🚀 go-pugleaf

--
Please remove "WWW" when replying via email
"Andrew Reilly" <andrew@gurney.reilly.home> wrote in message
news:SvY9a.30477$Xh1.85588@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2003 12:51:58 +1100, The Gadget Shop wrote:
> > Age article today on suggested TV/DVD/Audio auditioning techniques...
> > people agree?
>
> Seems mostly reasonable.  Not sure about being able to imagine what the
> singer's wearing, but still...
>
> I'd just add that for music tests, the more instruments (generally) the
> better a system has to be to still resolve all or most of the
> instruments.  So symphonic orchestral music can be a good test.  Often
> has good dynamics too (i.e., has quiet movements between the loud ones),
> compared to pop music, which is usually uniformly loud.
>
> Unacompanied vocals are a good test too, once you've set the volume to
> match real life: humans seem to be particularly sensitive to how other
> human voices are supposed to sound.  Spoken (as opposed to sung) is good
> too, if you can find it, for the same reason.
>
> All IMO, of course.  I don't think that there's much in the way of hard
> and fast rules here.
>
> Since you would be shopping for yourself, it would make sense for your
> test material to contain stuff that you like...
>
> --
> Andrew

## Good points Andrew.
I would add to listen to sax and here the difference on different systems.
Does it sound lean or fat and swamped. does piano sound clear or get muddy
as volume goes higher. Does guitar (The beginning of Chris Isaak's Wicked
Game is good for this, as can be Dire Straits) have definate tonal and
volume changes or all sound like a similar note or tone.
Do upper frequency voice and instruments get sibilent. Does lower bass sound
more like a tone rather than the clear sound of a double bass string being
pulled.

Dale