- ...
- 9 posts total
Most audiophile magazines give recordings they review a grade for sound and performance and often discuss the sound in their review. Many music magazines don't because people who care about sound are a tiny minority of their readers. Paul McGowan of PS Audio posted about how he recently recorded a string quartet and had this experience: https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/relative-better/ |
When films are screened for film critics, I imagine that they are good quality renditions (used to call them "prints") on good/big screens with proper sound, etc. If a director or composer has made an effort to include something in the film, the playback should not obscure it. And a good film critic would know the optimal playback conditions for a film. I see no reason the above argument doesn’t transfer without loss to the music critic. Now, whether an article of music criticism *should* discuss the audiophile technicalities is an interesting one. I’d love to see it, but I could imagine that for reviews with word-limits (i.e., all of them) it could displace important critical remarks about more central considerations. |
Yes as Tom says above most Audiophile mags, print and online, do music reviews and grade on sound quality as well as performance. To me great music is great music but great recording certainly helps a lot. Likely these days most critics use headphones and it’s a bit easier to put a competent headphone system than a speaker fronted system. |
- 9 posts total