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

Showing 3 responses by pinthrift

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

Jim (jhills)...you and erik_squires illustrate important points, giving this topic added merit.  We are indeed the sum of OUR experiences and knowledge which motivated me to post from a "hands-on," experienced position.  Setting up my familiar system in my untamed studio 20 years ago, I thought my sound was just okay from what I knew, Back Then.  Having great passion despite a small audio budget, I began to study, later joining a very active "Audio Asylum" chatroom, befriending professional audio & DIYers along the way, remaining close to several.  These connections, as budget and knowledge grew, allowed me to steadily improve my system over two decades, incrementally. 

Jim questions how one individual can continue to make claims of gross improvements, time and time again, which would imply that the original sound must have been horrid.  I guess I'm that guy.  I thought my system sounded pretty good before bringing it into a 10'x10'x7 1/2' room, changing everything!  Elements of my journey can be found in my posts, but rest assured there were many "aha" moments in this tiny, dedicated studio that warranted exclamations.  Claims that would justifiably concern Jim and Erik.  The vast range of layers of improvement possible in audio over time is enormous, really.  These improvements have kept journals and new products alive 7 decades.  They certainly are what keep my juices flowing and wanting more.

Today, laser optical cartridges show great promise, for example.  Loudspeaker design, materials and amplification; room tuning progress to include speaker/room matching, (vital); solutions to noise created by active electronics; continuing digital to analog progress and DSP.  These are all being explored and improved upon in real time.   And, yes, reviewers will get excited and hear things anew, playing their old favorites.  Let it Be.

Thanks again Guys, for the opportunity.  More Peace, Pin