Establishing a common analog listening bias

Raul, this is news for me, I thought your position was that you said we should always strive for the best e.g. with 0.01dB RIAA deviations?

Henry, No sir you did not offend me, if that's what you hear from your pressing then that's what you hear.

As you know what Dertnarm is after is current and readily available pressings for anyone interested in participating.

My RCA pressings of Belafonte Live are not. The most recent being Classic Records 45 RPM single side box set from a couple of years back and a fairly decent early original pressing.

None of what you and Axel heard on your copies exist on mine.
The opening introduction that leads into Darlin'Cora the audience clapping is distinct and well rendered you immediately get a sense of the size of Cargenie.

The horn section puts a quick end to the clapping then the concert begins.
No where from the intro to the final of the concert do I hear anything remotely to which you described.
All and all the music is vibrant and entertaining

There are many things to be heard that the mics picked up during this concert, from the guy near the stage with some sort of bronchial problems ,subway to a transport outside going through his gears.
Its all there whether you want to hear it or not, it's live.

The current and still available double Lp re-issued by Classic Records is a fairly decent copy.
Compared to a very good pressing on a scale of 1 to 10, I would rate this currently available copy a 6.5 out of 10.Ten being the good pressing.

The intro is a bit washy,the horn section is a tad bright.
Belafontes vocals lack dynamics through out.
More so apparent on the track "John Henry" also there are portions where his voice is a tad harsh on this particular track.

Over all the musical flow of things are a little dull compared to a good pressing.
I borrowed this current issue yesterday to bring this information here.

For decades it's pretty much common knowledge this rare live RCA Victor recording is superb through and through.
However this is not what this thread is about.

Yes Perrew but there ( RIAA ) I have the control on it through our phonolinepreamp design and in the other side you can have a near " perfect "cartrdge/tonearm/record set-up and enjoy more time the music that every 30-60 seconds stand up and fine tunning the set up " again and again " ( to " mantain " the " perfect " set up ).

I do that perfect set up when I need it: tests/comparisons on audio items, my main target is try to have the more time I have hearing and enjoying the music.

I already pass the " stage " where we are " fighting " with the hardware, I learn how o do it for I can enjoy the music like ever: this is part of us each audio learning curve, there are people that are where I'm and there are other people that are down stairs.

The audio and especially the each one targets are unique to each one person, each one of us have/has different priorities and different music/sound reproduction perception in a global target: music/sound reproduction in audio home systems, and due to those different priorities exist different quality performance levels. There are no especial rules here, only what we want and how we want it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Agree with Dave Brubeck Quartet "Time Out" Classic Records

I think Art Blakey and the Jazz Messengers deserve a mention "Moanin" mono Classic Records.

We need a bit more Rock...

While I think that discussion of music, as opposed to equipment is a refreshing and extremely worthwhile endeavor, I confess to being a bit perplexed by what the ultimate goal of this proposal might be. I don't really get it.

This is not meant to in any way offend, but I find it telling that in more than sixty posts, there has not been one mention of how all of the expressed opinions about this recording's or that recording's merits (or lack thereof), mentions of dynamics, brightness, obvious (or not so obvious) sense of space, etc., relate to the sound of real instruments played live.

The idea of a common listening bias was proposed a long time ago by pioneering audiophiles like JG Holt and Harry Pearson. And the most useful common bias has to be the sound of real, unmplified instruments in a real space. IMO this is not up for debate. What is the point of mentioning that Eric Clapton's "Unplugged" conveys more ambient information than The Weaver's Carnegie Hall, when "Unplugged", while it sounds very immediate and spacious, also sounds very tipped up in the highs, with way too much leading edge to the sound of the guitars? The Weaver's recording converys a far more realistic, and natural sound; compared to the sound of acoustic instruments, voices, and audience sounds, as heard live. What's the point of mentioning that a horn section sounds a tad bright, without answering the question: "compared to what?" Maybe it is, but have you ever experienced a great big band live? The brass section of a great orchestra? It can sound incredibly "bright".

I think the basic premise of this discussion is great, but I would love to see much more emphasis on how all of this relates to the real sound of live instruments and voices.