Challenge: Amateur vs. Stereophile "Gods"

[Mallette]

Actually, Bruce, I am going to hold. George Mims said he'd try to get on the board and post his own thoughts. I've a pretty good idea what they are, but I'd rather late him speak for himself.

Also, it's late, I have to prepare to fly out tomorrow for a week at HQ in Tulsa, and I am so blown away from the day I couldn't write comprehensibly if I tried.

Suffice to say I had a great time and my world was major expanded.

I WILL reveal all soon.

Dave

[Mallette]

Last call on this as a "scientific" experiment. Sometime in the next few days I'll compile and comment on the results. If you haven't done this I'd appreciate your participation. I think you all are going to find the experiment reveals more than expected.

Dave

[philipbarrett]

The experiment is going to reveal that we've all been had & it IS a Kurzweil LOL

[Mallette]

The experiment is going to reveal that we've all been had & it IS a Kurzweil LOL

Nobody has been had and no one will be embarrassed. Each and every response was accurate within the limits we all have...ears, listening experience, and systems.

There will be some surprises, I think, but nobody need fear either having done this or doing it. In fact, some less experience ears would be a good thing here. Some of us have spent so much time analyzing the spices we miss the flavor.

Dave

[sean5340]

Right now I am listening to Music Choice Jazz. Currently playing is Bill Evans- "Re: Person I Knew" 1962 and the piano placement is almost identical to the piano in File 1. Very nice!

Sean

[BLSamuel]

I'm kind of new at describing sound. Some comments after a couple of minutes of actually listening to both without too much distraction.

Edit: Corrected. My original Track1 is really File2 and Track2 is File1. [:$]

Track1 File2

• Sounded kind of noisy to me sort of hissy. I've heard "audiophiles" or company reps rave about resolution of earlier CD players many moons ago (1990's when I lived near Dallas, California Audio Labs CD player, large Mirage bi-polars, driven by big heavy Classe amps, no recollection of preamp) and well the same sort of thing - very soft passages it sounded like a lot of hiss to me but what do I know
• The piano seemed to move around? Like same frequencies would be more on the left, then more on the right?
• Maybe kind of bloated
• Piano seemed more left of center except when at times seemed to jump left / right / left / right (I must be nuts)
• was a live recording so maybe the "hiss" was more ambiance then anything
• Sound at times was kind of like from above the piano - first thought this standing up but sitting down also

Track 2 File1

• Sounded a lot quieter - maybe just less noise as no crowd? I don't know
• Piano sounded more right of center
• Piano seemed to stay put
• Sounded more like a real piano to me not so much the pitch and such but the stableness
• more like looking at the piano - never got the sense I'm looking down

Equipment (it's the music that matters but as a frame of reference for anyone who cares)

• Heresy 1's rebuilt with Bob Crites CT 125, 4500 network, Selenium mid drivers, and Heresy 3 bass driver (from memory, I'd have to go look - Marshall said it might be fun to swap out some K55 drivers on the mids. #^$*@ it does sound like fun. In any case they sound really good)
• Oppo DVD player
• Chase RLC1 functioning as pre-amp (little black remote box - no buttons - don't loose the remote)
• Radio Shack STA-52 receiver (part of my first stereo purchase - like 12 wpc with 0.9 % distortion .... my better amplification needs some work - need to get it back in service should sound much better)

• I also listened (edit listened, I wasn't listed to either side) to both in office on a portable Sony CD player into a Cambridge Soundworks Model 12 transportable system - main speakers right next to each other under TV [:$] - didn't notice as much difference in recordings. Would be interesting to spread the speakers out but the office is a disaster area at the moment.

edit: ps. In burning tracks to CD (note to self, burn audio to CD using Windows Media Player or whatever I used seemed kind of cumbersome) I noticed track information with one of the tracks and assumed it was the Stereophile track but tried to ignore that. And a few articles in Stereophile pretty much pegged the BS-o-meter over the years when I've subscribed....I also tried to ignore the comments of others I've read over the last few days but is that possible except for what I forget? I dunno. Our daughters Chihuaha walking around on the floor did not seem to affect the sound.

[Marvel]

Ben,

Have a look at my post on page two. It sounds to me like your CD was like my first one, with the track order reversed. Maybe I misunderstand your comments.

I can't wait to hear more from Dave, and to read the comments of George Mims.

Bruce

[BLSamuel]

Have a look at my post on page two. It sounds to me like your CD was like my first one, with the track order reversed. Maybe I misunderstand your comments.

Bruce. Yep. Dave just sent me a PM email (looks a lot like Forum PM in my email inbox) wondering the same thing. Checked the CD and File1 follows File2 (though WMP updated the title from the tag information including artist). Give me a simple test .... [:$]

Glad I had time to play. I'll have to go and reread the contacts once it's all over. The info from Dave and comments from George Mims should be fascinating to say the least.

I'll edit my post to set the record straight.

[artto]

I haven’t listened to this on the main system. However, my office is temporarily in the music room while we remodel. I’m using Klipsch ProMedia One on the desk top ~ but the room is good!!

#1 Has a squeaky chair. I hear more harmonic content ~ that harpsichord-like sound at times.

#2 Is recorded at a higher level. This can make the recording sound stronger at times. The subtle dynamics have more range although the overall dynamic range seems less. I hear a slight muddiness or darkness – not quite as transparent – quality in the lower midrange.

Either one is quite listenable.

EDIT: samuel mentioned something that I also now remember. #1 at times I felt more like I was right at the piano. Its more like the kind of sound I hear when I'm close to the person playing or sitting on the chair myself.

[Mallette]

OK, Gentlemen. I've copied the responses out and am studying them to produce an analysis. I am trully fascinated with this. It has revealed far more than I expected. I know both these recordings intimately so I know precisely what one should hear. That means I've been able to vicariously experience other peoples perceptions and systems. Rest assured I'll be doing no comments on either of those things. Wouldn't be prudent... However, my analysis may provide those who contributed with some insights into their imaging and amplification chain.

Feel free to "take the plunge" as I want to study this carefully and respond with due diligence. I've not heard from George but I'm sure I will. Even retired, he's a pretty busy man and still working on that last recital release.

Dave

[Marvel]

I'm just glad you survived your week.

[Mallette]

Thanks for mentioning it, Bruce. I missed my flight yesterday, spent 3 hours in the airport staring at the walls, got back to Houston just in time for rush, then had to get up and spend the day helping my wife at a school carnival, then with the day care center until about 10 minutes ago. I am going to sleep like the dead, then get up and listen to a LOT of music...

Dave

[Marvel]

Just to bump this in case someone needs to re-read their posts. [Y]

[dgoreck]

Just found this. Sincethe results aren't posted yet, I'll throw in my two inexperienced ears.

Im listening to this off my work PC, first round was crappy work Creative hadphones into the crappy logitech speakers. Second round of listening was my Klipsch Images headphones right into the jack on the pc....so much better, no noisy floor. This second round is where I am making the comments below from. Have to discard the first round of listening. Wish I had to headamp pico w/DAC but that is at home.

File1. (6:17min file)
- feels like your at the piano
- imaging is very envoloping, but something is weird about it. I would expect less movement in the imaging(@ say starting ~3min) with some of the segments...un-natural sounding form what i would expect having sat infront of a piano(from memory).
- my guess is that is is not closely micd due to the above comment I made, but then again, those qualities may be a resultant of such as I am not a recoridng engineer.
- i feel like the pianoist is playing facing the audience. Back to curtian with us able to see his face.
- slight buzz sound form a lot of higher notes out of left.

File 2. (4:21 file, clapping at end.)
- Definately a wider stage then File1.
- Most sound comes out of right center.
- Get some highs 'echoing' out of the left.
- pianoist back to to the audience or more likely he is 'seated on the left side of the stage' where we would see him on left and piano to the right.
- mic'ing seems to be more open in the the 'likes of stage mics'.

I would feel that File2 would be more natural if I in the room with someone playing the piano. I would think that the Sterophiles did File1 as they would most likely want to exaggerate on the imaging. I would say our Amerateur did File2, which closer to what I would expect from micing a piano for its imaging.

[Mallette]

Some pretty good calls there, dgoreck

http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/t/118195.aspx

Actually, the analysis WAS up. Take a look and post a response from what you read...

Dave

[Cornwalled]

Hello all,

I must agree with some of the comments above about it being difficult to compare such disparate recording styles. I think they both have their merits, but to me, number 1 sounds like the amateur recording. A few reasons why:

1. The bench squeak

2. The occasional distortion / midrange hardness at higher volumes that leads to ear fatigue.

The acoustics and recording styles are so different from each other that it's tough to compare. Certainly number one is closer mic'ed, which will give the impression of being close the the piano, while number 2 gives you the acoustics of the concert hall it was recorded in. I personally prefer number 2 as I feel it doesn't have the midrange hardness that can be unpleasant.

That's my 2 cents anyway.

-Jon

[Mallette]

Jon:
If you want the story to compare with your experience, it's here...http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/t/118195.aspx

Dave