|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.56.149.123
In Reply to: RE: This is not argumentative posted by Awe-d-o-file on December 01, 2014 at 11:10:12
would be a sampling of a variety of genres, primarily acoustic. I'd like to know, for example, if what "produces" the more noticeable growl in Ray Brown's bass imparts "thickness" to a Sarah Vaughan or Jane Monheit. Or "chestiness" to a Joao Gilberto or Sinatra. Or "darkens" the presentation of other-genre program material.
I'd also like to know how the tweak handles large-ensemble performances. Does it "place" everyone where he or she should be? Or--in a symphony, for example--are the string bassists standing in the cellists' laps?
Hope that helps.
Jim
http://jimtranr.com
Follow Ups:
I quite agree! Musical variety is good and spatial image and location is a critical area for me too. I liked reading your Tonkin paper. I really just skimmed it but will do a thorough read. I'd like to see some North Vietnamese comments from those that were there.
E
T
Thanks, Awe-d-o.
Jim
http://jimtranr.com
Winston's listening session lasted about 3-4 hours. Typically I'd say start with SP, play a track, swap to the BP, play the same track. Then, with the BP still there, I'd play a new track, than swap back to the SP. This way we got to hear both footers first and second on various music.
I chose a varied selection of musical types; in the time available we listened to a considerable number of tracks, some of them several times.
In this case I did not bother doing blind testing. That takes a lot more time and frankly wasn't needed as there is an easily noticeable difference between the two.
There was plenty of acoustic music, also single voice, massed voices, large orchestral, jazz, rock, electronic, harp, etc.
I'll leave it to Winston to describe the sound.
If you didn't blind test, then bias comes into play; so any comments are suspect and probably wrong. And when you hear something and tell Winnie what you hear, then he will hear it too. Human nature 101.
What you should do is administer a blind test with a third person changing the footers - or maybe not changing the footers, and then do separate note taking with the other person out of the room. Then your observations will have some validity. But you know all this .... right?
.... you think it would help you or someone else - or at least would be more helpful than just trying the tweak, and sharing impressions.
But of course, you won't do either. It's so much more fun to just flap your gums and stink up the air here, pretending to be "sceptical" - to cover-up simply being cheap and closed-minded.
I do blind testing all the time mate, so I am well aware of it's strengths and limitations. I am after all in the blind testing 'camp':
e.g.
http://www.madscientist-audio.com/blind-testing-canopeners/
http://www.madscientist-audio.com/blind-testing-canopeners/how-blind-test-blackdiscus/
The big downside is that to do it properly needs a lot more time and we didn't have that.
But as far as I can tell, you have already made your opinion clear : you think that this is some kind of parody or joke. So why labor the point?
Check the post: I said it reads as a parody, but I think you're serious. So I will labor the point.
I don't remember any big orchestral, Bob, but we did a shit load of comparisons, and there was so much info to digest happening so fast, maybe you slipped one in and I simply don't remember that. But I honestly do not recall any big orchestral. All the other stuff you listed, yes. If you remember what you say you played, big orchestral-wise, maybe that would refresh my recollection.
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: