2. misc-audio
  3. 190193-1069

So, a reviewer just said something I need to talk about.

I will not mention the reviewer, nor the specific equipment being reviewed, but this statement was made, talking about sax and strings: "the strings had real body, and it sounded like real strings being played". The tonality of the instruments was what he/she was talking about. I get this. The tone, the spatiality of the instruments, the stage that was presented. All well and good. What about the engagement between the listener and the musician. I have stated so many times here, ad nauseam, that the most important aspect of music listening, for me (and not enough with other listeners) is the "playing of the instruments". The artistry of the musician behind those strings. I just don’t get it. When I listen to Jeff Beck (RIP), using him as an example, what I am attracted to, FIRST & FOREMOST, is his PLAYING. Reviewers talk about "sound". Most people here talk about "sound". I spend more time now on other sites, that speak about the music playing and, the compositions. For whatever reasons, I seem to be realizing, that A’gon members, as so many reviewers, talk about sound. They very rarely mention MY most important aspect of listening. The musicianship and the compositions. Another rant from me. What are your thoughts on this? How do you listen? What do you listen for/to? What does your system convey to you? I know I am out of line again, but........My best to everyone. Always, MrD.

mrdecibel
normb's avatar
normb
168 posts
 

Michael Hedges’ “Aerial Boundaries,”

Jeff Beck “For We’ve Ended As Lovers,”

El Ten Eleven “Thinking Loudly” and/or “Fanshawe”

King Crimson’s “I Talk to the Wind,”

Nora Jones “Come Away with Me.”

All on vinyl, all original pressings, are just a few songs I use every time I “audition” a new piece of audio gear for just those elements you mentioned.

 

I’ve listened to each probably hundreds of times. I’m NOT a musician - I did take drumming lessons for a few years from a 92 year old Jazz drummer though - but I can appreciate the compositions, the complexity, the PLAYING details, how the instruments are used, how they “move me.”

No, it’s not “classical music” - As much as I enjoyed Mozart, Bach (JS as well as PDQ), many other Baroque-period composers  growing up, the audio mileau I’m more familiar with is rock-jazz and I’m not a music snob. I mean, Mozart and his contemporaries didn’t leave any LP’s or HS audio tapes around to compare and every player since imparts their own flavor upon those compositions.

 

I like audio gear to NOT sound like anything, just as neutral as possible, within my budgetary means.

ticat's avatar
ticat
357 posts
 

Interesting perspectives and responses…

To be honest about it, I think (for me) It was about the Music when I was Young… It is Now more about the gear….hmmm.

 

groovey's avatar
groovey
125 posts
 

Live music in the room with you,  instant active creative energy in collaboration is what it's all about. That's the magic, that's the thing - that's the clear spot.
That's what one part of what we're trying to reproduce at home, there is more but there ain't nothing like the real thing baby..

facten
2,878 posts
 

@painter24 @mahler123 @hilde45   +1

 

Other than the equipment reviewer describing why he/she chose particular tracks to evaluate the equipment I have no idea why there would be an expectation of a further deep discussion of the composition and the musicianship in the article. Music reviews cover those.

Also, some of the comments are digressing to why one owns equipment versus the Op's concern about equipment reviews not focusing on musicianship and music composition

 

baylinor's avatar
baylinor
1,416 posts
 

Audiophile definition per Merriam-Webster:

A person who is enthusiastic about high fidelity sound reproduction.

 

More to discover