Establishing a common analog listening bias

Yes Perrew but there ( RIAA ) I have the control on it through our phonolinepreamp design and in the other side you can have a near " perfect "cartrdge/tonearm/record set-up and enjoy more time the music that every 30-60 seconds stand up and fine tunning the set up " again and again " ( to " mantain " the " perfect " set up ).

I do that perfect set up when I need it: tests/comparisons on audio items, my main target is try to have the more time I have hearing and enjoying the music.

I already pass the " stage " where we are " fighting " with the hardware, I learn how o do it for I can enjoy the music like ever: this is part of us each audio learning curve, there are people that are where I'm and there are other people that are down stairs.

The audio and especially the each one targets are unique to each one person, each one of us have/has different priorities and different music/sound reproduction perception in a global target: music/sound reproduction in audio home systems, and due to those different priorities exist different quality performance levels. There are no especial rules here, only what we want and how we want it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Agree with Dave Brubeck Quartet "Time Out" Classic Records

I think Art Blakey and the Jazz Messengers deserve a mention "Moanin" mono Classic Records.

We need a bit more Rock...

While I think that discussion of music, as opposed to equipment is a refreshing and extremely worthwhile endeavor, I confess to being a bit perplexed by what the ultimate goal of this proposal might be. I don't really get it.

This is not meant to in any way offend, but I find it telling that in more than sixty posts, there has not been one mention of how all of the expressed opinions about this recording's or that recording's merits (or lack thereof), mentions of dynamics, brightness, obvious (or not so obvious) sense of space, etc., relate to the sound of real instruments played live.

The idea of a common listening bias was proposed a long time ago by pioneering audiophiles like JG Holt and Harry Pearson. And the most useful common bias has to be the sound of real, unmplified instruments in a real space. IMO this is not up for debate. What is the point of mentioning that Eric Clapton's "Unplugged" conveys more ambient information than The Weaver's Carnegie Hall, when "Unplugged", while it sounds very immediate and spacious, also sounds very tipped up in the highs, with way too much leading edge to the sound of the guitars? The Weaver's recording converys a far more realistic, and natural sound; compared to the sound of acoustic instruments, voices, and audience sounds, as heard live. What's the point of mentioning that a horn section sounds a tad bright, without answering the question: "compared to what?" Maybe it is, but have you ever experienced a great big band live? The brass section of a great orchestra? It can sound incredibly "bright".

I think the basic premise of this discussion is great, but I would love to see much more emphasis on how all of this relates to the real sound of live instruments and voices.

Dear Stiltskin,
Maybe Axel and I both have poor modern re-issues of the Belafonte, but we are both hearing the same things in the 'applause' department and I think a lot of it is due to the fact that this recording is a compilation of at least 2 (and probably more) concerts over several evenings.
As a result, there is much 'cut and paste' of individual tracks and thus the applause is faded out before the 'paste' of a 'new' track. This lack of continuity is disturbing to say the least and to me, destroys the 'live event' experience.
In fact, on careful listening, I believe the voice and instruments could be identically recorded in the studio?.....please don't crucify me for this sacrilege?

Axel, couldn't agree more on Dave Brubeck's Time Out. I have both the mono and stereo versions and prefer the stereo.

Want some rock??.....Roxy Music 'Avalon' and Brian Ferry 'Boys and Girls'. Great soundstage, balance, frequency extensions AND music!
Try Massive Attack's 'Protection' if you want to test the accuracy of your systems bass (and subwoofers). It is easy to have them, turned up too much and overpower the balance of the vocals.

Once again Axel, I agree with Paul Simon's 'Graceland' but for even better sound integrity, listen to his 'Hearts and Bones' and 'One Trick Pony' and 'Still Crazy after All these Years' and 'There Goes Rhymin Simon'.
This man knows his recording engineers!

Also Moby '18', Nelly Furtado 'Loose', 'Diary of Alecia Keys' and then the Joan Armatrading's 'Me Myself I', 'To the Limit', 'Show Some Emotion'.

And the Beatles 'Abbey Road'....easily the best recorded of their seminal albums.

But I eagerly await Daniel's list?

Regards
Henry

Dear All, as the question about the "ultimate goal" just came up again:

- It is not about ultimate sonic quality of a pressing. We do need a careful selected group of records which shall serve as a "common ground" to link and desvribe all sonic impressions each one has in his system set-up or with inidvidual components.
While I am perfectly aware that usually the vintage first pressing are the better sounding, we must restrict ourselves to what is CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FOR EVERYONE.
So - no 1s/1s Reiner PInes of Rome (just as an example...), but instead the "normal" below $50 Classic Records Reissue with33 1/3 and on one record only.......
EVERYONE must have access to all these records by mail-order (internet) or standard audio retail shop.
This is about the chance to give each and everyone the very same tool at hand and thus creating one FIXED POINT to set the "lever".
While the discussion about sonic differences in certain records is fruitful and important to extract the essence, in the very end we are forced by reality to restrict the "common ground LP package" to what we can buy today NEW.

Cheers,
D.