My uncomfortable audio and music self-awareness

[Barry]

Yes, in part I agree with this. A simple solution I used to the benefit of many, many customers (and for myself of course) was at Subjective Audio in the 1980s to invite a customer to bring with them a partner who's voice they knew well – or at least thought they did. The partner was invited to say out loud anything they liked, the content being unimportant. This was recorded by a pair of stereo mics into a Nakamichi CR7E.

The recording was played back through the various combinations of equipment under consideration. I took care, using a sound pressure meter to ensure that each repetition through these combinations was at the identical volume. The inherent distortions in the recording process was not an issue as it was, throughout the process, consistent.

The outcomes of these demonstrations were, in the main, fascinating – for those who valued the closest approach to voice-band fidelity highly. Needless to say under these circumstances, very few Linn Kans, Saras and Isobarics were purchased by my customers.

There were two further consequences from this process:

1. The partners of the customers were invariably astonished and dismayed and all emotions in between when hearing a reasonable facsimile of the voice possibly for the very first time.

2. Sometimes, as a consequence of uber-powerful brand marketing in the 1980s and the assertions of some mags and some reviewers who clearly didn't feel that voice-band fidelity was that important, the customer having heard that some speakers were more coherent in this vital frequency range still purchased 'delinquent' speakers because they lacked confidence in their own decision-making capabilities, preferring to abrogate responsibility to “the experts”. Sad, but true.

No surprise there then! Did you try the test using Quad '57s Howard?

[Neil McCauley]

No surprise there then! Did you try the test using Quad '57s Howard?

Indeed I did and, no surprises here, if voice was THE primary objective for the customer, I NEVER successfully sold against the 57.

[Audio Advent]

Why a lot of people feel uncomfortable the first time they see themselves on film/video (I know I did - and still do)... not only is it disorienting but also we are accustomed to 'seeing what we want to see' when we look in a mirror

I'm not sure I understand that. If we can choose to only see "what we want to see" then why can't we choose when watching any other visual stimulous like a video of ourselves?

I understand the mirror image thing could be mildly unusual the first time but most discomfort doesn't come from what our faces look like, how they differ from looking in the mirror, but how we move, parts of our face we can't see in relation to the rest, how we talk etc (things we absolutely cannot see or hear) being different to what we thought and that disparity causing self-conciousness whilst some of us are self-concious already about the mistaken idea of ourselves, let alone the closer-to-reality version on screen.

[mikmas]

I'm not sure I understand that. If we can choose to only see "what we want to see" then why can't we choose when watching any other visual stimulous like a video of ourselves?

Looking in the mirror is a mundane and (for most) daily event routinised from a very early age - so routine that we rarely think about it but just concentrate on the job at hand (washing, shaving, combing hair etc...). We don't need to take in all details, just those related to the actions (squeezing the pesky blackhead). The mirror also gives us a very limited and distorted view because of the optical physics involved.

Watching a recorded image is a totally different ballgame.... unless we are taking part in reality TV, the event is exceptional, from a very different set of viewpoints (as you mention) and often encapsulating aspects of our physical self we have never seen before but are suddenly confronted with. Blanking off 'less wholesome' details is much harder than when we look in a mirror, particularly if the viewing is public - thus accentuating the acute self-consciousness that can be experienced at such moments. I've known people who were genuinely phobic about being recorded on video; I'm sure they coped with their daily personal grooming perfectly well, or at least with far less distress.

I don't know is it's still the case but there have been many legendary Hollywood stars who had written in their contract that they could not be filmed from certain angles, particularly in close-up. They did that for a reason

[jandl100]

There's no denying that some music and some audio gear is complete rubbish no matter which way you look at it. I do try to avoid making comments that could offend about other people's tastes and choices, but sometimes when I see what others listen to and what they play it on, I'm soooo tempted to say something rude .

Well, you can console yourself by thinking that they may well have the same reaction to your choice of music and system, Geoff!

[jandl100]

Indeed I did and, no surprises here, if voice was THE primary objective for the customer, I NEVER successfully sold against the 57.

A friend of mine, back in the late 70s early 80s, had a pair of Quad 57 that I much admired for their fidelity and lack of colouration. - I had cheap but fairly decent Technics SB301 speakers at the time, I think.

1981 rolled round, marriage occurred, and I couldn't resist getting an extra £1k on my 1st house mortgage and buying a pair of the newly released Quad 63 from good old KJ Leisuresound.

After a few weeks of loving my new speakers I went round to my friend's place --- I was genuinely shocked at how coloured the 57s now sounded!
-- maybe the 57s just needed a service / fettle?

FWIW, my take these days is that overall the 57 is the superior speaker.

[Gordon Steadman]

A friend of mine, back in the late 70s early 80s, had a pair of Quad 57 that I much admired for their fidelity and lack of colouration. - I had cheap but fairly decent Technics SB301 speakers at the time, I think.

1981 rolled round, marriage occurred, and I couldn't resist getting an extra £1k on my 1st house mortgage and buying a pair of the newly released Quad 63 from good old KJ Leisuresound.

After a few weeks of loving my new speakers I went round to my friend's place --- I was genuinely shocked at how coloured the 57s now sounded!
-- maybe the 57s just needed a service / fettle?

FWIW, my take these days is that overall the 57 is the superior speaker.

Can't argue with a box swapper

I was surprised at the difference after my 57s came back from a full One Thing service.