Blind Audio Test - Old vs New
- Thread starter usedto
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Rick Vestal
Have a nice day and duck!
That was cool beans
jessearias
Active Member
Great post
This just proves that the just the name does not make it good, neither does the price. Its quite interesting to se that when one thinks expensive fancy name, they assume that it is the best.
Its amazing how many times big name, super expensive gear gets it ass spanked by gear half its price. :sigh:
This just proves that the just the name does not make it good, neither does the price. Its quite interesting to se that when one thinks expensive fancy name, they assume that it is the best.
Its amazing how many times big name, super expensive gear gets it ass spanked by gear half its price. :sigh:
kevzep
Its all about the Music
It's not just the sound of an instrument, for a musician, its the feel and how the instrument responds to your input as a player.....
I personally don't think there is a very good parallel between this and HiFi gear.....
But, on the face value, it was obviously what the expected outcome was going to be....Surprising result, and they got a news article out of it....
I personally don't think there is a very good parallel between this and HiFi gear.....
But, on the face value, it was obviously what the expected outcome was going to be....Surprising result, and they got a news article out of it....
usedto
Lunatic Member
oops! Missed that.:thmbsp:
trhee
ㅇtㅈyㅅr
I agree with this.
There's no parallel between this (musical instrument) and hifi gear. The article proves nothing other than 10 pro violinists preferred newer instruments over the older, highly sought after ones.
As a multi-instrumentalist (piano 43 years, guitar 37 years, drums 30 years, etc..), playing an instrument is more than just tone but also about a personal physical connection between said instrument and the player. For example, my interest in vintage Fender Strats is not for their playability or tone. There are so many custom guitar builders who IMO build finer playing and sounding instruments at a fraction of the cost including those from Suhr, Tyler, Grosh, Anderson, etc... For acoustic guitars, a brand new Nick Benjamin or Huss & Dalton is a far better guitar than many vintage Martins that I've played. OTOH, I also have a 1977 Yamaha FG-331 acoustic guitar (my very first guitar) that was an entry level model Yamaha of the period that is the equal, if not a better instrument, than many of the entry level models from the big companies like Martin or Taylor.
There's no parallel between this (musical instrument) and hifi gear. The article proves nothing other than 10 pro violinists preferred newer instruments over the older, highly sought after ones.
As a multi-instrumentalist (piano 43 years, guitar 37 years, drums 30 years, etc..), playing an instrument is more than just tone but also about a personal physical connection between said instrument and the player. For example, my interest in vintage Fender Strats is not for their playability or tone. There are so many custom guitar builders who IMO build finer playing and sounding instruments at a fraction of the cost including those from Suhr, Tyler, Grosh, Anderson, etc... For acoustic guitars, a brand new Nick Benjamin or Huss & Dalton is a far better guitar than many vintage Martins that I've played. OTOH, I also have a 1977 Yamaha FG-331 acoustic guitar (my very first guitar) that was an entry level model Yamaha of the period that is the equal, if not a better instrument, than many of the entry level models from the big companies like Martin or Taylor.
jessearias
Active Member
Blind testing
Blind testing is very subjective, especially if you know the items being tested. If the test was between a Paraluna tube preamp and a Parasound Halo pre amp, most people would be biased towards the tube unit as better.
But if it is a true blind test where you do not know the brands getting tested, there would be no bias. All you know what is being tested is a couple of preamps. The test results could totally surprise you. Much to the shagrin of your pre-concieved biases.
Blind testing is very subjective, especially if you know the items being tested. If the test was between a Paraluna tube preamp and a Parasound Halo pre amp, most people would be biased towards the tube unit as better.
But if it is a true blind test where you do not know the brands getting tested, there would be no bias. All you know what is being tested is a couple of preamps. The test results could totally surprise you. Much to the shagrin of your pre-concieved biases.
stereofanboy
Addicted Member
As others have mentioned, there is definitely a difference between a blind listening test and a blind playing test. Still an interesting article.
Yes, as a guitarist and saxophone player, I agree.
My friend has a blonde Ibanez acoustic from the early 1980's, gave 180 bucks for it, one of the best guitars I've ever played.
My craptastic Martin Sigma is one of the sweetest playing guitars ever. For lead picking, I'd much rather have it in my hands than my 1968 Martin D28, which I'm having Gruhn Guitars restore at this very moment.
robgmn
Super Member
The point that some seem to be missing is the fact that these performers are admitting that they would normally have chosen the Stradivarius based on the "principle" that it's old and bloody expensive, so it must be superior.
The comparison to Hi-Fi could be made in many ways:
Digital Formats - Lossy versus non-lossy compression. $100 DAC versus $1,000 DAC. Bluetooth versus lossless stream.
Turntables - $500 cart versus $5,000 cart. Cork mat versus felt. Straight arm versus curved. Direct drive versus belt.
Amps - Tube versus SS. Old tube versus new tube. Old SS versus new.
Speakers - Full range versus multi-way versus planar ribbon versus coaxial.
There are plenty of things about Hi-Fi that people consider a "principle" or a fact, though they never tested it themselves or have been provided with proof by the person they learned this fact from.
Right now, we have a very well-respected speaker designer stating that another well-respected designer is likely blowing smoke regarding a method of speaker use.
There are also plenty of people on the netz that will tell you that Ovation guitars are the worst ever, yet there are quite a few very famous performers who use them and will retire richer than the internet "experts".
So, yes, this article can be very analogous to what goes on in the rareified air of the Hi-Fi world.
The comparison to Hi-Fi could be made in many ways:
Digital Formats - Lossy versus non-lossy compression. $100 DAC versus $1,000 DAC. Bluetooth versus lossless stream.
Turntables - $500 cart versus $5,000 cart. Cork mat versus felt. Straight arm versus curved. Direct drive versus belt.
Amps - Tube versus SS. Old tube versus new tube. Old SS versus new.
Speakers - Full range versus multi-way versus planar ribbon versus coaxial.
There are plenty of things about Hi-Fi that people consider a "principle" or a fact, though they never tested it themselves or have been provided with proof by the person they learned this fact from.
Right now, we have a very well-respected speaker designer stating that another well-respected designer is likely blowing smoke regarding a method of speaker use.
There are also plenty of people on the netz that will tell you that Ovation guitars are the worst ever, yet there are quite a few very famous performers who use them and will retire richer than the internet "experts".
So, yes, this article can be very analogous to what goes on in the rareified air of the Hi-Fi world.
shelby1420
Enjoying the music.....
Hahaha, love it!!!
trhee
ㅇtㅈyㅅr
As for Ovation guitars, they're mainly considered a stage guitar (non mic'ed) where they excel for certain genres of guitar playing due to it's simple plug and play nature and resistance to feedback. Outside of said stage use, they sound horribly thin with very little projection when played acoustically. It's no secret that many acoustic guitar luthiers choose certain woods time and time again, such as rosewood back and sides with a spruce top as a classic combo. Plastic composite is hardly considered a tone wood.
The fact that a few "very famous performers who use them and will retire richer than the internet experts" is hardly a valid argument as to the merit of the guitar itself.
The fact that a few "very famous performers who use them and will retire richer than the internet experts" is hardly a valid argument as to the merit of the guitar itself.
robgmn
Super Member
In it's bare essence, it IS valid.
You just stated that it works well under a given set of circumstances.
Those circumstances being as a non-mic'd stage guitar.
A true POS guitar will not perform well under any circumstances (unless maybe you are using it to bash someone over the head
Again, if it's a POS, it's a POS that many famous people have used very effectively to earn a better living than the vast majority of our country.
I was just describing the concept of people painting with very broad strokes without the ability to "back it up".
Not that their fame means they know anything about guitars, but some of the folks who use or have used Ovation:
Cat Stevens
Chet Atkins
Robert Plant
John Lennon
Glen Campbell
Mark Knopfler
Jimmy Page
Last edited:
trhee
ㅇtㅈyㅅr
First, I never stated that Ovation guitars were POS. Ovations, IMO, are niche guitars used for a very specific purpose where within that purpose it works well, although there are still many better choices IMO. Like I said earlier, it's used often onstage due to it's plug and play nature that yields a pretty good amplified sound without much hassle.
Of the 7 artists that you listed, only 3 of them are considered guitar players, first and foremost (Chet Atkins, Mark Knopfler, Jimmy Page). Although they've all played an Ovation at one point in time, none of them choose Ovation as their main acoustic guitar of choice. Chet Atkins plays his signature Gibson acoustic/electric, Mark Knopfer prefers a Martin 000-40S, Jimmy Page prefers a Martin D28.
Anyways, there are Ovation fans out there and if it works for them, the more power to them. For me, there are better choices that I prefer as a player such as guitars from Nick Benjamin, Huss & Dalton, Santa Fe, Martin (with the exception of their entry level models), Larrivée and some of the higher end Taylor. Why? Quality of workmanship from fretwork, bracing, neck setting, binding, etc... to the acoustic tone and projection of sound which are all far superior to the ovation. For stage, a piezo system can easily be installed and some guitars such as the Martin OM-28E come with the outstanding Fishman Aura system that works even better for stage work than the Ovation.
Finally, all of the guitars from the brands I've listed typically are more costly than Ovation, but for me, someone who has been playing for nearly 40 years, the extra cost is well worth it and quite noticeable. For someone who has just started playing, it may not make sense spending $8000-9000 for a custom made Nick Benjamin and the differences may not be appreciable. With that said, from what I've learned over the years, whether it be guitars or hifi gear, there is no one size that fits all.
Of the 7 artists that you listed, only 3 of them are considered guitar players, first and foremost (Chet Atkins, Mark Knopfler, Jimmy Page). Although they've all played an Ovation at one point in time, none of them choose Ovation as their main acoustic guitar of choice. Chet Atkins plays his signature Gibson acoustic/electric, Mark Knopfer prefers a Martin 000-40S, Jimmy Page prefers a Martin D28.
Anyways, there are Ovation fans out there and if it works for them, the more power to them. For me, there are better choices that I prefer as a player such as guitars from Nick Benjamin, Huss & Dalton, Santa Fe, Martin (with the exception of their entry level models), Larrivée and some of the higher end Taylor. Why? Quality of workmanship from fretwork, bracing, neck setting, binding, etc... to the acoustic tone and projection of sound which are all far superior to the ovation. For stage, a piezo system can easily be installed and some guitars such as the Martin OM-28E come with the outstanding Fishman Aura system that works even better for stage work than the Ovation.
Finally, all of the guitars from the brands I've listed typically are more costly than Ovation, but for me, someone who has been playing for nearly 40 years, the extra cost is well worth it and quite noticeable. For someone who has just started playing, it may not make sense spending $8000-9000 for a custom made Nick Benjamin and the differences may not be appreciable. With that said, from what I've learned over the years, whether it be guitars or hifi gear, there is no one size that fits all.
In it's bare essence, it IS valid.
You just stated that it works well under a given set of circumstances.
Those circumstances being as a non-mic'd stage guitar.
A true POS guitar will not perform well under any circumstances (unless maybe you are using it to bash someone over the head
Again, if it's a POS, it's a POS that many famous people have used very effectively to earn a better living than the vast majority of our country.
I was just describing the concept of people painting with very broad strokes without the ability to "back it up".
Not that their fame means they know anything about guitars, but some of the folks who use or have used Ovation:
Cat Stevens
Chet Atkins
Robert Plant
John Lennon
Glen Campbell
Mark Knopfler
Jimmy Page
Glen Campbell, while many may not know this, is a considerable beast on guitar.
robgmn
Super Member
trhee, I think Al Dimeola might be a guitar player too, but I'm not entirely familiar with his discography
But, what I was trying to do with the Ovation reference was say that there are a lot of "experts" out there that make claims with little or nothing to back it up (least of all, personal experience).
It could be a discussion of supercars ("the Veyron is better than the Enzo"), or wristwatches ("that Vacheron SMOKES the Patek"), or speakers ("those JM Labs Grand Audios dance all over the Ayon Audio Cranes"), or violins ("the Stradvarius sounds better than any violin out there").
In this particular situation, a group of musicians were given a blind preferecne test of violins that were played in an actual setting they would be used in.
The Stradi didn't do as well as would be expected given its cache.
Presuppositions were proven wrong, and it can happen any time there is a choice between one thing and another.
'Nuff said?
But, what I was trying to do with the Ovation reference was say that there are a lot of "experts" out there that make claims with little or nothing to back it up (least of all, personal experience).
It could be a discussion of supercars ("the Veyron is better than the Enzo"), or wristwatches ("that Vacheron SMOKES the Patek"), or speakers ("those JM Labs Grand Audios dance all over the Ayon Audio Cranes"), or violins ("the Stradvarius sounds better than any violin out there").
In this particular situation, a group of musicians were given a blind preferecne test of violins that were played in an actual setting they would be used in.
The Stradi didn't do as well as would be expected given its cache.
Presuppositions were proven wrong, and it can happen any time there is a choice between one thing and another.
'Nuff said?
Catcher10
Prog-tastic!
I believe this can be applied to hifi gear.....especially today when so much is purchased online without ever a demo possible, all we have is a bunch of subjective online reviews and posts on sites like this...all subjective.
In the past you had so many more hi fi stores you could walk into and pretty much hear what you were interested in before buying.
This blind test also goes for the wine industry...how many times do you see a blind test with a $8 bottle of wine against a $100 bottle.
In the past you had so many more hi fi stores you could walk into and pretty much hear what you were interested in before buying.
This blind test also goes for the wine industry...how many times do you see a blind test with a $8 bottle of wine against a $100 bottle.
Once human beings get involved, things get...complicated. 
