For me, the process of evaluating upgrades begins with my state of mind. Whenever I am burdened with stress, overcome with ‘negative’ emotions, feeling elated etcetera I do not make any decisions: I prefer to leave this for a time when I feel calm and rational.
The process begins with choosing tracks that I know very well and I avoid over analysing. The difference should be audible without someone else, for example a sales representative pointing out differences. In addition, I do not buy into the marketing material/hype because this can prejudice/influence my perception. Furthermore, I do not consider it to be an upgrade merely based on a group of ‘respected’ members because there would appear to be a considerable amount of shoulder rubbing on this forum.
In the event that I consider it to be an upgrade, I leave it to rest for a while and then revisit at a later date for reaffirmation. Blind listening also takes place whenever I am uncertain and I like to take my time: there is no hurry for me to post ‘glowing’ reviews about night and day differences that may influence other members.
And therein lies a problem! Many times I have bought shoes that when tried on in a shop have been extremely comfortable, including spending far longer doing that than anyone else ever seems to in order to try to be certain, yet when I then have worn them for hours in real life they have caused me no end of trouble.
I try to ignore any HiFi pro’s and con’s and just focus on which option is more musically enjoyable. That seems to work out best in the long run.
I do think we are all different in how we experience music and have different sensitivies (for me it’s timing) which makes it vital to decide for oneself.
What makes it hard is occassionally when the musical strengths are split between two options. That’s not so easy cos I always want the best of both worlds.
The method I use is active listening - its the same for evaluating hifi equipment and differences in masters.
Listen to a piece of music you know well, although it doesn’t need to be - I just find it easier. Write down what you like about it and what you note in its presentation, does it grab you, if so why - the style of the playing- the balance of the mix, the microphone technique, the acoustic of a hall, a part of the orchestra, the bass playing etc. Its important to summarise and write down as you memory is unreliable in this regard
Repeat for several pieces of music you like
Have a gap of at least 30 minutes - and then listen to the music again with the new equipment or master… look at the notes you wrote - how do you reconcile them now - is it the same or different - if different why is it so - has the enjoyment of that music changed - again write down your observations.
After having done this for a dozen pieces of music or so - you may start to see a pattern emerge - or no pattern at all. The former suggests that there has been a material change, the latter suggests that although there might be presentational changes there is no real SQ change.
I have found this an effective way of evaluating replay equipment - and it, in my opinion, helps remove erroneous superficial presentation changes which can lead to bad decisions and regrets - and finally it is rooted in music appreciation and enjoyment
Using a wide choice of music has helped.
As well as the favourites that you would want to play and enjoy an upgrade of listening quality. Finding some cacophonous modern jazz that seems to make more sense, or something slow and low that might have been boring and unengaging becomes interesting.
This could mean a more wider window of music to discover in the future after the dust has settled. I wouldn’t want an upgrade that editorialised replay.
Some upgrades stand out in my mind particularly. I was blown away going from nap42 hicap to 52 and again from 52 to 552. These were the biggest I can remember, totally night and day.
Any others anyone wants to share?
I certainly wouldn’t say going from NAC52 to NAC552DR was as clear as night and day, just more refined, perhaps. That said, I do believe the NAC52 is a very capable pre amp. Now if you want BIG improvements, I’d suggest: a) NAC82+2xHiCap to NAC82+Supercap; and b) 2xNAP135 to NAP500.
No upset caused. It’s just that when I installed the 552 I realised just how good the 52 was in comparison to its replacement. I would not have described that as a night and day difference.
You didn’t respond to Indicate if this is the same as Linn’s Tune-Dem method?
In other threads @Peder refers to Tune-Dem, which is what I assumed he meant when he said this:
Though he hasn’t yet come to this thread to offer his wisdom and experience to people who may not have been interested in the cable threads.
If yours is indeed the same method, I wonder if you’re able to respond to the query that he hasn’t answered, as outlined in the penultimate paragraph of post 5 in this thread?
…in fact, I think that Tune-dem, as practised by Linn, has changed over the years. In the 1980s it concerned being best able to follow the tune and all of the musicians contribution to the tune together. More recently I think that the emphasis has been changed to following the rhythm and tune of the bass, with the objective being to facilitate the setting of Space Optimisation. I use the 1980s version as it sets the music up as a whole…I don’t use SO as I think that it detracts from the music. As always, my interpretation and findings only. In any case, I do not think that it is necessary to strictly follow someone’s pre-determined process…usually we all know when we have hit ‘the sweet-spot’.
Best to All…lockdown seems to be a good time to discover new music!
I’m really not sure I have a method or would want one. I tend to use the same recordings because I love the performances and they have an aspect which is critical for me in way or another - a voice, a complex interplay, a crucial transition… Then I listen and observe what happens to me. That’s partly because I was once listening very critically, comparing the same recording on CD and LP and the two were very, very close as far as my head could tell me. Except for some reason one was more moving than the other. It just got to me more. So whereas I appreciate the idea of tune dem, for example, and may use it as a technique in comparisons, I tend to just listen to the music.
The touchstone is always the live performance and the sound of classical instruments in particular. But once I find something that can reproduce them in a way that makes a purchase conceivable I will move through all genres I like, from jazz to reggae, rock, psytrance and so on, often causing dealers considerable discomfort, particularly from the drum machine on the Thompson Twins’ Musette with Drums…
Sometime, dealers make suggestions of their own - and this has brought me to know some wonderful new music.
It sounds like a long process, but listening for instrumental tone, timbre and texture in the beginning means I often rule stuff out within a matter of minutes. I find it surprising how much gear gets female voice, piano, violin and cello quite simply wrong…