There’s a few well recorded, HQ test track threads. Often when I’m testing I’ll play tracks that are far from perfect, it’s supposed to be a test right? Why play to its strengths?
Here’s an example I’d like to see anyone else’s.
For a supergroup the recording is far from stellar but it’s a bunch of voices I know well. Making them out isn’t always straightforward. It also demonstrates why mere mortals should avoid allowing their voices to be placed in direct comparison to the pure reference instrument that is Roy Orbinson’s voice.
If on a test I find that known voices are the best (a bit hard for me as I do not listen to so much music with vocals). But in the last years I follow Lynn Adib and I did listen so much that I think it is the most familiar voice for me (it is so familiar that I can listen to vocal jazz that normally makes me beg for it to stop).
Ahhh, they sorted that for the next outing though, no? The Trinity Sessions is an excellent recording resulting from an idiosyncratic recording process. Will give your suggestion a go.
@CrystalGipsy, great choice of album for this kind of thing
Bill_Janssen
(Wigwam wool socks now on asymmetrical isolation feet!)
14
Well, with test tones, you’re not listening to the music, you’re listening to the equipment. Less chance of distraction, better ability to concentrate on what you’re actually hearing, instead of what you’re remembering.
