The worst sentence in audio writing


. Literally, hearing new details and delicacy in music I’ve heard a thousand times before.

I read this sentence from another thread but didn’t want to pollute it with this thought or to harp on my own opinion about the gear being discussed.

What I did want to do was point out that this sentence is one of the worst, most fraudulent sentences in all of audio, and we have all read it from a dozen different reviewers.  Anytime I read this I shudder. It’s not that I don’t believe the reviewer who writes this, it’s that I do. To understand why I hate this sentence you have to know my own personal values in audio.

  • Smooth frequency response
  • A laid back presentation

In order to make gear which has details never before heard the gear must exaggerate some sounds to the detriment of others. There’s no such thing as a neutral piece of gear that also makes you hear things yo have never heard before.

It’s a type of con, in that sure, you get new details, but they never talk about what you are giving up. The beauty of this con is that there’s all sorts of frequency response tricks and distortion gimmicks which will make you feel this way, each different, each not neutral. Each time we experience this "never before heard details" is like a new hair cut. It isn’t better, it’s different and that is exciting.

erik_squires

@yoyoyaya 

 

I feel I'm conflating it because reviewers conflate it. We live in a world of S/N of 100 dB or more. 
 

As I've agreed above, yes there are instances where reducing noise or improving how the speaker works with a room can actually yield improved detail at your listening location, but usually when I read that sentence it is nothing so benign.

...I think the phrase mentioned is a 'fall back' taught in Reviewers' Skool:

"If all else is 'meh', use Stock Comment #2C in your handbook."

After all the equipment of various types over X years, things have just Got To start to 'blur' into each other....

Editor needs 1~1.5K words about Item #483 by midnight, or they run with the stock "RIP, Fred 'retired' infill piece' to CYA the mag....

"This was an amazing amp....(...amazing that I was able to stay awake during listening..) that, despite it's shortcomings...(...willingness to put your privates into The Vice...but gives' one 'the out'....)...exhibits a velvety black background." 

(...because I had to be woke up after the first hour by the cleaning staff....).

Reading between the lines is so much more....'entertaining'.  Write Nice, or the client will pull their ad contract, and mgmt. will jump up yer tush and begin to speak for you...esp. with the aforementioned 'RIP/Ret.' piece....

That, and mags are assembled months ahead of the cover date....so the Big Fear is to review well an item that the competition mag just called "eh, meh'....

Mho, the reviewers have to be bending elbows at the same watering hole...if only to keep from stomping on each others' printed insteps'

*taptaptappitytap....*    hmmm...."Cortana, have I used the previous phrase before?"  

>Yes, you've used the exact wording 251 times. 463 variations, 1,974 referrals to that phrase or it's varia<

"...hmm, thanks..."  *damn...*...

If you can't say something nice, say nothing.
Except where print, and the distribution of, comes into play.

Then Nothing

Is Death.

The reviews are more often than not similar to a horoscope, where we can read into them what we want.

Thanks for the topic, erik_squires...

20+ years of refining the sound quality in my dedicated, difficult (almost cube) small listening studio, proceeded by 30+ years of hi-fi experience, has been a journey, indeed.  My other posts touch upon facets of the process, if you have interest.  Others have mentioned reduced noise floor and improved refinement of resolution abilities in modern playback, be it analog or digital.  Yes and yes.

Across the board, gear has improved despite our nostalgia. Highly skilled application of Digital Sound Processing is improving exponentially, both in design and application by skilled Sound Technicians.  My Tech in San Jose studies and experiments with these improvements on a daily basis.  Mike currently has me set-up with digital playback of 24bit/48Hz down from 24/96.  Things have never sounded better in playing back my lossless rips or streaming. 

I have attempted to communicate some of my experiences with both Stereophile and The Absolute Sound, receiving zero response.  Let's keep in mind, the audio journals and professional reviewers must be supported by the manufacturing and sales industry to stay in business.  Fair enough.  If enthusiasts discover DSP improvements are indeed possible no matter how good their systems (including vinyl playback) in addressing loudspeaker/room behaviors, sales are threatened.  Robert E. Greene of TAS has reported positively in some of his reviewing around DSP, keeping within the context of the gear under review, especially self-powered loudspeakers, another bold, futuristic audio topic. 

fsonicsmith above stated weariness around Stereophile's Mike Fremer recent gains by going to great lengths improving his source for electricity.  A resounding YES from me from my experiences.  Removing non-musical noise artifacts allow frequencies previously masked by noise to be heard, often resulting in "...new details and delicacy (heard) in (the) music..."  Precision DSP corrections can do the same in correcting how loudspeakers interact with a room, congesting frequencies, backed-up by frequency sweep measurements.  I recommend using room treatments to get you as far as possible BEFORE fine tuning with DSP. 

So, there's my 2 cents.  My goals are in attempting to remain fluid around new technology and advances in our beloved hobby, ever moving towards the impossible:  our artists replicating that moment in time in, our homes. 

More Peace; Stay Positive & Test Negative                 Pin