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

Showing 3 responses by detlof

Tim, good point!

Tvad, LOL. Now not to impede communication, let me describe the following episode, for which I'll never use the term "bright" again, thanks to our learned friend:
Just listened to a solo violin recital on CD with the g-sting (sic) at 1875 hz , the tremolo first starting at 57.5db with its crescendo after 75msecs at exactly 87db,where sudden peaks occured at 7325 hz oscillating between 59 and 67.5db. Listening to the same Partita on LP no such peaks were observed. (: