BS in Audio Gear Marketing

[Jim]

New Apogee ad in EM this month - Manny Marroquin on the Rosetta 200:

He uses these words to describe the unit: "sounded bigger", "more depth and transparency", "openess", "others sound compressed and narrow"

These terms have no universally accepted definitions as relates to audio. These terms are about as helpful as describing the product "has the sound of chocolate concrete."

So, what I infer from this, is if you have a product that's essentially no different from the competing products, you start using terms that are meaningless or vague, and hence, immune to argument.

What if I took a contrary view: "I think the unit sounds small, shallow, opaque, closed, neither compressed nor wide."

Gibberish!

They don't sell film or video products this way. Why is the audio equipment industry consumed with so much overblown hype? Are audio equipment consumers that stupid or gullible?

I do realize that a lot of this is subjective. But, if people can't articulate what differentiates their favored product over others, why should they be given any credibility?

If your product is better, tell me why in terms that have some universally accepted definitions. Doing otherwise seems to me to be a low-self-esteem ploy, or designed more to confuse than enlighten.

[Spikey Horse]

I don't quite follow.... I use terms like that all the time - in fact I'm always coming up with new metaphors to describe a sound, a mix, a piece of gear.... I can't see what ids wrong with that per se.....

I guess there's only 3 ways to describe a piece of gear's audio spec:

1- Describe its construction/coding/specs/parameters/components used etc

2- Show the results obtained by another piece of equipment or software, measuring some aspect of its performance, as data.

3- Have some user (sound engineer/reviewer/producer etc) describe how it sounds subjectively.

ALL of the above can be totally meaningless or may totally misrepresent the 'truth' or 'real world' performance etc

Meaningless 'carefully selected' specs can be just as useful, or not, as a reviewer's words or those of a well respected engineer...

But doesn't everyone know what an *advert* is? It's never going to quote someone saying - 'yeah it's OK pice of gear but not much diffferent from X product which is half the price and of course it's new so has untested reliability...'

There is a difference between advert speak and actual lies and if people are just being seduced by some well presented specs, quotes, or a nice shiny picture then no one else is really to blame.

I like the quote from the Simpsons...

Salesman character says to marge simpson who's learning to sell real estate (with straight serious face): remember there's the truth (changes to over the top smile and enthusiasm) and ....'the truth' !!!

[ed belknap]

He uses these words to describe the unit: "sounded bigger", "more depth and transparency", "openess", "others sound compressed and narrow"

These terms have no universally accepted definitions as relates to audio. These terms are about as helpful as describing the product "has the sound of chocolate concrete."

Dude, you absolutely *must* run out to your local newstand and find a copy of Stereophile or The Absolute Sound! Talk about entertainment; if you think Manny Marroquin's adjectives are vague you'll absolutely *love* reading bloated windbags like Harry Pearson, Michael Fremer, Jonathon Valin, or Art Dudley blather on ad nauseum about how so-and-so's new audio product makes music sound more "plummy" or "immediate" or "velvety" or "saturated" or "piquant" etc.

[Jim]

That's another phenomenon I don't quite understand... audiophiles.

It's not unusual to go into an audiophile retail store and find single channel amps for $30K, and speakers at $15-20K each. I don't see the point in getting playback equipment better than what's in the recording and mixing studios that created the recordings.

I've heard those guys talk, and they get excited about hearing a chair squeak in the third movement.

Like all luxury items, there's an exponential price jump for incremental increases in quality. That goes for watches, cars, furniture, etc. The high price comes with bragging rights and snob appeal as well. That's about the only distinction I can detect.

It is funny, in a tragic kind of way, like people who believe in fortune tellers and astrology.

[alphajerk]

it is kinda limited to the field of music innit? can we think of any other industries that do this? i cant think of any.

[yofo]

Don't rag too hard on the audiophiles , at least they are people that want to listen to music. Most of what is selling these days is surround sound home entertainment systems where all people care about is making it sound like their house is blowing up while watching action movies or Big BOOM car systems where all they care about is letting people 2 blocks away hear them. If you ask me , not enough people actually care about quality sound anymore.

[Rizla]

True, the audiophiles have helped keep vinyl alive, and high grade digital formats, I'm glad they're there.

it is kinda limited to the field of music innit? can we think of any other industries that do this? i cant think of any.

I think if you went into an art supply store and wanted a product that would automatically "warm up" or "give depth" to you painting, you'd look like a dope. At GC and other superstores, musicians are encouraged to believe in such magic products, sold by these would-be experts who just took a crash course last week on the GC product line...no, I can't think of an industry like it. Even broadcaster catalogs are a world apart from "pro audio"...

[chrispick]

This thread makes no sense to me.

Adjectives like "openess," "warmth" and "more depth and transparency" are perfectly useful terms when describing audio. In fact, they're terms that engineers and mixer use all the time; they're a part of their vernacular.

Wouldn't you say the sound of your DAW monitors exhibit more openess and depth than, say, the speakers on your clock radio? Likewise, but to a lesser extent, professional audio gear is comparative. Why wouldn't it be?

Granted, writing about music is, as the cliche goes, like dancing about architecture. But you have to describe these qualities in print somehow, right? And hard stats only impart so much meaning.

As to the discussion regarding sales, advertising and their hype: What are we, in the fourth grade? Of course ads over-emphasize a product's strengths and de-emphasize its weaknesses. That's what makes them ads.

[Jim]

This thread makes no sense to me.

Adjectives like "openess," "warmth" and "more depth and transparency" are perfectly useful terms when describing audio. In fact, they're terms that engineers and mixer use all the time; they're a part of their vernacular.

All right, a challenge! OK, mister smarty (and I say this in good humor, because I do respect your opinion), define "openness", "depth" and "warmth" for us, using terms that we can all mutually agree are clear and meaningful.

This is part of my point. I believe the reason these terms have become part of the vernacular is because of the Emperor's New Clothes... herd behaviour.

Likely, people use those terms because they've heard or read others using them. And use of those terms makes one part of a club... The Obfuscater's Club... where others who are similarly at a loss for clear definitions can nod and harummph in agreement.

[Spikey Horse]

All right, a challenge! OK, mister smarty (and I say this in good humor, because I do respect your opinion), define "openness", "depth" and "warmth" for us, using terms that we can all mutually agree are clear and meaningful.

OK even more smarty pants describe the terms "openness", "depth" and "warmth" as used in normal (non musical) everyday context.

YOU CAN'T because they are all quite relative and context/situaton dependant. BUT when you have some information about the subject to which they refer they CAN become meaningful. A warm cup of tea, a warm embrace, a warm compressor. As long as you are familiar with drinking tea, embracing and using different compressors you get the meaning.

IMHO in music gear marketing the main issue is not so much the terms themselves but whether they are lying or not.

[qo]

The UA1176 is 1.0467 warm and .342 transparent. I haven't measured its airiness yet, but it sounds like it might be around 5 or so. The analyser I used hasn't been calibrated in a while so don't quote me.

[chrispick]

This thread makes no sense to me.

Adjectives like "openess," "warmth" and "more depth and transparency" are perfectly useful terms when describing audio. In fact, they're terms that engineers and mixer use all the time; they're a part of their vernacular.

All right, a challenge! OK, mister smarty (and I say this in good humor, because I do respect your opinion), define "openness", "depth" and "warmth" for us, using terms that we can all mutually agree are clear and meaningful.

This is part of my point. I believe the reason these terms have become part of the vernacular is because of the Emperor's New Clothes... herd behaviour.

Likely, people use those terms because they've heard or read others using them. And use of those terms makes one part of a club... The Obfuscater's Club... where others who are similarly at a loss for clear definitions can nod and harummph in agreement.

Okay, stepping up...

• There's an openess to the sound of my new Tannoy speakers; the stereo definition is clearer, allowing me to discern different frequencies better than I could with my junky Rolands which mushed them together.
  
  There seems to be greater depth to the sound too. I'm definitely hearing more frequency below 95-100 hz as well as those in the "air" frequencies. Those got lost with the Rolands
  
  In fact, now I can tell that the compressor I used on the guitar track doesn't quite have the transparency I thought; it's definitely adding subtle harmonics to lower-mid frequencies, giving that track a slight warmth.

So, you see, although these terms might be jargon, they're not of the "Emperor's New Clothes" variety. They actually have pretty specific meanings in the context of "audio-speak."

Every field has its own coinage; it's tedious to constantly site techical stats when a word like "warm" will do. When ads folk want to talk to the people in the nitty-gritty of it -- their target demographic -- they talk that talk.

[epidot68]

This is a great thread. C'mon everyone has gotta admit to buying the next "fix-it-all" piece of gear because of an ad or a friends description using some inane adjective.

I have yet to see an ad that says - "Our stuff is so expensive you will need an equity loan to buy it, but it'll sound 0.00076% better than the cheap stuff and that'll make you more respected in the studio/audiophile community."

I have more cheap crap that sounds harsh and brittle. These words mean "bad", BTW. When I woke up and started buying Apogee converters, using Manley pre-amps, Microtech Gefell mics, and Langevin EQ my stuff started to sound much better.

Now, that is not to say that there isn't some great mid-priced stuff. But, the magazines and the reviews main job is to sell new gear to more people. This is not a bad thing. It'll likely lead to some really interesting music from folks who don't have a lot of extra cash. Will it sometimes be shrill, sharp, non-warm, blah, blah, blah - yes. Okay. It will be music and not more "stuff" that isn't positive.

Let the high end stuff find it's way into the hands of those who know how to use and the other stuff make glorious music of whatever kind in the hands of the folks who are just plain excited to have another method of having fun recording their creative ideas.

And check out Larry Crane's rant at the end of Tape OP's issue #48 to laugh your socks off!

[Jim]

I have yet to see an ad that says - "Our stuff is so expensive you will need an equity loan to buy it, but it'll sound 0.00076% better than the cheap stuff and that'll make you more respected in the studio/audiophile community."

You so get my point. That would be truth in advertising. At least some of the companies who know they're inferior realize that they're best shot to sell gear is to pose a semi-naked stripper holding their product.

Others, sadly like MOTU's recent Traveler ad, promote some hipster saying the product is "dope," as if that's all I need to know before shelling out 3/4 grand on this box. That's a step in the wrong direction, IMO.

Chris, thanks for playing a round here, but strictly speaking, you didn't define the words, you used them in a sentence.

I still can't tell what exactly you or anybody means when you say your new speakers have more openness... It may mean something to you, but I still have no idea what "openness" is as regards audio ephemera. I'm not just yanking your chain, or being devil's advocate, I'm really not any more enlightened. In your context, it sounds like you're describing a wider and less distorted frequency response... those are scientific, repeatable and observeable qualities, and can be judged on a test bench and given universally understood names (wider frequency response... pretty clear what that means).

Here's the dictionary.com definition of "openness"... no mention as pertains to audio quality:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=openness

And I'm not trying to be "opaque" here. I work in the film industry also, and when we tell somebody to "warm up that light", we mean to decrease the color temperature, or make it more red in the spectrum. We talk about "depth" of field. "Depth of field" is in the dictionary. Every shutterbug knows what that is. But, audio doesn't have "depth." It has a wave "length" and other mathematical definitions. The room audio is created in may have depth.

So, again I ask that if you use the converse (or a double negative), have you cleared things up? Would you say your speakers are "not shallow?" I think I got a handle on what "phatness" is... full frequency response, right? Or, is it "robust bottom end?" Maybe I don't get it.

Couldn't other, better, more precise and universal terms be used instead? If so, and you have confidence in your product, why not use them? To do otherwise just gives the appearance of lack of confidence at a minimum, and outright dishonesty at the other extreme, and wise consumers should be aware of those advertisers tactics.

[chrispick]

Chris, thanks for playing a round here, but strictly speaking, you didn't define the words, you used them in a sentence.

I tried to include the definition in my example sentences. Moreover, words are defined by context, right? And sentences provide some context.

But, more to point...

Openness in audio-speak refers to the breadth and definition of frequencies playing simultaneously against each other. If you're playing a CD and you hear instruments playing different frequencies and they don't sound mushed together or dulled, then you can say it has openness. The opposite would be a closed sound, yeah; frequencies sound undefined and mushed together.

Depth refers to the full range of frequencies you can hear. Greater depth mean you can hear more high and low end frequencies (gauged in hertz). Yes, shallow is the opposite of this.

Transparency means the device imparts no perceivable additional distortions, harmonics or overtones. The opposite of this, in audio-speak, is colored. A device that colors the sound (e.g., a compressor) adds harmonics and distortions to the audio signal. Sometimes, this coloration sounds pleasing; sometimes not. It's all about palette, taste and whether or not you want to represent a sound as accurately as possible or if you want to alter it.

Warmth is a more subjective term, granted, but does refer to a range of frequency, specifically boosts in the 200 to 600 hz area and/or dips in the 3 to 7 kHz area (both create similar aural perceptions). More specifically, when audio people talk about tube warmth, they're usually referring to harmonic distortions occurring in those lower frequencies which give the signal some perceived boost. Warmth is, in fact, often an added coloration; it's usually not the result of transparent gear.

So, warmth in audio has some analogy to warmth in color temperature. It can be quantifiably gauged, but usually it's more about perception. Consider: Bringing light color temperatures closer to 5600K doesn't necessarily warm a set dressed entirely in cobalt blue in the eye's of a viewer. There's always the perceptibility factor. All those exact light frequencies are still filtered though subjective eye-to-brain translation. That is, no one sees color the same (some can't see it at all). So, subjective terms come into use.

To wit: Warmth as used in film/tv buzz-speak is kind of incorrect anyway, isn't it? Blue is a hotter color than orange in Kelvin; yet, when you want to warm up a shot, you either boost oranges or dip blues (sound familiar?).

I still can't tell what exactly you or anybody means when you say your new speakers have more openness... It may mean something to you, but I still have no idea what "openness" is as regards audio ephemera. I'm not just yanking your chain, or being devil's advocate, I'm really not any more enlightened. In your context, it sounds like you're describing a wider and less distorted frequency response... those are scientific, repeatable and observeable qualities, and can be judged on a test bench and given universally understood names (wider frequency response... pretty clear what that means).

Yeah, they are scientific, repeatable and observable, of course. And those specific stats are always readily available to audio gear purchasers. Go to any audio gear manufacturer and you'll see plenty of reference to hertz ranges, millimeter throws, ohms, volts, what-have-you. Often, in fact, you can get white papers with all the techno-nitty-gritty you can swallow.

But we're talking about ads, right? When you see a car ad on tv, they drop a few stats on you (e.g., mpg highway/city), but the thrust of the content often pertains to subjective qualities: comfort, thrill, sex appeal, sense of acceleration, etc. Somes of these elements are distinctly quantifiable; some aren't. That's mass advertising. It's, by nature, generalized for broad appeal.

Audio gear print ads are allowed to approach things similarly, aren't they? Just like car info: If you want to know every tech spec legally permitted, you research a little. And I mean a little -- and you'll find all the applicable decimal points.

That said, I still contend that an ad using the word "openness" when referring to aural quality imparts more meaning than you recognize.

Here's the dictionary.com definition of "openness"... no mention as pertains to audio quality:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=openness

And I'm not trying to be "opaque" here. I work in the film industry also, and when we tell somebody to "warm up that light", we mean to decrease the color temperature, or make it more red in the spectrum. We talk about "depth" of field. "Depth of field" is in the dictionary. Every shutterbug knows what that is. But, audio doesn't have "depth." It has a wave "length" and other mathematical definitions. The room audio is created in may have depth.

I've worked in the film industry as well. The last film I worked on was "Hellboy" and not in an audio-related capacity (I was a 3D animator and compositor). And I went to film school at NYU. And I can attest that there's plenty of jargon in that world as well (e.g., my dictionary has no film-related definition of a "stinger," but any gaffer working a set knows what it is). Daily Variety is chock-full of industry buzzwords and coinage, and those in the industry understand it just fine.