Have your say & ask the experts

The jargon I have most trouble penetrating is descriptors used for sound. I think I understande but am not sure. I was going to go into a protracted narrative about this....but I think I'll spare you that.

Instead, I will add a table of a selection of terms to get things going, provide context (from the mag) and offer forum members/staff the opportunity to provide the definition. I will maintain the OP to include the definitions as they are supplied. Moreover, if posters would like to suggest other terms (complete with context from the mag), I will maintain the table.

Alternatively, if I'm the only one who finds this difficult, I'll let this thread die.

Note: please do not use one term to define another.

 It was a quiet evening in the Schloss Pro, and talk turned to...

By the way, what the hell does transparent mean anyway?

[quote user="PJPro"]By the way, what the hell does transparent mean anyway?[/quote]

See-through. So "...Vocal clarity increased and became more transparent..." is probably tautology, as something becoming clearer would suggest increased transparency. Clearly.

So you can see my problem. How does one apply this in the context of sound?

"The vocal clarity increased and became more see-through....".

I'm struggling to understand what the reviewer is trying to tell me.

EDIT: sorry your thread changed while I was posting.

[quote user="PJPro"]EDIT: sorry your thread changed while I was posting.[/quote]

I do that occasionally, in the quest for greater clarity, transparency and insight. 

We ran a 'how to speak hi-fi' page on 15 of our recent Ultimate Guide to Hi-fi, covering these terms:

Ambience; Attack; Depth; Detail; Dynamics; Frequency Range; Openness; Space; Soundstaging; Timing. 

Give us a day or so and we'll post it up here, too. 

[quote user="JohnDuncan"]Can we draw a veil over this?[/quote]

No because then someone would change an interconnect or something, and it would be like a veil had been lifted from the music (Great hi-fi reviewing cliches of our time, no. 27)

[quote user="JohnDuncan"]Can we draw a veil over this?[/quote]

No because then someone would change an interconnect or something, and it would be like a veil had been lifted from the music (Great hi-fi reviewing cliches of our time, no. 27)

Interconnects can't do that. I can prove it (but choose not to).

See also 'window flung open on the music', 'trouser-flapping bass' (which is of course dated by the very nature of its cultural reference) and 'inky black acoustic backdrop'. 

See also 'trouser-flapping bass' (which is of course dated by the very nature of its cultural reference)

[quote user="JohnDuncan"]Can we draw a veil over this?[/quote]

No because then someone would change an interconnect or something, and it would be like a veil had been lifted from the music (Great hi-fi reviewing cliches of our time, no. 27)

Interconnects can't do that. I can prove it (but choose not to).[/quote] nope i have the definitive proof (cant remember which way it proves) but have lost it in one of my large boxes in which i keep strange things (vanman is in there somewhere too)!

We ran a 'how to speak hi-fi' page on 15 of our recent Ultimate Guide to Hi-fi, covering these terms:

Ambience; Attack; Depth; Detail; Dynamics; Frequency Range; Openness; Space; Soundstaging; Timing. 

Give us a day or so and we'll post it up here, too. 

 Have to be after the weekend now, as I stripped the copy out of the page but forgot to bring the file home with me. Sorry!