This could be an interesting thread although I smell blood in the water and the sharks are coming (you better brace yourself @o_holter ). I told the OP that haters got to hate, BTW is funny as I mentioned some names to the OP before reading the post, your name Millercarbon was thrown as a low probability detractor (not a hater), for the record I follow your posts and 99% of the time I do agree with you, and you stated your opinion in the most respectful way possible.
As a matter of fact I do agree with your comment on no auditioning systems via Youtube (for purchasing or decision making purposes)
The OP is not trying that (from my understanding), he just happens to have a system kind of similar to mine and we exchanged recordings of the same songs. He was just simply trying to compare the sonic signature of similar (or dissimilar) systems.
Yes we know there are many variables who make this impossible, for starters the room reflections, the device used to record phone or otherwise, speakers toed in, position of the recording device, power (electricity), power cables and interconnect, 50Hz or 60Hz AC, AC regeneration or not, digital or analog, PCM vs DSD, vinyl mastered from digital or from good master tapes, tubes russian Svetlana's vs American RCAs
Yet with all that we were able to compare three different systems and evaluate bass, midrange from the recordings, I have to say and the OP might agree or not I don't know that highs were extremely hard to evaluate from the recording, most likely because of highly dependable on positioning, yet we had fun and we came at the end with an approximate idea of what else will we tweak or change. For example the OP not following manufacturer recommendations changed his toed in to his preference, so did following on his steps and I and found that his (the OP) speaker toed in might be better suited that what I had before.
IOW, even though stupid recordings made with a phone of highly costly and sophisticated systems could give us a hint on certain parameters without having to travel to the location, heresy? well yes :-) but fun and instructive? that also.
As a matter of fact I do agree with your comment on no auditioning systems via Youtube (for purchasing or decision making purposes)
The OP is not trying that (from my understanding), he just happens to have a system kind of similar to mine and we exchanged recordings of the same songs. He was just simply trying to compare the sonic signature of similar (or dissimilar) systems.
Yes we know there are many variables who make this impossible, for starters the room reflections, the device used to record phone or otherwise, speakers toed in, position of the recording device, power (electricity), power cables and interconnect, 50Hz or 60Hz AC, AC regeneration or not, digital or analog, PCM vs DSD, vinyl mastered from digital or from good master tapes, tubes russian Svetlana's vs American RCAs
Yet with all that we were able to compare three different systems and evaluate bass, midrange from the recordings, I have to say and the OP might agree or not I don't know that highs were extremely hard to evaluate from the recording, most likely because of highly dependable on positioning, yet we had fun and we came at the end with an approximate idea of what else will we tweak or change. For example the OP not following manufacturer recommendations changed his toed in to his preference, so did following on his steps and I and found that his (the OP) speaker toed in might be better suited that what I had before.
IOW, even though stupid recordings made with a phone of highly costly and sophisticated systems could give us a hint on certain parameters without having to travel to the location, heresy? well yes :-) but fun and instructive? that also.