Individuals test within their own frame of reference. But groups of customers and potential customers have varied frames of reference. A reasonably fair group test would be to have a free or demo daw record/render a single simple public midi file playing the target public synth demo using several agreed upon presets.BONES wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:36 amI fail to see how that matters when making a direct comparison, given that the comparison will be made on the same equipment by each of us. That said, if something sounds great on some systems and lousy on others, then I'd be tempted to class it as lousy overall, because I think one of the most important qualities of an instrument should be its ability to be consistent across a wide variety of set-ups.glokraw wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 11:15 pmEvery commenter is equipped with different types and qualities of:
cables
speakers
headphones
audio interface
room acoustics
audio config settings
personal hearing loss
knowledge of sounds and sound design
knowledge of music terminology and genres
This way each tester can access the same gear while in their own frame of reference, where they can compare among instruments at their disposal, rather than prodding the opinions of others who likely have quite different scenarios. This also puts the onus on things other than an individuals knowledge and skill, where even more variability may exist, and can be minimized in public test results.
There was a triple-blind comparison done where a Fender modeling amp was tested against a Fender tube amp, and the tube-snobs failed to discern correctly in over half their attempts. Nobody in the test knew what was what,
except the setup guy.
We're fortunate these days that even inexpensive gear can be greatly enjoyable. and even productive when in capable hands, decades beyond the '70's quality specs.
Cheers
Edit...but who cares, anyway $$$
