Jitter vs no-Jitter

[徐中銳]

An allegory of how jitter decreases « high-fidelity » :

It's like Pooh

Some prefer a bit of Pooh

[Sal1950]

There's High Fidelity and there's Highly Euphonic, High Fidelity = accuracy to source, Highly Euphonic = pleasing to the individual listeners taste. It's your system and you chose which path you choose to follow.

[徐中銳]

Okay, let's ponder « high-fidelity » metaphorically then, my choosing Stella Tennant, will I notice the difference of her (in a non-snapshot situation) modelling counterfeit garments rather than the genuine ?

 

Or if jitter were clothing, rather see her living in settings when nude or clothed ?

 

Surely, it does indeed depend upon our « models » at home.

 

Thus, products from what pedigree and upbringing ?

[Sal1950]

Yuck, She? looks like a little boy in a majority of those photos.

[esldude]

Yuck, She? looks like a little boy in a majority of those photos.

 

+1. Not a model I want at home.

[徐中銳]

Well, representing my generation, I've picked Stella over, say, Kate Moss.

Whether indicative or not of the music released while I grew up, I prefer lithe lean ladies in ballet flats...

 

Perhaps you're into big-breasted curvy, high heeled...

 

And, I might as well show how I've thought about supermodels throughout the past 60 years—when I did some Christmas themed advent graphics, in 2009 to amuse Ken Ishiwata, then later made public :

Linda Fonssagrives

 

 

Twiggy

 

 

Naomi Campbell

[esldude]

Well' date=' representing my generation, I've picked [b']Stella[/b] over, say, Kate Moss.

Whether indicative or not of the music released while I grew up, I prefer lithe lean ladies in ballet flats...

 

Perhaps you're into big-breasted curvy, high heeled...

 

And, I might as well show how I've thought about supermodels throughout the past 60 years—when I did some Christmas themed advent graphics, in 2009 to amuse Ken Ishiwata, then later made public :

 

Everyone likes what they like I guess. You and Ken, any ladies you like, I can say I have no use for, as in no use. Kate Moss, yes. What you are showing as an alternative........a gut level disgust as not being whatsoever attractive. Something that looks like an anorexic adolescent boy is not my idea of a desirable female.

 

[徐中銳]

Of course, Stella's only modelling my generation's fashions, akin to a particular music system playing back recent decades' recordings.

 

And neither of us can say who are Ken's type of ladies. But I can quote the following 2008 Q&A :

As somebody who designs audio equipment, do you have an ultimate goal in design or have you ever gotten close to that?

Ken Ishiwata: If we had the same tastes you would have a problem – you would start fooling around with the same girl (laughs). So it’s the same for the taste for sound as well. You can’t really have “this is it”. When it comes down to the sound character I leave it down to the individual’s taste because they have to know what they want, but our job is scientific accuracy. If you have a soundstage any system you play back should be able to precisely reproduce that. Those fundamentals are a must for me. For example, with this pair of this amp (PM7001KI) and this SACD (SA7001KI) I paid extra attention to the soundstage and I think we’ve made quite a big step. With sound characteristics what I’m trying to do with a single product when you have low frequency to mid-high frequency I try to bring the speed the same, not to have imbalance in the speed. So then the harmony of whatever the music you play back with that amplifier or SACD is till intact. That’s what I try to do.

And his Japan based colleague's 2003 Q&A :

So there was no unified Marantz sound back then?

Ryuichi Sawada: To the public I am sure there was a 'Marantz' sound, but within Marantz you could tell who had developed each product. Also, a lot of the amplifier engineers never grasped the intricacies of speakers properly, which made it hard for them to put the finishing touches on an upcoming amplifier. To complete amplifier development, you ultimately have to listen to it with many different speakers, but the most important thing is to vision and define how you want the amplifier to sound.

Also, the sound the market wants changes over time, or perhaps it is the sound the engineers want that changes and is redefined over time. For example, a certain age wanted an energetic sound and another age wanted an airy sound.

There have also been changes within the company, when Philips was working closely with Polygram, and when we decided to distribute B&W speakers in Japan. It has been a very good learning experience to adapt to these changes, and I have found out that no matter how requirements change, you have to maintain your belief in the kind of sound you want.

 

What kind of sound is Marantz after right now, or is trying to maintain?

Ryuichi Sawada: That's quite hard to define in my own words, but its a sound that has plenty of information, with high resolution and excellent signal-to-noise performance. However, it shouldn't sound sterile or employ damping to soften or kill the sound in any way.

It's basically a well-informed sound with lots of information, but as you try to achieve it, it becomes more and more sensitive, and the environment you listen in and how you use the equipment becomes more of a factor in the equation.

This is unavoidable as far as I see it, and judging by the feedback I receive from Marantz customers, they have a strong desire to listen to good sound.

I would like to honour their wishes and create products that perform to these levels, allowing the user to really dig in to the sound.