Confession -

[E-minor7]

I hereby admit that I'm a fool with strings. I can't really compare.

The 2 progressing parameters, steel fading and ears gettin' used to new sound represents a cross-paradox for me.

Then add that how hard it is to remember the previous set at the same curve(s).

It's embarrassing, but too often I'm not sure what I hear.

 

Anyone recognize this or am I Mister Semi Stringlame ?

 

 

Got the thread idea while commenting on EA's '69 C&W - had an urge to get it out for a long time. Now it's done -

[EuroAussie]

I have to admit that I think its more difficult to tell when youre listening to an Audio sample. Once it all gets processed, compressed and spat out its probably hard to tell.

 

But, when playing the guitar, when its in your hands, and your playing with your own style and feel I can tell a difference straight away, as I imagine most of us do.

 

When looking into your PC, probably a different story when I think about it now ...

[j45nick]

It's a well-established fact that our aural memory is generally terrible. The only valid A-B comparisons are those made in near-real time, as has been done here recently on several occasions. Even differences in playing techinique, recording technique, or songs played can have a big difference in the way we perceive sound.

 

I haven't given up on trying to make these differentiations, but I take them with a grain of salt, particularly when it comes to choosing between guitars hanging on the shelf of a guitar store, or deciding what strings I like.

 

When it comes to strings, most sound pretty good when they are new, although they can certainly sound different from each other, and not all strings go well with all guitars. What matters to me is how they sound in a couple of weeks, since I'm too lazy to change strings every week.

[E-minor7]

I have to admit that I think its more difficult to tell when youre listening to an Audio sample. Once it all gets processed, compressed and spat out its probably hard to tell.

 

But, when playing the guitar, when its in your hands, and your playing with your own style and feel I can tell a difference straight away, as I imagine most of us do.

 

When looking into your PC, probably a different story when I think about it now ...

 

I know and admire your sharp senses on the topic and always read your words with interest. Even bought a handful of DR's at some point.

[E-minor7]

What matters to me is how they sound in a couple of weeks, since I'm too lazy to change strings every week.

 

Uuuuooohhh, , , I go much further than that. 2 weeks (of course depending on hours) to me is when the new strings meet the guitar and they get real together.

I typically keep a set on between 1-1/2 and 3 months - sometimes a half or even a whole year if steel and wood is a good marriage.

[stein]

I have to admit that I think its more difficult to tell when youre listening to an Audio sample. Once it all gets processed, compressed and spat out its probably hard to tell.

 

But, when playing the guitar, when its in your hands, and your playing with your own style and feel I can tell a difference straight away, as I imagine most of us do.

 

When looking into your PC, probably a different story when I think about it now ...

Downstairs here I use a laptop.

 

And it really DOES make accoustics have that "Taylor" sound.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

I hear ya E-minor7

 

I just 5 min's ago finished cleaning and re-stringing my 'Bird... A new set of strings are always going to sound ' different', same brand or not. Admittedly I don't experiment much with strings, but if the store has ran out of my usual brand I go for another.. no big deal with me.

 

I don't like the sound of new strings either..... like at least a few hours playing them in...and will leave a set on for a few months at a time too.

 

Stein

 

that made me laugh a ..my Bird sounds a little Taylor -ish right now...with the brand spanking D'Arrdios.

 

I think it is hard to really tell a big difference in hearing different brands.. but as EA say's the player can tell more maybe..a lot is to do with how they FEEL.. no ?

[EuroAussie]

Downstairs here I use a laptop.

 

And it really DOES make accoustics have that "Taylor" sound.

 

So does that mean when listening to a Taylor on a laptop it will make it sound like a Gibson, sort of reverse polarity .. ?

[stein]

It's a well-established fact that our aural memory is generally terrible. The only valid A-B comparisons are those made in near-real time, as has been done here recently on several occasions. Even differences in playing techinique, recording technique, or songs played can have a big difference in the way we perceive sound.

 

 

This is true. As a self-proclaimed "golden ears" Audiophile, I can back this up.

 

In a real A-B comparism, it is not only IF there is a difference, but indentifying what the difference(s) is. You could also express this as "percieving" a difference, or "confirming" a difference. And, I find that it takes at LEAST 2 times going back and forth to indentify/confirm differences. So even being practiced at it, the memory of even what was just listened to doesn't last or get ingrained enough to survive through another listen.

 

For example, say "bass". If the second sample is percieved as having more bass than the first, it may have, or it may be something else, like scooped mids. But we can usually be sure if we have focused on it, then go back again, and be sure. I believe it is because in order to remember a sound, we have to place it SOMEWHERE in order to remember it. As in, catagorized it in our heads.

 

There are many that say that "blind" are the more accurate, and the only proof, as if to avoid perceptions and snake oil. But listening test where it's done blind usually take much longer and more back and forth. WHY? because the listener usually identifies which is which and is only able to keep track AFTER he has listened enough identifying differences to be sure of which is playing at what time. The idividual results, of WHAT is different and why are always the same, it just takes longer to get there. And blind test usually always start the same way: with the listener FIRST getting straight in his head which is which.

 

I believe that rather than having an actual memory of sound, what we remember is how we feel, our impressions, and the effects on us when we "remember" sound. We then recreate the experience in our heads.

[stein]

So does that mean when listening to a Taylor on a laptop it will make it sound like a Gibson, sort of reverse polarity .. ?

No, but perhaps playing a recording of a Taylor through a stereo might make it seem like a Gibson.

[fortyearspickn]

Thanks EM7. Finally coming out of the string closet! I felt like I was the only one who, every time I changed string found the new ones too "Taylor like". By the time they got broken in, I couldn't remember what the old set sounded like. So I gave up trying to find "the perfect string" years ago. Especially seeing no agreement 'hear'!

All you have to do is buy two different sets of strings, say Elixers and D'Addario. Pull out a the same string from each set. Say the B, and string one up on the A tuning peg and the other brand on the B tuning peg. Tune up to pitch. Play one, then play the other. Repeat plucking until you can tell the difference. Then keep plucking until you can decide which you prefer.

Of course, use the same material for bridge pins!

I've suggested a fool proof way to test, compare A/B for ourself here though, in a previous thread on "Do bone bridge pins sound better than plastic?" If you are really bored, you can then test plastic vs bone pins. Just use an identical brand string. Buy two set s of Elixers. String up the high and low Es using plastic for one and bone for the other.

Foolproof, scientific way to settle these two burning questions. For Your Ears Only, of course, since you might prefer one sound, and your mate the other. Or, need I point out - a third choice! Say, Black Diamond.

[stein]

The whole Taylor/laptop thing:

 

We used to have both computers down here, and I would usually use Gwennies PC and she would play games on mine.

 

One day, while listening to one of EA's famous "listen to this what do you think" threads, while FOCUSED on the sound of this Gibson vs. that Gisbon, I was kicked off the computer and had to shift to the laptop.

 

Going from PC to laptop with the same sound sample, It sounded and felt just like a "Gibson vs Taylor" comparism. All the elements were there in the playing, the warth, etc, it had just been truncated and refined to the treble. Sounded good, but like a good Taylor.

 

Seriously, try it. It works.

[ChrisA83]

I'm pretty sure they all sound the same

 

 

*stands back*

[EuroAussie]

The whole Taylor/laptop thing:

 

We used to have both computers down here, and I would usually use Gwennies PC and she would play games on mine.

 

One day, while listening to one of EA's famous "listen to this what do you think" threads, while FOCUSED on the sound of this Gibson vs. that Gisbon, I was kicked off the computer and had to shift to the laptop.

 

Going from PC to laptop with the same sound sample, It sounded and felt just like a "Gibson vs Taylor" comparism. All the elements were there in the playing, the warth, etc, it had just been truncated and refined to the treble. Sounded good, but like a good Taylor.

 

Seriously, try it. It works.

 

Stein, but when you say going from PC to laptop, did you mean listening first through external PC speakers, then internal speakers in laptop ?

 

Because if thats the case then of course the laptop speakers will sound ridicolous, but if you compared external PC speakers to say laptop through headphones it would be a different story now, wouldnt it ?

[stein]

Stein, but when you say going from PC to laptop, did you mean listening first through external PC speakers, then internal speakers in laptop ?

 

Because if thats the case then of course the laptop speakers will sound ridicolous, but if you compared external PC speakers to say laptop through headphones it would be a different story now, wouldnt it ?

Haven't tried headphones. Maybe I can get that "Gibson tone" that way. Maybe even, dare I say, with a clip of a Taylor?

 

But yea, just the laptop speaks.

 

Go on, try it. Get your "Taylor" on. It works.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

Stein, but when you say going from PC to laptop, did you mean listening first through external PC speakers, then internal speakers in laptop ?

 

Because if thats the case then of course the laptop speakers will sound ridicolous, but if you compared external PC speakers to say laptop through headphones it would be a different story now, wouldnt it ?

 

Can also depend on other factors EA

 

Like what sound card is in the PC and what sound card is in the laptop..

 

another big factor that will colour your sound is what media player you use... for instance Windows media player will sound completely different than another.. I have started using AIMP2 for music on my laptop.

 

It is classed as one of the best for music on computers..and is very small and compact program.. it is a free download.. you should try it out..I was quite taken aback from the improvement in sound quality over say Windows Media Player

[EuroAussie]

..I was quite taken aback from the improvement in sound quality over say Windows Media Player

 

I use a Mac ...

[j45nick]

The whole Taylor/laptop thing:

 

We used to have both computers down here, and I would usually use Gwennies PC and she would play games on mine.

 

One day, while listening to one of EA's famous "listen to this what do you think" threads, while FOCUSED on the sound of this Gibson vs. that Gisbon, I was kicked off the computer and had to shift to the laptop.

 

Going from PC to laptop with the same sound sample, It sounded and felt just like a "Gibson vs Taylor" comparism. All the elements were there in the playing, the warth, etc, it had just been truncated and refined to the treble. Sounded good, but like a good Taylor.

 

Seriously, try it. It works.

 

What you are listening to/through makes a HUGE difference. In my office at home, I use a PC with a pretty sophisticated high definition audio controller. I have a set of decent Bose speakers attached to the PC, but if I really want to listen to sound critically, I use my Sennheiser PXC 450 headphones attached to the PC. Normally I don't bother with these, and use a multi-purpose music/speech headset since I spend a lot of time on Skype. That relatively cheap headset is adequate for general listening given the typical recording quality you get on youtube.

 

For Mark's 'bird comparisons, however, I switched between the speakers and the two different headsets to see how much difference it made. The short answer is "a whole lot", even with a compressed audio format. If you want to listen to music critically and minimise ambient sound confusion, a PC with a good sound card, listening through a quality set of headphones, is the way to go.

 

I have a similar setup on my number one laptop, which is actually a high end gaming computer, since I need the video processor capability. Using the quality headset on the laptop, compared to the built-in speakers, is like the difference between a Chateau Petrus and a bottle of Three Buck Chuck.

[stein]

compared to the built-in speakers, is like the difference between a Advanced Jumbo and a 814.

Fixed it for ya.

[j45nick]

Fixed it for ya.

 

 

Fair enough.....

[stein]

Funny enough.....

I'm on a roll.

[j45nick]

I'm on a roll.

Aarrggh.....!

[J200_2013]

This is true. As a self-proclaimed "golden ears" Audiophile, I can back this up.

 

In a real A-B comparism, it is not only IF there is a difference, but indentifying what the difference(s) is. You could also express this as "percieving" a difference, or "confirming" a difference. And, I find that it takes at LEAST 2 times going back and forth to indentify/confirm differences. So even being practiced at it, the memory of even what was just listened to doesn't last or get ingrained enough to survive through another listen.

 

For example, say "bass". If the second sample is percieved as having more bass than the first, it may have, or it may be something else, like scooped mids. But we can usually be sure if we have focused on it, then go back again, and be sure. I believe it is because in order to remember a sound, we have to place it SOMEWHERE in order to remember it. As in, catagorized it in our heads.

 

There are many that say that "blind" are the more accurate, and the only proof, as if to avoid perceptions and snake oil. But listening test where it's done blind usually take much longer and more back and forth. WHY? because the listener usually identifies which is which and is only able to keep track AFTER he has listened enough identifying differences to be sure of which is playing at what time. The idividual results, of WHAT is different and why are always the same, it just takes longer to get there. And blind test usually always start the same way: with the listener FIRST getting straight in his head which is which.

 

I believe that rather than having an actual memory of sound, what we remember is how we feel, our impressions, and the effects on us when we "remember" sound. We then recreate the experience in our heads.

 

You gotta wonder if subtle differences in strings (and even tone woods) REALLY make such an appreciable difference, whether in fact the difference is just in the artistry of the guitarist, a kind of player's pathetic fallacy. What struck me is that in double blind tests to identify the Stradivarius, a $2million dollar Strat could seldom be identified as such.

 

See http://www.npr.org/blogs/deceptivecadence/2012/01/02/144482863/double-blind-violin-test-can-you-pick-the-strad

 

Here's the concluding excerpt from one of the double blind tests:

In a test in 2009, the British violinist Matthew Trusler played his 1711 Stradivarius, said to be worth two million U.S. dollars, and four modern violins made by the Swiss violin-maker Michael Rhonheimer. One of Rhonheimer's violins, made with wood that the Empa researcher Francis Schwarze had treated with fungi, received 90 of the 180 votes for the best tone, while the Stradivarius came in second with just 39 votes. The majority (113) of the listeners misidentified the winning violin as the Stradivarius.