In article , Bob Latham bob@sick-
of-spam.invalid scribeth thus
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

I find that surprising actually. I have often found that while much
"pop" is mixed in such a way as to sound at least "ok" on a wide range
of kit[1], full orchestral recordings can be very much more demanding
and revealing of strengths and weaknesses in equipment.

I don't have a problem with people saying they prefer to use classical for
*their* tests. They obviously find it more useful and good luck to them. I
object if it's suggested that everyone should.

The shear dynamic range is one aspect, also unlike studio recordings,
where the sound stage can be assembled from multiple mics to place
sounds wherever the engineer thinks they sound best, there are defined
positions for many orchestral parts, which makes for a far more rigorous
test of imaging.

I've never ever heard an image on classical that impressed me. Strings on
the left is useful for making sure the channels are the right way round.
For me that's the end.

My inability to use classical probably has something to do with the fact
that I don't think orchestras sound nice. I like much of the music but I'm
not impressed with the sound. Organs and pianos are much better sounding
than the rest for me.


Bob.


Well I don't think your the only one, Keith G who used to post to
uk.rec.audio before they came to take him away .. used to extoll the
virtues of one valve single ended triode amps;!...
--
Tony Sayer