What to play a sceptic?
Posted by: MerryDance on 11 December 2004
Most of us are familiar with comments from friends and family who aren't into Hi-Fi (and let's face it most aren't)along the lines of "What are all those black boxes for?". "Can't you hide the speakers in the wall?" "I wouldn't be able to hear the difference" and perhaps most discomfiting of all "How much ?" "No- you're kidding.Let's have a listen then."
Now the tricky bit -what to play? Ideally I would go for their favourite music if I have it but usually they're not really into music much.So I would try and play something they're familiar with such as Beatles -And I love her and hope to open their eyes and ears to what's possible on a good system. I find you only have one shot at this as the subject quickly changes.Anything too busy or "hi-fi" has them cowering in the corner. So suggestions please-if you're forced to play something for a non believer and hope to convince them that you're not really mad and haven't wasted a colossal amount of money what would you play?
Now the tricky bit -what to play? Ideally I would go for their favourite music if I have it but usually they're not really into music much.So I would try and play something they're familiar with such as Beatles -And I love her and hope to open their eyes and ears to what's possible on a good system. I find you only have one shot at this as the subject quickly changes.Anything too busy or "hi-fi" has them cowering in the corner. So suggestions please-if you're forced to play something for a non believer and hope to convince them that you're not really mad and haven't wasted a colossal amount of money what would you play?
I think the worst thing is when this happens and your system's having an 'off' day or the transformers choose that moment to go into full on 'buzz' mode.... 
Hi john,what I've done in the past is to just ask them to look through the cd/lp racks, while I pour the wine, & pick their own choice.One of the more frequent responses is that they had never heard lp's sound so good(compared to cd's& their own record players,I guess).Most will begrudgingly admit that it all sounds great,but they're not all that bothered.Some may then ask to listen to a choice of mine, & I'll put on something that they've not heard before, but not too far from their own musical taste,& ask them how easy it was to follow the different instruments,etc,not just how much bass/how many watts per channel,etc('cos i honestly don't know). I've got a friend who is in the process of buying a converted warehouse,& wants to spend £15k on an integrated system for AV, music,plus having it put all through the house.I took him to a well respected dealer, & they spent a good deal of time going through the options.At the end of the day,when I asked him how he felt about value for money,& the step-up from his existing £500 surround-sound system, he said that he didn't think that the £5k AV system was 10 times better than what he already had (the law of diminishing returns 
I think), & the bit of kit that he liked the most were the remote & wall mounted control-panels!!He just loves gadgets, & doesn't care that much for quality sound reproduction.I guess he'll end up down the bang&olufsen route,& he'll be happy,which is I guess what ultimately matters.I've found preaching the gospel is a no-no,& only ever gained but a few converts.I think they all go home & say "I've got a mate who's spent x-amount on his stereo.It sounds bloody great,but he must be mad-there's no way I would ever do that!)Then again,I bloody hate golf Cheers, matt
I think), & the bit of kit that he liked the most were the remote & wall mounted control-panels!!He just loves gadgets, & doesn't care that much for quality sound reproduction.I guess he'll end up down the bang&olufsen route,& he'll be happy,which is I guess what ultimately matters.I've found preaching the gospel is a no-no,& only ever gained but a few converts.I think they all go home & say "I've got a mate who's spent x-amount on his stereo.It sounds bloody great,but he must be mad-there's no way I would ever do that!)Then again,I bloody hate golf Cheers, mattMy first "good" system was 3.5/Flat/102/NAPSC/140/RoydAlbions, and over a couple of years I gradually upgraded it its current CDS2/XPS/52/Super/2*135/RoydRR3. Throughout this period, my best friend's wife had numerous opportunities to hear it. She never bothered to say that she wasn't impressed, which she figured was only polite. She also was open to the possibility that she just didn't "get it", like the rest of us seemed to do.
However, when I upgraded my source from CDX to a CDS2, she approached me and commented that she hadn't been overly impressed before, but now it sounded great. That's why "Source First" is the best philosophy when upgrading your system. You'll get the most "magic" from that approach.
As to what music to play, choosing one of their favorites can turn out to be good or bad. Prior to getting an über-system, I had "predicted" how my CDs should sound on a good system. This is how I knew to keep upgrading my system. Until it met my expectations for most of my CDs, I wasn't finished climbing the ladder.
During this upgrade madness, I realized that many CDs sounded like crap. Either they're destined to always sound that way (including many popular CDs), or their poorly mastered. Yet on lesser systems, you often don't realize this, because all CDs sound equally crappy (or at least closer than they do on a more revealing system). Just as I developed an internal expectation of what these CDs "really" sounded like, so will your friends. This makes choosing a CD rather difficult.
Paul Simon's "Graceland" was a perfect example of this phenomenon. It's an old favorite of mine, but I had never gotten around to playing it on my system (too many new CDs). A friend asked to listen to it to audition my system. When I put it on, it sounded awful: compressed, bandwidth-limited, and dead. Needless to say, my friend wasn't impressed.
Fortunately, he was also opened-minded enough to let me spin a few other discs, and in the end he liked what he heard. Since then, "Graceland" has been remastered, and the new version sounds much better. (Now it sounds as good as I expected it should, enough though I got to know the album mostly from listening to a pre-recorded cassette on a crappy car stereo.
)
The moral of this story is that picking their favorite is ok, but only if you know that it will shine. Otherwise, go for the "well-recorded, female vocal" suggestion. It's pleasant enough for anyone to enjoy, and usually sounds quite good.
Unless you know that they hate her, Diana Krall is usually a good choice. Yes, many people have decided she's awful, mostly because she's popular. They come up with myriad reasons why, but it's her popularity that makes them search for the other complaints. Even the Krall haters will likely admit that she sounds good on your system.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
However, when I upgraded my source from CDX to a CDS2, she approached me and commented that she hadn't been overly impressed before, but now it sounded great. That's why "Source First" is the best philosophy when upgrading your system. You'll get the most "magic" from that approach.
As to what music to play, choosing one of their favorites can turn out to be good or bad. Prior to getting an über-system, I had "predicted" how my CDs should sound on a good system. This is how I knew to keep upgrading my system. Until it met my expectations for most of my CDs, I wasn't finished climbing the ladder.
During this upgrade madness, I realized that many CDs sounded like crap. Either they're destined to always sound that way (including many popular CDs), or their poorly mastered. Yet on lesser systems, you often don't realize this, because all CDs sound equally crappy (or at least closer than they do on a more revealing system). Just as I developed an internal expectation of what these CDs "really" sounded like, so will your friends. This makes choosing a CD rather difficult.
Paul Simon's "Graceland" was a perfect example of this phenomenon. It's an old favorite of mine, but I had never gotten around to playing it on my system (too many new CDs). A friend asked to listen to it to audition my system. When I put it on, it sounded awful: compressed, bandwidth-limited, and dead. Needless to say, my friend wasn't impressed.
Fortunately, he was also opened-minded enough to let me spin a few other discs, and in the end he liked what he heard. Since then, "Graceland" has been remastered, and the new version sounds much better. (Now it sounds as good as I expected it should, enough though I got to know the album mostly from listening to a pre-recorded cassette on a crappy car stereo.
)The moral of this story is that picking their favorite is ok, but only if you know that it will shine. Otherwise, go for the "well-recorded, female vocal" suggestion. It's pleasant enough for anyone to enjoy, and usually sounds quite good.
Unless you know that they hate her, Diana Krall is usually a good choice. Yes, many people have decided she's awful, mostly because she's popular. They come up with myriad reasons why, but it's her popularity that makes them search for the other complaints. Even the Krall haters will likely admit that she sounds good on your system.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
quote:
Originally posted by graham55:
Schubert's "Unnfinished" Symphony is absolutely f****ing matchless: growling low cellos to start, followed by an orchestra....
G
Don't try this on a potential partner though.
You might be better of with "The Trout" when you really don't want to "pack them off home".
Nime
quote:
Originally posted by paul_g:
Why does she attract such hostility ? - this should in my opinion be reserved for the obnoxious turd she has for some bizarre reason chosen to marry - although I must confess that the heavily Costello-influenced "Look of Love" album is outstandingly good (he's still a turd though !)
Why does anything "popular" automatically get panned by the "illuminati"? My only good answer is that those smarties like to set themselves apart. If they admit to liking something that everyone else does, then they're no better than the great, unwashed masses.
Of course, there is something to be said for the popular stuff needing to be easier to digest, and as such, it often isn't sufficiently challenging for those who like to be challenged. Does Diana Krall fit into this basket? Probably, but then again, so does most jazz. IMO, "challenging" jazz is often merely unappealing noise. It's great for stroking your chin, and that's about it.
The best stuff has real substance for those who like to chew, yet is presented in a manner that is palatable for the masses. A good example is The Beatles. In the Jazz world, Miles Davis' "Kind of Blue" fits the bill rather well.
BTW, I have much more respect for Elvis Costello than for Diana Krall. But of course, that's just my opinion.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-