2. misc-audio
  3. 1150283549

Your vote: Most Useless Audio Adjective

From what I've seen in online audio discussion forums such as Audiogon, words like warm, taut, wooly, and forward can upset even died in the wool audiophiles. While some may have a hard time getting their arms around them, most of the terms seem quite appropriate to me. You have to develop some list of terms in order to convey a description of a component's sonics, or to delineate it from another component.

However, I have noticed the description "self effacing" creeping into more and more reviews, and it flat out boggles my mind. Initially, it seemed to fit into the context it was being used - affordable or downright cheap gear, that was fun and lively. However, now that I've read the term being used to describe quite a serious piece of high end kit, the time has come to point out how ridiculous things are getting.

I had to laugh out loud thinking of the snootiest, most condescending audio dealer I know who was carrying this brand. Using the term "self effacing" with anything had to do with this guy was akin to describing Phyllis Diller a young, hot sex symbol.

What is your most useless audio adjective???
trelja
huggerray
55 posts
 
Not just "mint" but "minty" - Item usually has 2 scratches, a couple of "minor dings", "low hours" and always in my "second system"...
jsd52756
430 posts
 
Just like Phyllis Diller, my system is just "broken in".
That term always cracked me up in regards to cables.
-John
tripper
223 posts
 
Minty fresh. And liquid. If it's warm I'm pissing down my leg.
kurt_tank
1,189 posts
 
"Minty"

This is the most stupid, insipid term that has ever been invented by a moron audiophile. (If I just hurt your feelings, GOOD! Stop using it!)

At best, Minty refers to a flavor, not the condition of a piece of hardware.

Got it? Good!
newbee
4,767 posts
 
Restock, Not really, a stereo system is meant to replicate recorded music. It produces sound. The music is in the recorded performance. I can hear the 'music' in a poor system or a very advanced system, even if the output from the speaker is rolled off, bloated, shrill etc.

As a descriptive term, I believe it is usually connected with someone's attempt to describe a system as smooth with a neutral to warmish tone. But, its just undescriptive as everyone has their own opinion of what sounds 'musical' to them. Some would strike my assumption that 'musical' connotes any warmth. That to be 'musical' it must be 'neutral', which of course to me would suggest that in their definition 'accuracy' equates 'musicality'.

Rather than 'musical' why not for example 'the upper bass/lower mid-range is a tad warmer than normal, the mid-range is smooth and transitions into the highs without any upper midrange emphasis, and the highs are detailed and airy with out being bright? (Or what ever combination of adjectives you care to decide to use which would define your use of the term 'musical').

Were you to use your own specific terms I could then apply my knowledge of the components in your system to decide whether or not your opinion would be useful to me, but when you just say its musical I really don't have a clue about what it is that makes it 'musical'.

To me saying a product is 'musical' is much the same as saying its a 'killer', 'beats all', choose your own superlative, but you get the idea.

I don't know if this makes sense to you, its JMHO.

More to discover