"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain Churches" wrote in message


Hmm. In comparisons, brighter, just like louder, is
found by many to be better. One also needs to compare
both with a real clarinet, to decide which sounds more
like the real thing.

The fallacy here is that a clarinet has only one timbre. In fact, its
timbre is highly dependent on its environment.

The clarinet has three very distinctive timbres irrespective
of "environment" (did you mean acoustic?) They are
associated with the three registers: the first, "chalumeau"
up to Bb4 , the second "clarion" from B4 to C6. The third,
altissimo covers about two octaves above C6.
They all sound totally different, irrespective of "environment"
Much of what Keith recorded is clarion.

He achieved a pretty good sound IMO even though he
probably didn't have access to any tutorial info. But he
listens to a lot of good music, and probably hears the clarinet
at home on a daily basis, and so knows how it really
sounds.


A clarinet is made of wood, not glass:-)

Based on the recordings that Iain has brought to us, his monitoring system
is on the bright side. My *reference system* on this PC is a pair of
ATH-M50 headphones, well known for their neutrality.

So you evaluate on headphones?

Try a pair of B+W 802D loudspeakers, the choice of most
UK recording companies.


Again Iain's problem is that he's judging a quick shot for the purpose of
guidance as if it were a finished recording, and probably doing so on a
playback system that would be too bright for me.

An unkinder man than I might suggest that you are piling on the HF
to compensate for hearing loss. I of course, would not
dream of making such a suggestion:-)

Iain