[j-curve]

My first poll... hope I pressed all the right buttons.

Multiple selections are permitted. You could tick every option (I'd like to

) but that wouldn't mean much. Draw a line in the sand somewhere. I think I can get mine down to 6 or 7 essentials.

Why the poll? I've noticed that the factors which impress me most have changed slightly since getting into headphones, so I want to know if others are listening for the same things.

This poll was designed with classical in mind but hopefully the wording is non-genre-specific. [Get it? HA-hA-ha...

]

For the above, let "Instruments" include voices.

 

[zoboomofo]

Hey, I'm not too picky. I can stand just about any recording if there are any dynamics to it. Compression is such a waste of hi-fi listening to me.

 

[wallijonn]

the producer, mixer and recording studio.

 

[j-curve]

zoboomofo, dynamic range and frequency response probably belong under "Transparency" (of the recording process).

Quote:

wallijonn: the producer, mixer and recording studio.

Fair enough, but what are the audible effects of these? Say, for example, the label on a CD had the wrong information. How would you know? Would the differences you hear fall under the existing categories, or do we need more?

 

[j-curve]

OK, I just voted, but I could only get it down to 8 ticks.

With 7 voters so far and 28 ticks total, that's an average of only 4 ticks each! Some of you guys must be easy to please... or am I just too picky?

 

[j-curve]

bump...

 

[grinch]

my vote: whether or not the album was recorded/mixed in analogue.

 

[guzzler]

other: overall cohesion of the recording, like some albums have awesome songs you'd never listen to together..

g

 

[Geek]

I voted "other."

I thought that most of this stuff is equally important. Any serious shortcoming in one of those catergories can break a recording.

The music itself is equally important to the eventual fidelity of the finished product: If the music sucks and the recording is incredible, its not worth listening to. If the music is totally awesome, but the recording quality sucks, well I'd buy it anyways unless a better recording of the music had been made.

Cheers,
Geek

 

[j-curve]

Quote:

Geek: If the music sucks and the recording is incredible, it's not worth listening to.

Hard to argue with that. Like the Nyman piano concerto, perhaps? Accompanied by the sounds of your own fingernails scratching the paint off the walls...

Quote:

grinch: whether or not the album was recorded/mixed in analogue.

I agree, but for me it's not about "warmth". (Is that your reason?) Analogue is more forgiving at peak levels, and a tape master allows the digitally challenged multiple attempts to set the levels right for the transfer, whereas digital recording gives them only one shot to avoid an over-level event.

 

[MusicLover]

Cool, a thread revival. I think that smoothness, rich midrange, frequency extension, and soundstage are the most important.

 

[Dusty Chalk]

To my ears, a good recording only needs to excel in one area: The Gestalt.

 

[MusicLover]

Quote:

Originally posted by Dusty Chalk To my ears, a good recording only needs to excel in one area: The Gestalt.

What does that mean?

 

[bralack42]

Quote:

Originally posted by MusicLover What does that mean?

You must read Theodore Sturgeon's More Than Human. Basically it's the whole of the recording rather than the facets of it.

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Quote:

Originally posted by MusicLover What does that mean?

As bralack42 said, "gestalt" is another word for "the big picture", the overall impression, the whole that is more than the sum of its parts, etc.