2. misc-audio
  3. 127940-2135

Evaluating a system - what do you listen for?

I have been in this hobby a long time and my opinion of what I want to hear in reproduced music continues to evolve. Having owned many systems - and critically listened to many, many more - I am now looking for an overall sound that as accurately as possible captures the tone and tempo of the music with enough of a bass foundation to convincingly portray an orchestra at full tilt or club beats while still nailing the timbre of an upright bass. Decent portrayal of leading and trailing edges is nice, and a high end that’s fully present and balanced without stridency is a big plus. Detail’s good, but hyper detail without musical flow can be distracting. Airy treble and pinpoint or large soundstage are also nice to have, but if what’s coming out of the speakers doesn’t make me want to tap my toe or cry a little bit when a vocalist holds a note just so, then what’s the point? That’s what I’m looking for these days - what about you?
Ag insider logo xs@2xknownothing
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,706 posts
 

Whomever knows a guy with a real good analogue recorder---even the reasonably priced Revox A77, plus some condenser microphones, arrange for him to make you a recording of live acoustic music, the event at which you will be present. Listen attentively to the sound and music the musicians and singer(s) are making, taking notes if you wish. From those tapes burn a CD/SACD (and an LP if you have the disposable income!), and use it to evaluate equipment. From being at the recording session, you have a good idea of what the music and sound should be, much more so than any professional CD/SACD/LP you have. The recording will most likely be far more alive and transparent sounding than almost all of them, having gone through none of the processing commercial product does---equalization, compression, added electronic reverb and echo, gating, etc.

I made such a recording, and have used it for years as source material with which to judge the sound quality of equipment. It was made by myself in a small bar on El Camino Real in Sunnyvale California, the band being a Jump/Blues septet comprised of drumset, bass, upright piano, guitar, tenor and baritone saxes, and singer. The bass and guitar were plugged into small amps, but contrary to the mistaken notion (notably by Stereophile founder and chief-tester J. Gordon Holt) that instruments employing amplification are not acoustic sources of sound, the sound produced by amplified instruments is indeed acoustic---you hear the sound produced by an amplified instrument directly through the air with your ears, it is not an electronic sound source. The sound of an electric guitar and bass, while different than that of acoustic ones, have their own signature characteristics. If you were at the recording, you have heard that sound for yourself.

strongarm
30 posts
 
I used to be tbg. In the last five years thanks to several manufactures, I have gone to realism that I never thought was possible. I had thought that I was hearing all that was in the recording. I was missing many of the instrument harmonics, much of the decay of notes in the hall or studio, and many noises of the performers breathing, changing positions on the strings that you probably would only hear were you as close as the mikes, but now my speakers vanish and the speaker end of my large listening room is replaced by the hall or studio and instruments appear where I never heard them. The old saw of hearing the piano in another room and knowing whether it is real or a recording is lost-everything is real.
In no particular order I thank Miguel Alvarez, Rick Schultz, Roger Paul, Audio Points, Star Sound Tech Rhythm racks and Platforms, Zilplex cups, Mr. Ikeda for the Kai cartridge and recording engineers for capturing more than they could have ever heard.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Oh, brother! How many times have we heard that before? 😬

Let me guess, you’re a dealer now, right? 🤡
erik_squires
16,009 posts
 
My first: Effortless listening.

After this tonal balance and lastly dynamic range

By effortless listening I mean, I don't feel like I have to interpret or filter out anything. Listen to a tape recording of people in an office, and you'll suddenly hear the room they are in. All the echo which if you were in the room your brain would be constantly working to remove. This is what I most want gone.

Related to this, I want a glass smooth and extended tonal balance. I probably like my speakers a little darker or warmer than most.

Dynamic range is important but I can't really listen very loudly. What I want is utter ease of dynamics within the volume I listen to.

The thing I care about the least is precision imaging. Hyper detailed localization of instruments doesn't sound natural to me, and is often achieved by sacrificing the tonal balance.

wolf_garcia
6,685 posts
 
If you have a relatively accurate home system it's going to reveal good and bad things, including what the recording engineer did with the pan pots on the mixing board. One of my pet peeves (which I can ignore if I like the music) is the "20 foot wide drum kit" syndrome which exists on a lot of the jazz trio (and other stuff) recordings I listen to…unless somebody is in the far corner of the room playing just a high hat or a tom…in that case it's fine. I like coherency, which I've determined is the key for me both in my home rig and the concerts I produce and mix. Live shows always (except for musicians getting stuck in traffic) have a sound check where you try to get a balance that the artists like, and that is sometimes destroyed at show time by a musician who decides to play much louder (rare, but man…) requiring re-mixing on the fly…I still get paid. However, tonal coherency keeps you from losing interest…screechy treble, boomy bass…no no no.
More to discover