[Br777]

I continue to be delighted with Lunatique's settings.  It's hard to describe how much these seemingly subtle changes have improved my listening experience.  It took my brain a surprisingly long time to give up the revolt, and accept what I knew to be a superior sound signature. 
 
you were very correct especially about the sibilance thing.. I really am not noticing any sibilance at all.  People use the term veil lifted often around here, but thats actually a very good way to put it. 

 

[RexAeterna]

@Lunatique

really nice sound test. actually probably one of the best organized one i heard. i really appreciate the link but it's shame it only extends up to 16khz. frequencies up to 20khz is very audible to me still when i had my hearing test done(that's why i'm sensitive to treble peaks in either the gear or songs.)

i also kinda knew things can't be properly measured without gear. that's why there is specially design anechoic and diffused-field chambers to measure these things as well. i just plug things in and if something that sounds like a real acoustic guitar(especially with nylon strings) or close enough and can capture the acoustics of the room it's played in then i'm very happy person. even if the recording or mastering is so-so or poop i will still be able to enjoy since it's music i want to listen to. so far tho the akg 240DF's and pioneer monitor 10's are closest i gotten that i think sounds like the real thing so they are my number 1's when listening to headphones.

 

[Br777]

i just realized i posted in the wrong thread in my last post - i was referring to another thread where lunatique helped me understand how to eq my headphones in a whole new way compared to what i thought was correct, and subsequently brought a whole new level to my LCD-2 experience.
 
 

 

[Br777]

the 16hz tone in that test was outrageously painful to listen to.. i gave up way before i was able to bring it to an even level with the others.  I couldnt stand it even at low volumes.

 

[firev1]

So, is there no way to know what your listening to is completely neutral or accurate unless you know the equipment the studio is using/ have heard the artist in the studio? It kinda sucks to know that but this is a great thread. At least I know I will be deliberating more on what I listen to in the future if I do buy more audio equipment.

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

So, is there no way to know what your listening to is completely neutral or accurate unless you know the equipment the studio is using/ have heard the artist in the studio? It kinda sucks to know that but this is a great thread. At least I know I will be deliberating more on what I listen to in the future if I do buy more audio equipment.

 
I think you might have misread something to think that. Instead, think like this:
 
Credible studios will all be well within the acceptable range of accuracy/neutrality in their signal chain. No matter how each studio differs slightly, they will all be within that same acceptable range (the middle circle in the graph). How they choose to creatively color/stylized the music they are producing is not relevant, because the monitoring tools themselves are accurate/neutral. So if your monitoring chain is also within that accurate/neutral range, you will be close enough to hearing what they heard. That is why it's important to try to get your monitoring signal chain as accurate/neutral as possible--so you can be within that acceptable range that's closest to the pro studios.
 
 
 
 

 

[gregorio]

So, is there no way to know what your listening to is completely neutral or accurate unless you know the equipment the studio is using/ have heard the artist in the studio? It kinda sucks to know that but this is a great thread. At least I know I will be deliberating more on what I listen to in the future if I do buy more audio equipment.

Your logic is not quite correct because you are not taking into account the mastering process. The point of the mastering process is to alter the recording before it is distributed so that it will sound as intended on as wide a variety of consumer equipment as possible rather than sounding good just in the studio in which the recording/mixing was created.

G

 

[firev1]

Haha thats nice to know, glad I asked.

 

[bigshot]

Simple concept... Calibration to test tones.

 

[WrxSTI]

This is why you buy gear aimed at the professional market. Most of the time manufacturers there make an effort to make the gear neutral. Consumer audio, not so much. You can get sold all kinds of things and the p/$ ratio is a lot worse. I'm very happy with my Prodipe studio monitors and listen to everything on them, even though I don't produce (well I started messing around with soft synths, but that's another story). Could use more bass but that's down to my room, which I intend to fix with some superchunk bass traps.

 

[JRG1990]

Even cheap pro gear outperforms expensive audiophile stuff, http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm , http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/SLReport10.05.pdf , the behringer stuff is completly overlooked though because it has the behringer badge on it.
 
 
 
 

 

[Confispect]

@Luna, Congrats on the nice thread - Pm incoming. 

 

[Lunatique]

 
Quote:

Even cheap pro gear outperforms expensive audiophile stuff, http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm , http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/SLReport10.05.pdf , the behringer stuff is completly overlooked though because it has the behringer badge on it.
 

What's really sad is that despite these types of myth-buster shootouts out there on the internet and people often referring to them in debates, there continues to be flocks of sheep unwilling to see the truth and continues to willingly throw money away on esoteric boutique products that have absurd price tags but no real significant practical improvement. They'll quote specs and white papers and dissect the superior components, better signal routing, better heatsink design---whatever, but if you can't hear the difference in a double-blind test, then it's all meaningless. 
 
I'm not saying all cheap products are great and all expensive products are snake oil--I'm just saying you need to be really objective if you are actually after improvements you can really hear, instead of simply trying to satisfy your vanity. For some, having toys to play with is the real purpose, so for people like that, it really doesn't matter--they just enjoy the process of researching, buying comparing testing, and then the satisfaction of looking over all the toys he's collected--it looks impressive and it makes him feel good. 
 

 

[Br777]

^the tough part about that is that even someone with the best intentions not to be pulled into the "over priced botique" marketing or gimmicks, can easily be fooled by their own mind convincing them that the more expensive or better looking product simply must be better.  Even without outside influences, the mind can be a very tricky beast.
 
It's tough to be so clear and removed that you can accurately judge and trust yourself that the $100 amp sounds better or as good as the $1000 amp sitting next to it.
 
 

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

^the tough part about that is that even someone with the best intentions not to be pulled into the "over priced botique" marketing or gimmicks, can easily be fooled by their own mind convincing them that the more expensive or better looking product simply must be better.  Even without outside influences, the mind can be a very tricky beast.
 
It's tough to be so clear and removed that you can accurately judge and trust yourself that the $100 amp sounds better or as good as the $1000 amp sitting next to it.
 

That's why when in doubt, always do a double-blind test. Have a friend or family member help you do one so you won't be biases in any way. 
 
I do think it's possible to be unbiased enough to be quite objective--if your emotions are in the right place. For example, for those who crave to satisfy their vanity and lust for fun toys, their emotions are against their logical, objective mind. But for those that would prefer to save money, they will be less biased, because having the much more expensive gear end up being significantly superior is actually a painful thing to their wallet. They would hope it doesn't sound better, and even if it does, they would downplay the differences instead of hyping them up like the first group. So when someone in the second group actually do hear a significance difference they can't deny and does spend the money on an upgrade, they'll know for sure the differences are not imagined, and it's big enough to justify the price (even if painfully).