Question Best record production for Hi-Fi tests

[Witterings]

It has always been my view that when you listen to equipment the judgement that you make should be on the basis of whether what comes out of the speakers is close to what you would hear at a live performance (taking into account listening conditions etc.). Hi-fi is short for high fidelity and fidelity means truthfulness. So hi-fi should be true to the original.

I've also always been of the opinion that it is easier to make these judgements when you are listening to "simple" and "pure" music. By that I mean single voices and single instruments. So when I audition the things I use are in large part of that type. I must confess that i audition very rarely, the last time was 2014, and I haven't changed my equipment since. I posted here about that process then and my list was as follows:

• Bellini – “I Capuleti E I Montecchi” DG 00289047708031
• Shostakovich Symphony 5 RPO Ashkenazy – Decca 421 120 2
• Grieg Lieder Von Otter – DG 437 521-2
• Dowland Lute Music Vol 1 – Naxos 8.557586
• John Armatrading – Classics – AM 982 3506 – Track – “Love and affection”
• Shostakovich Piano Concerto 2 – Leonskaja – Apex 8573 89092 2
• Joan Baez “Joan Baez” – Vanguard 79594 – Track – “John Riley”
• Jimmy Hendrix – “Experience” – MCD 11692 – Track - “All along the watchtower”
• Brahms Piano Concerto 1 – Grimauld – DG 479 1058
• Beethoven Violin Concerto – Faust – HMC 902105
• Tallis – “Spem in Alium” – CDGIM 006
• Cream – “Wheels of fire” – Polydor 531 812-2 – Track – “Those were the days”

I won't bore you with details of this music as it probably won't be stuff you like. However, as an example, the Dowland Lute Music is just a guy playing a lute. Each note is pure, or should sound pure, and you should hear the player's fingers moving on the strings. If the notes aren't pure don't buy the equipment. That's a tough test!

There are other things to look for such as dynamic range. Most "popular" music has a very limited dynamic range, indeed a lot of it is highly "compressed" to make it more suitable for listening in noisy environments. Even in the classical world this happens with, for example, Classic FM heavily compressing their output as their listeners often listen in their cars and other noisy places, BBC Radio 3 uses a much lower level of compression. As a classical music lover I need equipment that can handle a huge dynamic range which is why a piece such as the Shostakovich Symphony 5 is on my list as it has huge range from almost silent to "knock the walls down".

I've rambled on a bit here for which I apologise. To keep it simple, if you have heard some music you really like live use a recording of that as your test.

Whilst I appreciate what you're suggesting but the reality is if you heard it live in one venue, it could sound completely different live at a different venue where acoustics, speaker placement and situe of sound engineer (which will affect how he hears / mixes it) will likely have a far greater variance than between typical home listening rooms.

That aside, unless you're only listening to live recordings the studio version is going to be completely different again, and probably with a different sound engineer and both will be using so many effects from basic EQ, reverb, compression, gates and a whole abundance of other effects to deliver what the sound / mixing engineer deems to sound best.

I set up / recorded my drums years ago and it sounded horrible. My brother in law who does shed loads of mixing / recording came round and in 10 minutes he'd complete changed my awful, harsh reality of what sounded like standing next to an unmiked / unamplified drum kit into what you'd hear on any record ... and they're completely different sounds.

Honestly not meant to be critical but I just don't see them as the same and just my 2p's worth.