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 12/10/14 12/10/14
A long time ago in the early 1960s I was told by the Choirmaster and Organist where I was by then a leader, that I had perfect pitch, he then laughed and said 'Doesn't help much, does it?'
It can be a bit of a nuisance, IME.
He was right, it makes listening to music, especially live music, quite difficult at times.
I find it quite difficult to listen to anything played on a modern Grand Piano. Much preferring such music up to Brahms say on a Viennese Action forte-piano.
Two nights ago I attended a long Carol Service in Nine Lessons, and there were some spine-shudderingly awful (unintended) dissonances, despite the antiquity of most of the pieces. I used to sing at these two services for many years.
You may recall that I invested in a wired remote for absolute polarity switching back in the early 1990s.
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
I think that all keyboard music at least to the end of Brahms works with the Bach-Spiral temperament. That is a reconstructed non-equal "well-tempered" scheme believed to be the one that JS Bach taught to his keyboard students.
The Bach Spiral scheme makes the "homier" keys such as C more in tune, while "hiding" the resultant out-of-tune-ness in "spicy" or "accent" keys such as F# or b.
And if you look at the Well-Tempered Clavier from a structural standpoint while taking matters of temperament into account, pieces for the homier keys seem to have more sustain, to revel in the in-tune-ness, while the pieces in the farthest-out keys seem to "picket-fence" the notes in order to avoid dissonances.
I can point you to a pair of Brahms organ-work performances (Equal Tempered versus Bach Spiral organs) if you are interested; I wish I knew of a pair of Bach piano performance examples. But I once heard an MP3 of a late Brahms piano piece in Bach-Spiral and it sounded great.
Dunno 'bout Stravinsky, tho.
JM
Very cute also!
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
