Your vote: Most Useless Audio Adjective


From what I've seen in online audio discussion forums such as Audiogon, words like warm, taut, wooly, and forward can upset even died in the wool audiophiles. While some may have a hard time getting their arms around them, most of the terms seem quite appropriate to me. You have to develop some list of terms in order to convey a description of a component's sonics, or to delineate it from another component.

However, I have noticed the description "self effacing" creeping into more and more reviews, and it flat out boggles my mind. Initially, it seemed to fit into the context it was being used - affordable or downright cheap gear, that was fun and lively. However, now that I've read the term being used to describe quite a serious piece of high end kit, the time has come to point out how ridiculous things are getting.

I had to laugh out loud thinking of the snootiest, most condescending audio dealer I know who was carrying this brand. Using the term "self effacing" with anything had to do with this guy was akin to describing Phyllis Diller a young, hot sex symbol.

What is your most useless audio adjective???
trelja
How about when a reviewer describes the sound as wet or dry?
What the heck does that mean?

ozzy
I rarely see "veils lifted" anymore. I suppose the phrase has been laughed out of audiophiledom and yet, I kind of miss it. Always made me laugh.

I despise "full loom". Makes me cringe every time I read it.

I will admit to using liquid, organic, and fatiguing. Each makes sense to me. For example, many moons ago I had a cheap Pioneer receiver and crap CDP which I tired of listening to after about 20 minutes. That's when I learned about the irritating/fatiguing nature of jitter. Now I have a lovely system with a nice liquid midrange .. very organic ;-)