Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Return to Propeller Head Plaza

Is there a correlation between preferred music and subjectivity/objectivity in audio?

98.220.55.32
Posted on August 24, 2009 at 14:44:01
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 Along the lines of Gymwear's post regarding politics and education.

There was a sub-thread that I was involved in with Regmac on Critics that made me wonder if objectivists mostly cotton to classical music with its tight structure (I'm speaking not of the modern variety but more along the lines of Beethoven, Mozart, etc) and subjectivists prefer more improvised music like jazz or rock. In that sub-thread, I made the mistake of dealing with Regmac on my terms instead of his and he quickly corrected me, even making a thinly disguised swipe at subjectivists and their lack of measurement focus.

There may not be many "objectivists" left around here to comment but is there anything to one's music preferences and their bent on audio gear sound? What do you think? I think RBNG prefers rock and E-Stat prefers classical, so that's two against my theory!

Wrong question, posted on September 13, 2009 at 12:36:42
Peter H-son
Audiophile

Posts: 1403
Joined: October 17, 2007
 It's not a question about subjectivity/objectivity but rationalism/mysticism.

"There may not be many "objectivists" left around here to comment but is there anything to one's music preferences and their bent on audio gear sound?"

No, here are no rational people left. That is typical of Internet forums. The rational individuals get chased away by fanatics and idiots.

"Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up"
--James 5:14-15
And yet, here you are., posted on September 13, 2009 at 14:37:09
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 2529
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 "No, here are no rational people left."

As a rational person, I can only conclude that since you posted here then clearly you are of the class "fanatics and idiots".

However, my posting disproves your hypothesis. Guess you are just wrong on all counts.

Ahh, the beauty and light of logic shining upon all...

RE: And yet, here you are., posted on September 14, 2009 at 10:21:02
Peter H-son
Audiophile

Posts: 1403
Joined: October 17, 2007
 "As a rational person, I can only conclude that since you posted here then clearly you are of the class "fanatics and idiots"."

If you say so it must be so.

The simple fact is that this forum has been overtaken by anti-science fanatics. As I said, this is no different from many other forums. There is no difference whatsoever between the wackjob that posts here and the Christian creationists. Pathetic.

"Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up"
--James 5:14-15
RE: And yet, here you are., posted on September 14, 2009 at 11:07:31
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 2529
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 "There is no difference whatsoever between the wackjob that posts here and the Christian creationists."

Hogwash! I bet that, on the average, our stereo's sound better!

R.

RE: And yet, here you are., posted on September 15, 2009 at 08:56:21
Peter H-son
Audiophile

Posts: 1403
Joined: October 17, 2007
 I'm sure they do.

But that's not the issue. The issue is that the wackjobs have killed the forum. The best thing would be to just get rid of it. As it is, it is as dishonest as a science forum on a Christian creationist web site.

"Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up"
--James 5:14-15
RE: And yet, here you are., posted on September 15, 2009 at 11:47:07
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 2529
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 Despite the title and tag line, it is my understanding that this has never been a particularly 'scientific' forum although it occasionally has it's moments. At least science, technology and engineering are allowed to be discussed. Perhaps it would be fun to look at the oldest archives and see if the nature of the discussions has actually changed.

I liked your Darwin quote. I've found the same thing, seems like the shallowest knowledge often begets the deepest conviction. However I don't think most folks here are antiscientific but some are rather unscientific. That's a big difference in my book. The fixation on blind testing however is beyond me, but it seems to be a passionate, albeit bootless, topic.

Rick

RE: And yet, here you are., posted on September 16, 2009 at 12:37:36
Peter H-son
Audiophile

Posts: 1403
Joined: October 17, 2007
 "I don't think most folks here are antiscientific but some are rather unscientific."

True. And those people probably think Darwin just stumbled on evolution or simply made it up out of thin air.



"Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up"
--James 5:14-15
RE: Is there a correlation between preferred music and subjectivity/objectivity in audio?, posted on August 29, 2009 at 09:29:56
caspian@peak.org
Audiophile

Posts: 386
Location: Oregon
Joined: January 12, 2008
 As a DIY speaker builder, I see subjective enjoyment of music as the true goal and objective measurement/calculation/analysis as the way toward achieving that goal.

When I'm in subjective enjoyment mode (which is most of the time), I just listen to music. Many different kinds of music, on recordings ranging from sublime to atrocious. (You can't exactly find audiophile recordings of Fritz Kreisler or Blind Blake).

When I'm in objective mode (as when voicing a crossover or a reflex cabinet tuning) I use test signals and instruments, and design/ analysis software. Once I have a reasonably good response modeled, and verified by measurement, I will use the best-recorded and most familiar music in my collection for fine tuning. Different styles of music highlight different aspects of system performance: simple folk music like Kate Wolf is best for vocals; good rock like Dire Straits for crisp percussion and punchy bass; symphonic music for the ability to resolve harmonic complexity and sheer dynamics; jazz saxophone or classical guitar for midrange subtleties, etc. Fiddling and tweaking may ensue, but I judge subjectively when it finally sounds "just right" and it's time to leave well enough alone.
I prefer mostly classical and jazz ..., posted on August 26, 2009 at 02:07:10
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 I am also largely a subjective decider on all things audio; however, I don't disregard objective data in-so-far as it can be correlated with my subjective observations. Like E-stat I use electrostatic speakers and tube amplification, because well it sounds better IMO.

Nothing wrong with preferences - however,..., posted on August 26, 2009 at 17:18:03
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 ... you seem to have a need to disparage others' musical preferences, to establish superiority of yours.

As a (hopefully) reasonably educated person, I'm sure you know the name for that complex.

RE: Nothing wrong with preferences - however,..., posted on August 27, 2009 at 04:33:37
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 As a (hopefully) educated person surely you can see that particular genres of music are produced in very different ways. It is not the music per se that is superior, it is the WAY its PRODUCED that is superior.

I like rock music just fine so I am not disparging your taste in music style but what it connotates with regard to sound quality and fitness for purpose of judging equipment quality. Older rock recordings are sometimes decent/good; less compressed and at least not clipping. However; they are still grossly inferior to superior recordings from the classical music and jazz genres.

You cannot judge tone with amplified and purposely distorted instruments, period. You cannot judge low level resolution on highly compressed, multimiked recordings. Afterall, the whole purpose of compression is to make the soft sounds louder so the system doesn't have to dig deep to get them across. You cannot judge dynamic range because often there really isn't any to speak of (this is how a low powered boombox can play loud with compressed music, real dynamic range would simply kill it). You cannot judge distortion when the recording is clipping left and right and so on...

Sure you can say something sounds different even with this music but you cannot judge which one sounds CORRECT. You need experience with live, unamplified instruments in real spaces and then have recordings that are made to preserve these things as much as possible and then you have to listen carefully. THEN you can begin to judge whether something is clearly better or worse and not simply different.

All is not lost, posted on August 25, 2009 at 16:25:56
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 9838
Location: Central boonies
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 There are many enigmatic aspects to my life. While my musical collection contains a lot of classical, I would say that I listen to that genre perhaps 20% of the time. I would characterize my overall preference as "largely acoustical". But that encompasses a wide range. In rotation with the garage system now are:

Emerson, Lake and Palmer - Emerson, Lake and Palmer (how many rockers can switch from Moog synth to grand piano to The Royal Festival Hall pipe organ?)
Original broadway cast "A Little Night Music"
Dead Can Dance (sampler CDR from about six different albums)
Soundtrack from Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince"
Troika "Dream Palace"
60's Samplers (graciously provided by M. Kuller)
Astrud Gilberto (CDR collection)
Madonna "Hard Candy"
Michael Hedges "Aerial Boundaries:

As for examining navels, I'm with you on passing on that. On the other hand, there are some lovely leggy ladies with Morton's Toe like Kate Beckinsale. What were we talking about again? :)

rw
No! But I was told by a reputable dealer the only way to identify an objectivist without talking to him was.., posted on August 25, 2009 at 10:53:04
Don Till
Audiophile

Posts: 675
Location: Tempe
Joined: February 16, 2009
 to examine his navel. Some objectivists may be identified by calculators in their top pockets. He also mentioned that audiophiles with second toes shorter than their big toes have a higher propensity to be absolute sounders. He also stated that customers clutching recent issues of Stereophile, knowing RCL class ratings or those having to run out to their car to look something up are most likely to claim to be subjectivists.

Hmmm, posted on August 25, 2009 at 14:57:57
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 I'd prefer to just ask rather than examining his navel. But then again, I'm a subjectivist and we play by our own set of rules. :)

>knowing RCL class ratings<

I seem to recall my current integrated amp, CDP and speaker wire were a solid Class C sometime back in the '90's. :)

Hmm., posted on August 24, 2009 at 19:29:27
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 1420
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 What about those of us who are objective where possible but also value our own subjective impressions, and whos collections span from Vivaldi to Deicide?

Correlate that!

I feel the answer is no.

Point taken, posted on August 25, 2009 at 04:57:26
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 >What about those of us who are objective where possible but also value our own subjective impressions<

That's probably most of us.

>whos collections span from Vivaldi to Deicide?<

That maybe you and I only. I listened to Bach and Spinegrinder last night (not to mention John Zorn, Lull, and Ornette Coleman).

Point taken.

Count me out - for me on the other end of spectrum from Deicide ..., posted on August 25, 2009 at 11:13:34
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 .. are Kraftwerk and Yello. That's where the train stops.

RE: Count me out - for me on the other end of spectrum from Deicide ..., posted on August 26, 2009 at 02:16:42
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 Remind me never to take any kind of audio advice from you seriously.

You mean, regardless of what that advice is? How about...., posted on August 26, 2009 at 04:56:12
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 ... my opinion that Simaudio Supernova is very good CD player, and NBS Mnitor I bi-wire is very good cable (both first-hand experience)? Would you scratch both from your list, or just wait for classical lover to express his opinion? Or, by the same token, would you run to buy something that classical lover recommended, without listening?

I'm sorry, it's just too funny.

RE: You mean, regardless of what that advice is? How about...., posted on August 26, 2009 at 07:59:39
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 Yes, regardless of what that advice is because it comes from using material that frankly can't tell you much of anything.

"my opinion that Simaudio Supernova is very good CD player, and NBS Mnitor I bi-wire is very good cable (both first-hand experience)? "

No I didn't say I would scratch them off my list per se just I wouldn't trust your opinion on them. Maybe they are both very good, but I am not sure you would be able to tell given your admission about music choice, therefore I would not take your advice on the matter seriously. So in effect your experience would be meaningless to me because I know that your choice in music limits the ability to tell anything meaningful about the gear.

"Or, by the same token, would you run to buy something that classical lover recommended, without listening?
"

I would never buy anything without listening to it, regardless of who recommended it. Would I be more inclined to try it based on their recommendation than yours?? Yes because their choice in music, IMO, gives them a decent chance of hearing something meaningful between pieces or gear or wires.

"I'm sorry, it's just too funny."

What exactly? That I wouldn't take your advice on gear because of your music choices or that you pretend to be an audiophile listening to trash recordings?
How does carcass93's music in his signal integrity analysis somehow invalidate his results as compared to yours?, posted on August 28, 2009 at 13:25:59
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 1420
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 This seems to be what you are implying. Please correct me if I made a mistake or explain how a particular genre of music creates signals more worthy of analysis.

Wouldn't heavy metals rich complex waveforms caused by distorted guitars layered over bashing drum heads, cymbal crashes, growling humans, etc. potentially contain more data to analyze than the often more pure tones found in recorded classical music? Doesn't more data allow for a more complete analysis?

It is my opinion that anyone not considering all signal types in their analysis is potentially missing system response data only made apparent from signal types they haven't been using in the analysis. Personally I prefer impulse response analysis but haven't been able to create an accurate impulse in practice and suspect that even I couldn't appreciate the music of an impulse train.

RE: How does carcass93's music in his signal integrity analysis somehow invalidate his results as compared to, posted on August 28, 2009 at 15:07:51
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 Well I am not saying that there isn't a lot of information but think about what kind of information. Essentially one of a kind distortions that you have no idea HOW they should sound like. No dynamics as it is compressed to hell and back and then boosted to clipping.

"contain more data to analyze than the often more pure tones found in recorded classical music?"

Maybe but only if it can be unravelled from the recording itself...in most cases when it has been processed like that above then the answer is no way. I would also question that there are more complex tones in the processed music than the harmonic structures of acoustic instruments. Besides, when you are recorded in a natural space there is the real room acoustic that is also adding to complexity...and the phasing and levels work a systems full dynamic and tonal palette far more than near constant level noise.

"Doesn't more data allow for a more complete analysis?"
Not necessarily as outlined above.

"t is my opinion that anyone not considering all signal types in their analysis is potentially missing system response data only made apparent from signal types they haven't been using in the analysis."

Again, signals are only useful for analysis if you know what they were supposed to sound like in the first place.

"Personally I prefer impulse response analysis but haven't been able to create an accurate impulse in practice and suspect that even I couldn't appreciate the music of an impulse train. "

ARe you talking about objective measurements with impulses or music that is useful for judging sound quality?? If I want to MEASURE something then I clearly don't use music...its far too complex to unravel with measurement tools. For listening? music. Acoustic music where there is at least some kind of real reference.

RE: How does carcass93's music in his signal integrity analysis somehow invalidate his results as compared to, posted on August 29, 2009 at 13:56:27
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 1420
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 "Well I am not saying that there isn't a lot of information but think about what kind of information. Essentially one of a kind distortions that you have no idea HOW they should sound like."

It seems one could make the same argument for any recording event that was not personally witnessed.

"No dynamics as it is compressed to hell and back and then boosted to clipping."

Only with newer stuff. This recording technique didn't really become popular among metal artists until late eighties and early nineties. Even now it is mostly only applicable to those who know this technoique or are going to bigger recording studios and hiring the busy pop song recording engineers. It may be hard to believe but most of the best examples of this type music is pretty well underground, low production budget.

"Maybe but only if it can be unravelled from the recording itself...in most cases when it has been processed like that above then the answer is no way."

A digitally captured recording can easily be compared to the original in programs such as Cool Edit Pro. No unravelling necessary at least within the error rate of the capturing gear being used.

"Again, signals are only useful for analysis if you know what they were supposed to sound like in the first place."

Not really. Engineers spend much of their days comparing system response to injected signals to try and get an idea about system transfer function. Once you've done it for a whhile it isn't such a big deal.

"If I want to MEASURE something then I clearly don't use music...its far too complex to unravel with measurement tools."

Maybe you are just using the wrong tools. Wave editing programs usually offer great ways to help users see file differences. They can be very powerful tool for analyzing audio system response when a PC with I/O capability is thrown in as a piece of test gear.

"Acoustic music where there is at least some kind of real reference."

It's a great sanity check after the objective approach plays out or if no objective approach is readily available.
RE: How does carcass93's music in his signal integrity analysis somehow invalidate his results as compared to, posted on August 31, 2009 at 00:59:52
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 "It seems one could make the same argument for any recording event that was not personally witnessed"

To some extent yes,but an acoustic instrument always sounds like itself and the same is not true for electrified instruments, which can change completely with the push of a button or twist of a knob. Not to mention the amplication an electric guitar goes through affects the sound profoundly (ask any guitarist worth his salt why they prefer a tube amp).

"Only with newer stuff. This recording technique didn't really become popular among metal artists until late eighties and early nineties. "

Is 80s and 90s newer stuff?? It is 2009 you know.

"now it is mostly only applicable to those who know this technoique or are going to bigger recording studios and hiring the busy pop song recording engineers. "

No, it is an endemic problem in the industry that is even creeping into jazz and *gasp* classical music as well.

"It may be hard to believe but most of the best examples of this type music is pretty well underground, low production budget."

I have heard plenty of underground music in my day and even recorded some. I was recording a bit for an underground swiss rock band. I also used no compression etc. but they didn't like that sound saying it wasn't "loud" enough or with enough attack. Another example was when I went to go hear a Norwegian jazz/techno band called Jagajazzist. They were amazing live, so driving and innovative with a huge sound. My friend and I bought all of the records (cds and lps) that they had on offer. Got them home and...WHAT THE HELL! Sounded like shit, all compressed and lifeless. Haven't listened to them since. What a pity that this great music can be destroyed by bad production but it can.

"Maybe you are just using the wrong tools. Wave editing programs usually offer great ways to help users see file differences. They can be very powerful tool for analyzing audio system response when a PC with I/O capability is thrown in as a piece of test gear.
"

I challenge you to be able to quantitatively demonstrate that you can unravel the recording (i.e. the test signal) from the system response using a wave editing program and a PC with soundcard. I would be amazed if you could even deconvolute it from the soundcard. I don't think you can do this and I am sure it would be of limited use, especially in distortion analysis. Frequency response?? Hell that's easy to measure, especially if you don't care about the "true" response of your speakers themselves but the overall room response at the listening position. I myself use pink noise and a 61 band RTA to get in-room response at the listening position. This tells me nothing of course about electronics quality or even speaker colorations, as they are all likely 10db or more below the main response...but they could be highly audible and you won't find them unless you do a gating experiment and measure the decay and even then you won't have the true effect unless you can notch out the main response (possibly only if you have one excitation or a few discrete excitation wavelengths) and look at where the energy spreads to.


"It's a great sanity check after the objective approach plays out or if no objective approach is readily available.
"

Its more than that, its THE criteria for good sound or not.
" too funny" refers to the fact that..., posted on August 26, 2009 at 08:18:08
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 ... you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about, instead looking to pick a fight when there isn't one.

Feel free to disregard whatever aduio "advice" I would provide, and I'll do the same about yours. I will start, if you don't mind, with colored and not terribly resolving Monarchy amps, that you promote in every other of your posts as world-beaters.

RE: " too funny" refers to the fact that..., posted on August 27, 2009 at 01:25:16
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 "... you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about, instead looking to pick a fight when there isn't one.
"

LOL, I was stating my opinion to any potential advice you might give, not starting a fight. As to having no idea what I am talking about...Rock on dude as that is about the depth of your musical knowledge and therefore your audio knowledge as well because, especially in high end audio, the two go hand in hand.

" I will start, if you don't mind, with colored and not terribly resolving Monarchy amps, that you promote in every other of your posts as world-beaters."

If that is what you think then I know you have no clue about price/performance. They are affordable and beat all of the midfi SS dreck that is out there (I am referring only to their hybrid amps, not their small SS amps).


Let's just say . . ., posted on August 26, 2009 at 17:55:14
Frank E
Audiophile

Posts: 643
Joined: May 20, 2000
Contributor
  Since: September 8, 2000
 . . that because the objectivists (whatever they are?) have now been run off, the subjectivists (whatever they are?) are now turning on their own. It's one of the incontrovertible rules of society (perhaps with the exception of only this forum).

You see... I don't even mind turning on (kind of) my own - just not over musical preferences., posted on August 27, 2009 at 07:51:02
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 It's just silly, and in my opinion that kind of snobism is what might - or should - give audiophiles who indulge in it bad name.

No more meaningful than putting down Speyside connoisseur, only because you personally prefer Islay.

RE: You see... I don't even mind turning on (kind of) my own - just not over musical preferences., posted on August 28, 2009 at 01:31:06
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 Hey wake up!! No one is putting down your choice in music because of the music.

RE: Let's just say . . ., posted on August 27, 2009 at 01:26:40
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 Let's just say he is not like me and it is clear from his choice in music that his priorities lie somewhere other than mine.

RE: Point taken, posted on August 25, 2009 at 11:06:25
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 1420
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 "That maybe you and I only."

That's a good point. We may be outliers and not an indication of what trends could be spotted. I can only speak for myself.

Apparently, no - in most people's mind, somebody with my tastes would be best served listening to boombox., posted on August 24, 2009 at 14:58:10
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 But, of course, without actually being objectivist - since I wouldn't have to know WTF that is.

But wait a second here - I don't know WTF that is anyway! I mean, I've no idea what's so objective in sitting on pile of "affordable" garbage and proclaiming "I'm smart, because I'm cheap and deaf!".

"Objectionable" - now that's totally different matter...
RE: Apparently, no - in most people's mind, somebody with my tastes would be best served listening to boombox., posted on August 26, 2009 at 02:15:06
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 Have you tried your music on a boombox?? Maybe the satisfaction level will be the same and you can save a bunch of money.

Listening to old AC/DC tapes (cassette) in my friend's basement el cheapo system, shooting pool back in high school sure sounded fine to me. If that was my main music now I doubt I would get more enjoyment from my expensive system. Would it sound closer to what was recorded on my system now? Yes of course but that is not the same as getting more enjoyment always. With well recorded classical music it most certainly is the case...I can only imagine how poor my recent Swan Lake cd or my recent Keith Jarret cd on ECM would sound that el cheapo system in the basement...unlistenable I would estimate.

As I said - you're trying to speak about matters you have no interest in, or any idea about., posted on August 26, 2009 at 08:23:14
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 I have enough conroversy on these pages with brainless "everything sounds the same" herd, to be able to afford any more with somebody like you about music preferences.

Have a nice day.

RE: As I said - you're trying to speak about matters you have no interest in, or any idea about., posted on August 27, 2009 at 01:41:13
morricab
Dealer

Posts: 4456
Location: switzerland
Joined: April 1, 2005
 What you don't seem to get is that the WAY music is recorded has a lot to do with the necessity of a really good system or not.

IF most or all of the music you are listening too is A) made in a studio with multi-miking, B)using lots of compression, equalization, studio effects and/or level boosting, C)the music itself is highly distorted sounds then the benefit from going from a strictly midfi or even lower system to a true high end system is largely a waste of money. Maybe the sound gets a bit better resolved but that might simply allow you to hear what a complete screwup the recording really is. Sometimes, masking is a blessing.

Why do you think hard rock/rap/grunge/metal etc. music is compressed and boosted to the max?? So it will sound good with their prime target market's delivery systems, i.e. ipods, car stereos and portable stereos. None of these devices can handle music with any dynamic swings, its simply the physics. So, the music has to be crippled.

Dynamically limited music through a dynamically limited system sounds reasonable because also the resolution of these systems is also limited. Nasties are smeared out a bit but so is everything else of interst, which doesn't matter with most rock music anyway.

Dynamically limited music through a wide dynamic range system can sound very flat and the nasties have nowhere to hide.

Try listening to a good classical cd recording in the car while driving at highway speeds. Almost impossible without riding the gain knob like crazy. Up and down, up and down with the dynamics of the music. Only classical on the radio is sometimes (and I mean sometimes) possible because the radio station COMPRESSES the music for you to make it workable on the radio. Maybe you don't own any classical music to try this.

You're wrong!, posted on August 26, 2009 at 12:17:15
Don Till
Audiophile

Posts: 675
Location: Tempe
Joined: February 16, 2009
 You actually almost had a worthwhile conversation about audio. It's the other brainless stuff you feel compelled to argue about that you should be avoiding.
Your input is truly invaluable - as usual. N/T, posted on August 26, 2009 at 13:33:05
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 2634
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 N/T

Yeah, we gotta come up with a new name, posted on August 24, 2009 at 15:48:35
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 Objectivists really doesn't work. Cheapanddeaf works but it's not melodious enough. Flat-earthers is accurately descriptive but has no pizzaz.

What's a good name for those who extrapolate their poor listening skills on the rest of the world and refuse to try anything new in case it might upset their belief system????

"What's a good name for those who extrapolate their poor listening skills on the rest of the world and refuse..., posted on August 24, 2009 at 19:34:49
musetap
Audiophile

Posts: 6371
Location: San Francisco
Joined: July 8, 2003
Contributor
  Since: January 28, 2004
 to try anything new in case it might upset their belief system????"

Too bad Richard BassNuts Greene is taken.

How's about CCRAPTHEAD*?

*Cheap, Complacent, Ranting, Anti-audiophile, Pathetic, Tedious, Hebetative, Egocentric, Addled, Divisive.

Ok, I admit it needs a bit of... tweaking.

“ Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination. ” -Michael McClure
RE: "What's a good name for those who extrapolate their poor listening skills on the rest of the world and refuse..., posted on August 26, 2009 at 05:15:01
kerr
Audiophile

Posts: 3695
Location: Central Indiana
Joined: November 10, 2003
 >How's about CCRAPTHEAD*?

*Cheap, Complacent, Ranting, Anti-audiophile, Pathetic, Tedious, Hebetative, Egocentric, Addled, Divisive.

Ok, I admit it needs a bit of... tweaking.<

I'd change the D to deaf, remove one of the C's and the T to make it CRAPHEAD. Easier to spell. :) It was quite good as written, though.
RE: "What's a good name for those who extrapolate their poor listening skills on the rest of the world and ref, posted on August 26, 2009 at 12:23:32
musetap
Audiophile

Posts: 6371
Location: San Francisco
Joined: July 8, 2003
Contributor
  Since: January 28, 2004
 I had originally created it around CRAPHEAD, but wanted to seperate the crapheads of the world
from the Audiophileish CRAPHEADS, who deserve their own, new word.

It was a coins toss between deaf and divisive, but since it is a new word, why not TWO d's? CCRAPTHEADD.

Thanks, but still needs tweaking...



“ Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination. ” -Michael McClure

Page processed in 0.235 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ] [ Go Green ] [ Take5 ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]