|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
207.200.116.133
In Reply to: stereophile finished posted by PhillyB on January 22, 2007 at 10:54:55:
>My only complaint is the reviews are to short...>They were shortened so more reviews could go in each issue.
And I think some of them are too short - like Harley's Wilson MAXXII piece.
Personally, I still find Stereophile to be entertaining and would miss it - much more than sound and Vision, for example.
Follow Ups:
I would agree, but having said that, Stereophile lately is just been useless. I miss TAS and Sound & Vision much more.TAS right now rules in all areas, at least they try to tell you compared to the real thing what a unit does god or does not.
I can read through the crap based on my experience. Highly detailed means bright by the end of the review, full and musical means warm, be nice to hear them mix and match a warm amp with a colder preamp etc.
Digital is in its golden age right now, it a great time for us still in this hobby, tubes are great, solid state is musical and some digital is to die for, including sound of the newest recordings over the past 5 years or so.
Be nice see the audio folks start to push this more and make it more widely known throughout the audio community not just us select few and that is the problem with high-end, it market for the select few who can afford it, and it dies after that.
Everyone is to blame, the product lines should cover all markets at least up to mid-hi-fi ranges and this could and would grow the hobby to more people.
$20,000 dollar amps, $40,000 reviews are a waste even for most audiophiles, the reviewers and we cannot even afford them, so why review it if very few can or will pay that type of equipment.
It is turning more people off then on. I just flip over them. I hear those systems at times and all they do is play loud, turn them down to normal listening levels and you be surprised at how close much, much cheaper gear comes to it sound quality, this is what reviewers should be talking about, educating the community.
Mark Fremmer reviewed a CD player and it was out of phase due to a wiring error, he thought it sounded great..nuff said about reviewers ears there no better then me or you, but it liked it, $45,000 unit could make you think your hearing things you never heard before because your supposed it, just like $15,000 speaker wires and power cords.
If I spent that much I hear god talk to me to so I would not feel foolish and I hate to say it that I have at times, I got caught up in the hype and BS which some reviewers sold us hook line and sinker, I know many people in the mid-90’s who washed there hands of this hobby due to the crap being sold as truth.
Let’s hope for the best. The digital age is here to stay, you have 20 years of computer and video games hobbyist so how do we reach them, and perhaps we cannot.
"TAS right now rules in all areas, at least they try to tell you compared to the real thing what a unit does god or does not."To a certain extent that's true, but I don't think they've ever really explained what the "Absolute Sound" really is. Is it the sound of live acoustic music in a specific venue? If it is, what the hell do I do as someone who likes electric music performed in not-so hot venues like my nearest sports arena? If I used that as an absolute reference, all I have to do is buy the crappiest horn loaded JBL's I can find and blast the crap out of them with a 70 Volt amp.
Their own interpretations vary from not only issue to issue, but article to article. And while I do like the writing of most of the reviewers, I've come away feeling that Harry Pearson is a windbag. The Yin and Yang bullshit is enough to drive any enthusiast to the nearest trash can.
But that aside, it is the other writers I do look forward to reading, and again I thought the Class D amp face-off was one of the best articles last year about an up and coming technology that I predict will continue to get better and better........and hopefully cheaper and cheaper.
Harry frequently defined "Absolute Sound" (probably 2 or 3 times a year in the olde days.)To paraphrase: "It's the sound of real (read acoustic, not amplified or electronically modified) instruments in real space. Get that right and "accurate" rock playback will follow."
As far as the sound of a shitty PA system overdriving an overly reverberent stadium; if that's the sound you are after, then yeah, you are on your own.
And as I stated before, that defintion changes often. Why? Well....how is that such dramatically different sounding components occasionally approach the absolute sound? SUBJECTIVELY they may, but an absolute doesn't change. If it does, then it ain't.The aforementioned "Stadium" analogy is not what I'm after, nor is it what I've attained.
From what I remember, the basic definition hasn't changed (well maybe since Harley's at the helm and Harry's been marginalized), but what has changed is what aspects of the absolute have been approached. Tonality? we might be there. Dynamics? Few systems can truly deliver ppp to fff without compression, so maybe this week they focus on that. Soundstage? 30 years ago, when TAS started, this was rarely spoken of. Now proper speaker design and placement are relatively common.Harry has admitted that the goal may be unattainable in situ, but he does acknowledge that advances have been made towards the absolute.
The reference is just a goal. Something to strive towards. It was his way to define his frustration with Holt's early approach (which in reality wasn't that different), just as Holt's frustration lead him away from High Fidelity's viewpoint. It's a testament to Harry's vision and to the ideal itself that people are still discussing it.
The current TAS has drifted from its roots established by HP, JWC, PHD, JN, etc.
"It's the sound of real (read acoustic, not amplified or electronically modified) instruments in real space"the lattitude in this statement is such that, you might just say it is the equivalent of asking how long is a piece of string. Having a chamber orchestra play in the QEII hall and my local Bishopsgate institute hall both qualify but the resultant sound will certainly not be the same, so much for absolute sound :-).
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Not at all... Take the sound of a violin. If the violin is properly recorded and reproduced, then it should sound like a real violin (not steely or lacking body), no matter what the sonic imprint of the hall. In and of itself, this is not an easy task and many system will probably fail in some way. And that's just a single instrument!The real problem is that in order to truly follow this philosophy, you should have access to recordings of materials where you yourself have attended the recording sessions. Pearson did this at one time, John Marks has the proper recordings, so do Atkinson and Greene. Beyond that, the list of people truly qualified to review in this manner is extremely restricted. I believe the number of manufacturers that follow this paradigm is even fewer. Weisfeld and Wilson come to mind and that's about it.
Looking at the response you have got I better be more specific"Not at all... Take the sound of a violin. If the violin is properly recorded and reproduced, then it should sound like a real violin (not steely or lacking body), no matter what the sonic imprint of the hall"
A violin in a highly reflective small hall will sound steely especially to those who seat in the front rows, lacking body is another thing entirely that most likely has to do post-recording processing. At any rate, when I think about it now, many audiophile recording companies especially does that employ minimalist mic'ing techniques go to huge lengths to find suitable halls for recordings, obviously they feel that the sonic imprint of the hall has some influence on the final product.
Ironically, the recording technique that seeks to minimise the influence of hall on the tonality of the instruments is close miking and not without justification as proximity to sound source has an effect to the overall perception of tonality, it captures the sound of the instrument at a location where ordinary listeners will never seat, and as result the overall tonality is somewhat different.
As I mentioned earlier, I wish I could agree with you but I cannot, I remember an incident a while back where a composer about to listen to a performance of one of his own pieces commented on the deleterious effects of the hall acoustics on the sound of the orchestra.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"A violin in a highly reflective small hall will sound steely especially to those who seat in the front rows"Only if it is a cheap shit violin or a really bad musician. Have you actually done this?? My ex-girlfriend use to practice in our 25 square meter main room. It was sometimes VERY loud but NEVER steely sounding. Of course she was playing on only top shelf instruments. I have done several recording sessions with here in small studios (music studios not damped recording studios) and small concert halls and even standing 1 or 2 meters from the instrument it would never be called steely.
You probably right that lacking body has to do with the processing or the recording equipment itself (if it is cheap then you can get a sound lacking body).
"As I mentioned earlier, I wish I could agree with you but I cannot, I remember an incident a while back where a composer about to listen to a performance of one of his own pieces commented on the deleterious effects of the hall acoustics on the sound of the orchestra."
Be that as it may the deleterious effects of the playback chain on the realism can be much more extreme. Live still sounds live regardless of so so acoustics. It is this "liveness" that is lacking in most systems.
"Only if it is a cheap shit violin or a really bad musician. Have you actually done this?? My ex-girlfriend use to practice in our 25 square meter main room. It was sometimes VERY loud but NEVER steely sounding. Of course she was playing on only top shelf instruments. I have done several recording sessions with here in small studios (music studios not damped recording studios) and small concert halls and even standing 1 or 2 meters from the instrument it would never be called steely."The sound of a violin is greatly influenced by the strings, there is no way a gut stringed violin will sound steely no matter how badly played, it simply not part of the sound of gut stringed violins, On the other hand a steel stringed violin may well sound steely and probably will sound so depending on promixity and the music program. However, the upshot of using steel strings is that they are louder than gut strings and as a result the sound is projected further. That said, even a gut stringed instruments will sound strident if listened to in close proximity on an energetic music program. And in both cases, a highly reflective hall will make it worse.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
"The sound of a violin is greatly influenced by the strings, there is no way a gut stringed violin will sound steely no matter how badly played, it simply not part of the sound of gut stringed violins,"No one is using gut strings unless they are specifically trying to replicate a period piece. For example Baroque music played on Baroque instruments. If you are playing on a stradivarius violin, which she was for one year, then you put the best strings you can on it, which is to say that yes, the strings matter but a top violin will likely have the best strings available. They will use strings that result in maximum projection of sound (for big concert halls) and also good sound (as judged by the musician).
"That said, even a gut stringed instruments will sound strident if listened to in close proximity on an energetic music program."
Again, it depends on the instrument and the skill of the musician. You can be point blank with a very agressive passages and it doesn't sound how you are describing. OR you can be relatively far away and its like fingernails on a chalkboard.
I lived through months of Paganini Caprices in my apartment (she eventually played four concerts here in Switzerland where she performed all 24 Caprices...not many attempt this). There is not a more generally agressive repertoire in existence for the violin. If not played well and on a good instrument the result will be most unpleasant. However, when played well and on a good instrument the sound is rich, full and musical and not steely, wiry etc.
Will it be loud? Of course! If you have never heard a top violin played in a very loud space it is amazing the acoustic power of such an instrument. It can make your eardrums pulsate! But that is not the same as steely, wiry etc.
"And in both cases, a highly reflective hall will make it worse"
Most music halls tone down the violin not make it worse. This is especially true if you are sitting further away where most violins will sound positively sweet.
Harry just shakes his head when folks head down the "in which hall?" direction. While they certainly vary, your choice of venue does not change the characteristic sound of an instrument.
Hi-Thanks for the mention.
Ray Kimber has made some great recordings, and John Atkinson used Ray's proprietary mic array on Bob Silverman's Diabelli Variations project.
Later,
...sounded great..nuff said."Whoever doesn't know Mikey's name by now just has not been paying attention.
As for said wiring error, inexcusable as that was, it provided Mikey with the proper polarity to hear his recordings to advantage, a fact that escapes most reviewers even to date. So he lucked out! Doesn't mean the unit is blameworthy.
"Mark Fremmer" must be a new writer. Never heard of him. Is he related to Micheal Fremer? It's January so it must be Stereophile bashing time. Give it a rest....
> It's January so it must be Stereophile bashing time.
The cold weather sure does bring the trolls out to play. :-)
On a related note, there are regularly Asylum posts in which
someone complains about non-delivery or delayed delivery of their
Stereophile. I always respond to these posts, either on the Asylum
or via private email, offering to send these people the missing
issue if they email me their street address.
What puzzles me is that less than half of these people do so. If
they care so much to complain about it on a public forum like the
Asylum, why do they then _not_ care when I offer to make good the
shortfall? Perhaps there are more trolls around than I suspected?
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Michael
Gee, they're even older than I am. Probably went deaf.
> Digital is in its golden age right now...Be nice see the audio folks start to push this more and make it more widely known throughout the audio community not just us select few...>If you have an ideas about how to get the word out to those who haven't been exposed to high end, don't keep them to yourself.
Unfortunately only a small minority of music lovers are passionate about sound quality. And they usually need to hear high end demonstrated before they realize the difference.
> $20,000 dollar amps, $40,000 reviews are a waste even for most audiophiles, the reviewers and we cannot even afford them, so why review it if very few can or will pay that type of equipment.>
Do you write to Road and Track and tell them to forget the Ferraris and focus on the cars people can afford?
People don't like reading about reality all they time - they need fantasies. Otherwise it would be our wives in Playboy...
> I hear those systems at times and all they do is play loud, turn them down to normal listening levels and you be surprised at how close much, much cheaper gear comes to it sound quality,>
I'm not convinced the cheaper gear comes that close to the resolution, coherence, frequency extension, dynamics and tonal color, even at lower volume levels.
> ...this is what reviewers should be talking about, educating the community.>
They do when they all review the lower priced equipment but they can only educate the folks who read their mags.
> M Fremmer reviewed a CD player and it was out of phase due to a wiring error, he thought it sounded great...>
Some listeners are more sensitve to absolute phase than others.
But it doesn't really matter what the reviewer thinks - it's what you think after you go out and audition the piece that really matters.
> I know many people in the mid-90’s who washed there hands of this hobby due to the crap being sold as truth.>
I'd say they weren't really audiophiels then, because the proof has always been in our listening and deciding. Anybody who bought a product just because of hype or a review deserved what they got.
> Let’s hope for the best. The digital age is here to stay, you have 20 years of computer and video games hobbyist so how do we reach them...>
Good question. We've been asking it for the past 20 years that high end has been "dying".
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: