Pro gear is used to record music. If you thank that the pros are making good sounding recordings, go with the pro stuff. If you think recordings need a little help to sound good, check out audiophile gear.
Pro v Audiophile - Science v Snake Oil?
I have a long time friend Mike who has an interest in audio gear that broadcasters/pros use unlike myself who remained mainly confined to domestic audio. He reads journals written for industry professionals and is mainly interested in using pro/semi pro gear.
Of course there is no hard and fast distinction between professional and domestic audio, as companies such as ATC, B&W, Harbeth, JBL, PMC, Sony, Technics etc. often have product lines for both markets. However there does seem to be a feeling of two separate camps each with its own aims. This feeling is probably enhanced by the different way the products are often reviewed and sold (with the possible exception being headphones) which often don't seem to care which camp they fall into.
Domestic audio used to be sold by retail outlets whilst pro gear was often sold via catalogues. The rise of internet shopping through retailers like Amazon now sees such products often sold side by side. Still, the way they are reviewed are remain separate between industry publications and domestic magazine press. Professional audio gear remains largely ignored by the domestic press and vice versa. You can almost sense the feeling that each camp might regard the other as being beneath contempt.
Industry users and reviewers seem to have a no nonsense approach to audio gear and go by technical specs and durability whereas domestic reviews major on vague subjective impressions. Yet once upon a time domestic audio too used to be reviewed in a similar fashion.
As the years have rolled by I increasingly find myself asking whether by reading domestic audio magazines and the like, I was on the wrong road all along. Especially when I consider how 99.99% of all the film, music and TV/ radio output that I've enjoyed was originally produced and recorded. Mike just knowingly smiles in a 'I told you so' way, and just this once he may well be right.
Anyway, here's a great resource showcasing how audio journalism once used to work.
https://www.americanradiohistory.com
Of course there is no hard and fast distinction between professional and domestic audio, as companies such as ATC, B&W, Harbeth, JBL, PMC, Sony, Technics etc. often have product lines for both markets. However there does seem to be a feeling of two separate camps each with its own aims. This feeling is probably enhanced by the different way the products are often reviewed and sold (with the possible exception being headphones) which often don't seem to care which camp they fall into.
Domestic audio used to be sold by retail outlets whilst pro gear was often sold via catalogues. The rise of internet shopping through retailers like Amazon now sees such products often sold side by side. Still, the way they are reviewed are remain separate between industry publications and domestic magazine press. Professional audio gear remains largely ignored by the domestic press and vice versa. You can almost sense the feeling that each camp might regard the other as being beneath contempt.
Industry users and reviewers seem to have a no nonsense approach to audio gear and go by technical specs and durability whereas domestic reviews major on vague subjective impressions. Yet once upon a time domestic audio too used to be reviewed in a similar fashion.
As the years have rolled by I increasingly find myself asking whether by reading domestic audio magazines and the like, I was on the wrong road all along. Especially when I consider how 99.99% of all the film, music and TV/ radio output that I've enjoyed was originally produced and recorded. Mike just knowingly smiles in a 'I told you so' way, and just this once he may well be right.
Anyway, here's a great resource showcasing how audio journalism once used to work.
https://www.americanradiohistory.com
- ...
- 23 posts total
@tomcy6 No I don’t believe recording standards are very high. In fact it’s pretty obvious that most of the industry has very little regard for the concerns of audiophiles. We’re just far too small a group for them to take us seriously. The Steve Hoffman's and Barry Diament's are few and far between in the recording world unfortunately. Your idea of ’helping’ recordings sounds good, say if you want to add a little warmth and bass via your setup, it might help thin sounding recordings and vice versa. Perhaps all amps should have tone controls. |
@tomcy6 No I don’t believe recording standards are very high. In fact it’s pretty obvious that most of the industry has very little regard for the concerns of audiophiles. We’re just far too small a group for them to take us seriously. The Steve Hoffman's and Barry Diament's are few and far between in the recording world Unfortunately, you are correct. Outside of classical, some jazz and a few mainstream artists, general, mainstream new music recordings have not been great for many years. Thus audiophiles latching on to recordings of years past. |
@cd318 I imagine Film and TV studios would place a high priority on performance and reliability simply because of the huge recording and production costs. Time is big money indeed, and unreliable products get very short shrift Sadly this idea of a high priority on performance vis a vis recording is not usually the case. Most sound stages are awful and the ones which have some dedicated acoustic treatment are, with some very rare exceptions, mediocre at best. And because most film people have a marked predisposition toward the visual the sound departments generally get very short shrift. In fact in order of importance they most often sit somewhere between craft services and the janitorial staff . And in situations where usable sound cannot be gotten off the floor, which is often the case given the sad state of sound stages, looping is used to fix it after the fact. Thus looping is unfortunately a much overused bandage that in almost all cases does not do the in frame performances any favours, in fact quite the opposite. And btw most editing suites have acoustics that are worse than the average living room. |
@cd318 Funny you would bring up Barry Diament. Remember not too long ago when Mr Diament made an appearance on another audiophile forum. After some extended attempts at trying to speak truth to bs on several topics he was quite familiar with, including recording and acoustics, he was basically chased off the forum by the usual mob of no-nothings and haters because he was critical of some long held dogmas ( and an industry insider, then a forum favourite, who was fluffing the followers of said dogmas to solicit business for his dogma friendly products ). Which was really too bad because Mr Diament would have been an amazing source of information on a number of topics important to the audiophile community. |
- 23 posts total