Baseline
Join Our Community Subscribe to Paul's PostsOne of the reasons I created the Audiophile’s Reference disc to accompany the Audiophile’s Guide is the need for a baseline.
In the past, we used our favorite music tracks for set up references. I even published a few lists of these favorites so we could all be on the same page.
But being on the same page with dozens of favorite tracks is not the same as agreeing upon a carefully crafted standard.
If we set up our systems based solely on our favorite music, then we have no mutually agreed upon standard. And when there are no standards, then we cannot in good faith help each other get where we want to go.
By creating a carefully crafted reference we have a common baseline. Which is why on the disc there are baseline tracks for center image, small, medium, and large groups, and for measuring depth.
Once a baseline is agreed upon and populated throughout the community, it becomes easy for the group to help each other. We know what to expect and we can then assist each other in achieving it.
Baselines are agreed upon starting points.
They are essential for communities to help each other.
The first Superbowl was 1967, how is it that 2021 is the 55th? Bart Starr vs Len Dawson.
Anyone else recall that game?
Well then, Kansas City is favored by +3 and the potential Tom Brady Story (ad nauseam) is compelling. KC is stronger than they were last year and both teams gave up almost as many points as they scored.
If Tampa Bay wants the championship, the game plan needs to simply be, take out Patrick Mahomes. After four years of (fill in the blank) governance, America deserves a party.
Hopefully it will be a good game/contest.
Superbowl or Superspreader.
Regardless, hopefully it will be a good contest.
dr.goodears, you’re going to need all your fingers and toes, and more 🙂 Just count them. 1967 was number 1, 1976 was number 10 etc etc so 2016 was number 50, 5 more to go.
Bart Starr vs Len Dawson. I don’t know about that. I read Bart Simpson vs Les Dawson 😉
If football ain’t your cup of tea, check out the Netflix series ‘Ozark’. Personally, i’ve only viewed three complete tv series since the 60’s, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad and recently Ozark (a recommendation from Sammy Hagar).
Friendly warning; there is a heaping spoonful of gratuitous violence throughout but it’s a grabber, all three seasons so far. I also hear Madmen is/was decent but haven’t the vehicle to view.
dr.goodears,
Madmen is/was great; so very 1960’s.
Lots of gratuitous cigarette smoking.
Highly recommended!
Thanks for the Rec, i love nicostink almost as much as Amazon (not!).
Just turned on the TV. Kansas City are the team in red. Not doing very well. Read a book about Charlie Parker last year. Kansas City seem to be better at music than football.
Hmm, KC won the whole enchilada last year, but Tampa Bay executed their game plan “to a T”. Indeed, Bird was a madman. If money laundering, forensic accounting and Kansas City culture is your cup of tea, check out Marty Byrde and the KC Mob on the Netflix series Ozark.
Looking on the brighter side, at least there’s one day a year – we the pilgrims – don’t have to suffer through Cricket hyperbole. 🙂
Hahaha….that can be arranged 🙂
You are no doubt aware that the NFL plays games at Wembley Stadium in London and it is very popular as a spectator sport. Why you need 50 or 60 people on each team is a mystery. We have teams of 11 and a 12th man who can deputise as a fielder (not batting or pitching, to use the baseball terms) if someone is injured, and has the traditional role of bringing on the refreshments every hour. It is a gallant if humbling role, that extends from school to international games.
Legends are born as 12th man, most famously Gary Pratt, for running out Ponting in 2005. FatRat would have loved Gary. 15 minutes of fame. Australia now have their own Gary, a bit of a superstar, who the English love for a classic fumble a couple of years ago. Gary’s real name is Nathan Lyon. I have no idea why he’s called Gary, but everyone calls him that.
Steven,
Apparently it was Matthew Wade who started calling out “Nice, Garry” when Lyon was bowling back in 2010 & it stuck.
He’s also referred to as the GOAT…
Greatest Of All Time…slow off-spinner with the greatest number of wickets.
Makes absolute sense Paul.
For many years, since 1995, if you were in the audio retail & set-up game in Australia, it was the Chesky Records’ – Guide To Critical Listening; ‘The Ultimate Demonstration Disc’
128x Oversampling (High Resolution Technology) CD…
my how far we’ve come.
Far Rat makes a good point as Paul’s disc follows the same lines as the Chesky one, but it is designed for system evaluation rather than room set-up, which is not the point of Paul’s book.
Paul’s assumption that “ In the past, we used our favorite music tracks for set up references” is incorrect as far as I’m concerned. I’ve posted my evaluation segments before and they are quite specific sounds. For example, for point source Paul uses an accompanied vocal. I use an unaccompanied finger drum (Mridangam). For a medium group Paul uses a 3-string band (mandolin, guitar, fiddle), which is heavily focused on the mandolin, whereas I use a conventional trio (piano, percussion, bass).
With regard to system set-up, anyone taking this seriously these days should use technology. Like many people I use REW because it’s accurate, quick, easy and free. If test tracks have to be in HD or DSD, they are going to be about system evaluation, not set-up. Being part of the vast majority that considers 16/44 quite sufficient, I’ll stick to that. REW uses low definition frequency sweeps and tones to measure your room response far more accurately than you could ever do by ear.
I second this. Strongly.
IMO the only thing one really needs is a few exceptional recordings available of different formation/music styles which are relevant for his music preference and which he knows extremely well…and then use those whenever evaluating something in his or other setups.
For those who don’t have a feeling what a really good recording is or don’t have one, such samplers are certainly helpful and as Paul says as basis. I just wonder why the whole procedure is needed then, if the usual music collection of the person doesn’t inherit anything of that quality.
People tend to trust themselves too little.
If you send a sweep from say 30 – 250 Hz to your system, it should be very easy to hear any significant drop-outs, and REW will certainly show them to you. You will find it much harder to hear those drop-outs using music as a test signal. Of course this only serves to confirm your excellent point, that if you can’t hear it, it’s not an issue! Plus, if there’s nothing you can do about it, best not to know about it!
Where REW really comes into its own is subwoofer set-up. Doing this by ear is difficult and imprecise, with REW it’s very quick and easy and very accurate.
BIG TIP: The reason for getting a UMIK microphone ($60) is because they are calibrated to REW. You enter the serial number from the label on the mic and REW does the rest. It’s idiot-proof, because I have no idea about these things and I managed to do it.
That’s true. I was just referring to reference music tracks. Test signals used for measuring have their own meaning and justification.
But surely what’s really important and relevant to this site is the bass line.
From Wikipedia “Baseline a minimum or starting point used for comparisons.”
When I think of baseline I think of basal metabolic rate. That on average is the number of calories a healthy adult in a vegetative state will burn in 24 hours. This is the amount of energy it takes to carry on body processes to stay alive whether it comes from food or energy stored in the body. Under normal circumstances a human will burn more. How much more? That depends on many factors. Physical activity is one. Fighting and illness is another. As soon as conditions vary they human body must adjust to them. Therefore the baseline is of very limited value. Same goes for a recording. As soon as you play a different recording the baseline adjustments go out the window. To make the problem more interesting, no two systems that are different and/or in different acoustic environments will give the same results as another playing the same recording. Furthermore the parameters you can adjust that are engineered into the system are so limited in number that there’s no way to compensate for most of the variables to get comparable results even from the baseline recording. This is why even the room acoustics had to be altered by removing some sound absorbing panels to optimize the performance of the IRS V compared to the system it replaced and despite Paul’s claim that he was expert at system setup he needed the assistance of Arnie Nudel to optimize placement of the IRS Vs.
Is having and using this disc as Paul suggested useful? Yes but its limitations should be kept in mind. A baseline is not the same as a standard. Even if there was a standard (there isn’t) it would be of limited value unless you could adjust the system to meet that standard. When it comes to making recordings if ten recording engineers each recorded the same musical performance you’d get ten different recordings. That’s what makes all of this so much fun for me. You’re blindfolded, turned around ten times and you have to shoot a bullseye on a moving target. It’s enough to drive people who take this too seriously crazy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfBG0d5Oj3c
I have ordered the bundle, just to see how my system performs with the provided reference tracks. I think it will pass with flying colors, based on my experience with the Chesky Demonstration Disk. I’ll bet, however, that the provided recordings do not include what I believe is the biggest test of an audio system — well recorded really big sounding choral and orchestral works with very complex sound structure. The ability of an audio system to distinguish individual voices out of a large group of voices with an accurate spatial placement of those individual voices is one of the attributes that separates truly high end from ordinary hi-fi. It is easier for small ensembles in an audio system to shine. It is harder for an audio system to achieve the same level of realism with large orchestral and big choir works. The same applies with pipe organ music. It is easier for small pipe organ recordings to sound real, but large pipe organ recordings are harder for an audio system to faithfully reproduce.
JLG,
Sounds very logical.
I have an Elton John track that gets very busy (complex sound structure) & that I’ve used for decades to evaluate an audio-rig’s ability to distinguish individual instruments…it’s only Rock ‘n Roll (but I like it)
So, I need to find me some well recorded choral & orchestral & large pipe organ works then.
Maybe Beethoven’s 9th & Bach’s….you know…that pipe organ one 😉
Beethoven’s 9th yes. Bach organ pieces are not necessarily the most complex. His works have simple, though very sophisticated, polyphonic lines and are often performed on small to medium size organs using only a few ranks per manual. More complex organ repertoire was developed later, such as during the French Romantic period performed on Cavaille Coll organs of much larger size in cavernous Cathedrals.
Thanks 😉