[KH]

On 7/31/2013 10:29 AM, Audio_Empire wrote:
In article , KH
wrote:

On 7/30/2013 3:52 PM, Audio_Empire wrote:
snip

This would appear to say volumes about your knowledge of pop music.

I know enough * more than I want to. And if you are saying that I am
wrong here, then I believe it says more about your knowledge of music
and reproduction than it does about mine.

I'm saying you clearly don't know the range of "pop" music, quite a lot
of which is acoustic, because you don't care, and *you* don't listen to
any, by your own admission, so you don't seem to be in a strong position
to opine on it's suitability for auditioning.

snip

It bears directly on how a system will sound with the referenced system
- in the opinion of the reviewer. How is that less useful than a review
of how a speaker system sounds with music that the reader couldn't care
less about, and won't be listening too?

Because he will at least know that the reviewer is basing his opinion on
the quality of reproduction of a known absolute. A string section is a
string section, but an electric guitar can be made (and often is) to
sound like anything the musician and engineer want it to sound like.

And to someone who never listens to string sections, but listens to
electric guitars routinely, of what value is an opinion on accuracy of
"strings" reproduction? I know what your point is, but you fail to take
into account that many audiophiles - including yours truly - listen to
many types of music that doesn't qualify as "suitable" in your lexicon,
but we nonetheless care a great deal about quality. You don't
understand how that's possible; fair enough. But your opinion is no
more valid than mine.

I.E., It's not a REAL acoustic instrument that can be experienced with
nothing between the player and the listener but real space.

Frustrating!

They are entertainment, IMO, and nothing more, no matter what the
musical selections are.

Again, we're not talking about the entertainment qualities of the music.

No, I'm talking about *reviews* here, not music. You are describing
reviews that have relevance to *you* as the only useful reviews. My
point is that reviews are all subjective, and only useful as
entertainment since there are no standards being employed. Even if
"live, unamplified" is used as the "reference", there is zero evidence
that I (or anyone else) would agree with any particular reviewer or review.

snip

I maintain
that one cannot make any determination beyond "it sounds good to me"

And yes, I would agree with that point. *Without* any qualifiers however.

Keith