Of course it’s possible to judge a system’s sound using highly processed non-acoustic music. The question is not whether it can be judged, but whether one’s goal is to achieve a sound one likes without any aspirations to meeting any particular standard of fidelity; or, whether it is to achieve a sound that gets as close as possible to the sound of acoustic music. It’s not the same for everyone and, yes, no matter what many think it is possible to have acoustic music as a real and very useful standard.
To throw in the towel because timbre is altered by the first microphone is, in a way, a little like saying: “why should I shower at all, I’m just going to get dirty again”. Point is, of course the process of choosing components that, in combination, best mimic the sound of live acoustic instruments is imperfect. Of course that first microphone alters timbre as well as other aspects of the music. However, the goal is to choose pieces and combinations of pieces of rec/playback electronic gear that does the least damage; and some do a much better job than others.
Its become popular to dismiss the use of a sonic standard and there certainly is nothing wrong with simply aiming for what “sounds good” to us for whatever reason. It is obviously a personal thing. However, with enough exposure to the sound of un-processed acoustic music it becomes possible to form an aural “database” of the characteristics of unprocessed musical sounds that let’s one be a better judge…..if that is one’s goal. Ask yourself this question: how is it possible to tell that the friend or loved one on the phone is getting over a cold? Shouldn’t all that “processing” and crude playback device make it impossible to tell; never mind, tell who it is? Familiarity with the sound.
My experience has been that building a system that best reproduces unprocessed acoustic music allows processed music to sound best. However, “best” for me may not be best for someone else. With processed music, “best” for me also includes being able to hear the warts in the recording that were the result, at least in part, by the choices that the engineer/producer made. The fun part is to be able to tell if Phil Woods is playing his Yamaha or his Selmer alto saxophone. There is no professional mic that will do so much damage that it becomes impossible to tell.
