Why do audiophile equipment reviews use such obscure music to evaluate hardware?

If one listen only mainstream pop and rock, he don't need to spend big money on hi-end set up, IMO. So it's normal that the music used for testing hi-end equipment is "obscure" (as anything different from the mainstream pop and rock can be considered obscure)

 

I buy stereo magazines for the pictures and Playboy for the articles. Audiophile porn!

 

The "live orchestral is the only true test" thing works well. BUT I want to know how a system deals deals with hyped high frequency content. Jesus and Marychain would be an example. High order intermodulation distortion can sometimes scrape by on orchestral stuff and start spitting on hyped pop stuff.

 

You're killing me man!

M~

 

Well, I will have to check out your reviews then.

 

I disagree with the above.

In many of these "pan potted multi mono recording", there is an incredible amount of hidden detail which can be used to determine a system or components ability to resolve subtle details that might otherwise be masked. You dont need to know what the "reference" point is to use "heavily produced pop records" for reviewing purposes..just take the track for what it is and uses its cues and nuances.

For example, I use some tracks from David Bowies's Ziggy Stardust when testing components/system changes.

So you really need a combo of both minimal miked acoustic references and dense but well recorded music to fully test a system.

 

Yes, but if it is music most people would already know, their descriptions would have more impact. As is, not only do I have to try to imagine the sound they're describing, I also have to imagine the music. There's no common jumping off point.

 

Well the fact is you don´t need music at all, but carefully selected tones, choosen for various effects and reasons. But for a layman it´s best to use music that is very, very familier and known.

 

I'm not saying they can't or shouldn't also use classical music to evaluate these things. But that should be a part of the review. How it performs with widely owned and lived music is much more important to me.

Just about every classic rock fan will own Dark Side of the Moon, St Pepper, some Zepplin, etc. Jazz fans will almost always own Kind of Blue. Pop fans will likely own Thriller. Modern rock fans will likely own Radiohead or Arcade Fire. Etc, etc, etc.

I'm fine with using esoteric recordings as a jumping off point. I'd just like to see reviews use music a lot of people will likely own as well.

 

I agree with this. But I think personally, what *I* primarily need are sources that I know really, really well, that I've heard on a range of systems. And that may include some poorly recorded examples, as long as I am very familiar with them. Only then can I really tell what a component (or loudspeaker) is doing with the music.

 

I think You are taking the reviews too serious, it´s not until You listen in Your familier space You will have any idea anyway.

 

When I evaluate components in a store, I always take some more poorly recorded music. In fact, I tend to learn more about a component with poorly recorded music. Fantastic recordings almost always sound great on good equipment, so I learn a lot less if I only use that to evaluate.

 

Also, audiophile brands would do themselves a service if the recordings used to evaluate their equipment were less esoteric. Using obscure classical music primarily turns music lovers who might get into audiophile equipment off by seeming like the equipment's only worth buying if you're into that stuff and that's a MUCH smaller market.

 

I can´t imagine that people can´t think for themselves and evaluate in a way that suit their needs.

 

I have purchased quite a few recordings because they seem to be used by so many reviewers. Patricia Barber, Holly Cole, Janis Ian, Ani Difranco, Alison Krauss, (wow, all female singers?) and many others. Some of them I truly enjoy for the music and some not so much. Also purchased some classical and made sure I got the same catalog number used. Guess Daft Punk should be on my list.

 

I'm of the belief that a good part of it is just showing off. I for one don't think much of the sound quality of many audio reviewers' sonic "chestnuts". It's also hard for me to understand how an incredibly overengineered album like Random Access Memories can serve as an audio reference. And though many listeners may not be familiar with classical music, a well recorded large scale orchestral work like Mahler's 2nd Symphony will give a system a good workout, and if it does a good job on it you can be pretty sure it will also kick ass with rock music. Likewise a piano quartet or quintet will give an excellent idea of how the system will perform with smaller scale acoustic music (folk, bluegrass, etc).

 

What is "widely" listened to cannot be defined and certainly not over time as new music emerges.

Again, acoustic music material is among the most revealing of performance for subjective & listening tests.

Certainly nothing wrong if a reviewer chooses to include processed material for such testing, and many have done so - at least in any number of reviews that I have read.

 

That's bologna. You can easily look through the best selling albums of all time and find albums or tracks that will expose the strengths and weaknesses of any component. This is just a cop out and part of the thinking that keeps hi-fi so niche.

 

Please explain exactly what you mean by "obscure classical music".

The assertion that classical listeners represent a relatively insignificant portion of the marketplace of audiophilia is highly debatable.

 

Flipping through the current issue. Really nice. Not sure why I didn't know this existed, so thanks!

 

I would suggest you contact the editorial staff of the appropriate periodical(s) and express your concerns directly to them.

 

I see it as an opportunity to introduce recordings to the reader and I enjoy that part. Often these are mixed with references to "classic recordings" that many of us own, so I have no issue with it, in general. Sometimes it does get a bit extreme - the Jon Valin zither player comes to mind.

 

It's self reinforcing. Classical music represents, what, less than 1% of music sold?

If it represents such a high percentage of the audiophile community, I see that as an obvious missed opportunity by component manufacturers. Lots of people love music. Yet most people don't own hi-fi set ups.

These audiophile publications share at least part of the blame for that. If there reviews were more accessible, I think you'd slowly grow the base of hi-fi owners.

 

You're right. Internet forums are the wrong place to express ones opinion.

 

Don’t you sort of have to use recordings that test the outer capabilities of gear you are testing? I am sure every reviewer has a known arsenal of recordings they rely on for specific aspects. If you want to buy a set of speakers, and you find a review interesting, buy the recordings referenced and see if that helps you formulate a more nuanced understanding of the review.