For Newbies: how to listen:swaps/changes

I'm not as theoretical or technical as some of the others, but I agree that both male and female vocals, recorded simply (not pop, rock, or other excessively processed music) are my first test. I also find well recorded piano to be a good test. Wide range in tone, quick strikes and long decays. Definately should be something you are intimately familiar with. Must admit I often make a fairly quick judgment, not very methodical with my free time.

Trust YOUR ears. The best piece is the one that sounds the best to you. Who cares what other people or spec sheets say.

I have a few "test" disks. They change from time to time, but each disk has a distinct purpose. I, like Craig find vocals to help alot. I use Eva Cassidy "Time After Time" to see how smooth the treble is. This disk is not as well recorded as I'd like and therefor the treble can be quite fatiguing, if the treble is harsh or bright here it will clearly wear over time. I use Sara K. "Hobo" for pace. This disk is very well recorded with alot of sudden noises and quick rythems. It also has excellent bass and very good soundstage. If my feet are tapping and I'm not listening for anything in particular, the equipment is working. Patricia Barber "Cafe Blue" is a favorite of mine. The base MUST be tight and focused, even on the deepest notes. If the base tends to flatten out across your floor rather than staying a tight note above the floor, the system is not able to handle the base to the lowest notes. If it does flatten out, take note of when (how low) and use this as a yard stick. (with this as an international site, what does yardstick mean to Redkiwi, Ben Cambell and our other international friends?) He voice should never sound shrill or bright, even in the highest passages. The studio should be pressent, but only if you look for it. The piano should sound true and the strikes on the strings should be apparent if you look for them. For me, if I find myself not looking for anything, just enjoying the presentation the system is resolving everything well. "Nature's Realm" on Water Lilly Acoustics is an "audiophile" standard. This is the disk with the subway running under the church and a system that resolves this has "great" base control. (well that's the audiophiles story) I can feel the train yes, but the real story for me is this is a great disk. The pace and extremes are very good. The sound quality is fantastic, I use this to see if the system can keep up on the loudest most sudden passages. This disk will bring out the worst in amps and speakers. Finally I'm using Duke Ellington "Blues in Orbit" for detail. There is a large group of brass insterments here in three distinct layers of depth. My system is able to pick out the tone variations of three insturments playing side by side the same notes, together, I must listen for this however. The depth and definition of soundstage is evedent. The louder more complex passages should remain unconjested, still have the apearance of individuals playing together. There is also some studio information that will take some looking, but if the system is resolving this you will hear it.
I hope this has helped Elizabeth. It's all a bit esoteric, but the point is you must know the music first, and have music that has pushed you system to it's limits in the past. When I was shopping equipment and setting up my system I found the Chesky "Ultimate Demo" disk to be very informitive. They take you through 20+ areas to listen for and give you examples of when it's working. Thanks for the great thread, J.D.

I received a lot of negative votes for my above post and I just dont understand why. What better advice to give a newbie then trust your own ears. This is a high pressure over opinionated hobby where every product is reviewed to the equvalent of the second coming of Christ and backed by technical specifications that have nothing to do with sound quality. I was not refering to the other excellent posts on this thread and didnt get into what to listen for because it was already covered so well above. When choosing equipment the best piece for you is the one that sounds best to you. Not what a reviewer or salesmen likes.

Hey Perfectimage. I boosted you up. I think some people might have interpreted your post a slap-down, but you obviously didn't intend it that way. There may be some people here who just vote negative on everything.

Anyway, A little over a year ago, I finally decided to buy a NEW high end system to replace my 10 year old stereo. I went to a couple of high end stores and auditioned equipment. I found that I could not really determine if I liked something or not with a two minute demonstration - even with my own music. After a bad experience with a mean retailer, I changed tack and decided to buy used equipment & see what I like.

Most of the high end gear I've owned had something special that no other piece could do. I hear these things after a couple days of listening. Things like the Audio Physic Virgo's refinement & low level detail, or the vt100's 'just right' tube glow. I rate a piece of equipment by how often I want to listen to music. If I happen to have a bad match or something that is screwing up the system, I find that I just don't listen as much. Usually it's something I can eventually qualify. For example the metallic quality of a cd player, the dead sound of some solid state amp/speaker combos, dull cables, or the overly veiled quality of some tube amps. My ears are getting tuned up now, and I can make judgements faster + estimate some system interaction. Generally I will keep two of a given component type for a while, switch them back and fourth every few days, and see what is better. It's kind of neat that I can now 'sort of' match components based on 'described characteristics' and have them beneficially affect the system.

It is very true about a person's taste being a factor. One person might like the MG 1.6's bass speed and coherence breathtaking but dislike the Vandersteen 3aSig's slowness and lack of detail. The next might be thrilled with the bass weight and natural instrument timbres of the 3a, but dislike the lightweight presentation and off-axis thin sound of the 1.6. Both great speakers. I apologize in advance.