Jump to content

Allan F

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Allan F

  1. I like many genres of music including and, perhaps, especially "so-called pop music", But I must confess that I don't have a clue of what he is talking about when he speaks of "tuning into each space, one after another, round and round..." BTW, George, pop music is not nearly as unidimensional as you would portray it. In fact, there are a great many good acoustic pop recordings that sound anything but "artificial". Perhaps you have allowed your hatred of electric guitars to dictate your opinion of all pop music. 🙂
  2. Well, I'm not sure that it's obvious to you know who. 🙂
  3. I would agree with the following amendment: Good recordings sound, as much as possible, like live acoustic instruments played in a real space. As you know, George, this is Harry Pearson's classic definition of "the absolute sound". It is an ideal or goal that is never attained, but the closer the sound of a recording approaches it, the higher its fidelity. And high fidelity is what it's all about!
  4. More importantly, how is any of it relevant to the topic of the thread?
  5. Those older DACs offered less resolution and some tended to favour, to at least some extent, warmth over accuracy. But, they were "musical". I don't know if you would still prefer the sound of those DACs today if you could hear and compare it to the sound of music produced by the T+A DAC 8 DSD and HQP at DSD512. I don't believe that audio memory is retained over lengthy periods of time.
  6. To what extent do the conventional measurements generally performed on audio equipment really measure sound "quality", and are their additional measurements that can better inform us of it? By "quality", I do not mean in the common usage of how good it is, but rather the unique tonal characteristics of particular sounds, such as the timbre of musical instruments. In the same vein, how much do measurements using fixed tones correlate to the dynamic characteristics of the sound of music?
  7. And the answer is...? (I know, I know, it was a rhetorical question.)
  8. And it can't be blamed on expectation bias.
  9. FWIW, I have used both Caig DeoxIT Contact Cleaner spray and DeoxIT Gold spray for years and have neither experienced nor heard of any long term deleterious effects resulting from doing so. Neither product leaves any grunge on connectors. Caig currently offers a wide range of products for electronic equipment and their website contains several product selection guides. Caig website
  10. Alex There were two different SACD issues of the Norah Jones album. The later one was a genuine hi-res DSD offering created from the original master. I may be wrong, but I believe that it is the one you have.
  11. Your post is a better example of an objectivist misrepresenting both the intent and content of what I wrote. I will not elaborate further, as I will no longer be a party to your disingenuousness.
  12. If the SACD was, in fact, created from a 16/44 master, it's a ripoff. You are paying SACD prices for hi-res DSD and you are not getting it. Years ago, there was a scandal regarding a Norah Jones SACD that was created from the 16/44 CD master.
  13. Why don't you tell us what you really think of Margo Timmins and The Trinity Sessions, Jud?
  14. Which may or may not predict sound quality. Most subjectivists don't ignore published measurements. As you suggest, they may use them to limit the products for consideration, e.g. a speaker frequency response curve that falls off a cliff below 60Hz. But their purchase choices are based on trusting their ears. And when it comes to the controversial topic of cables, measurements if they are indeed even available, tell us little. The majority of people who enjoy this hobby have neither the equipment nor the knowledge - or the desire to obtain them - in order to use measurements as a diagnostic tool.
  15. Some people obviously have far too much time free time on their hands.
  16. I guess that the above tells us all we need to know about where you are coming from.😉 Fact Check: The whistleblower wasn't used to impeach Trump; Trump's own words and actions were used to impeach him. End of political discussion.
  17. With respect, I think that you may be missing an important distinction between the different reasons for anonymity. Anonymity properly serves to protect individuals such as whistleblowers from retaliation or retribution. Without that protection, there is a strong disincentive to come forward. OTOH, the cloak of anonymity is often used to hide the identity of an attacker, the cowardice referred to in the NY Times piece. The issue is whether anonymity is being used as a shield or a weapon. It is justified in the former case but is to be decried in the latter.
  18. This New York Times piece by Richard Bernstein appeared almost a dozen years ago. The growing cowardice of online anonymity
  19. I did not intend to imply any such correlation. I certainly agree that price is in no way a guarantee of sound quality. My post assumes that the buyer has satisfied himself that the more expensive product does, in fact, sound better. Within product lines from reputable well established manufacturers known for sound quality, their more expensive lines almost invariably sound better than less expensive ones. And it is in that context that my comment regarding price/performance and diminishing returns arises.
  20. I can't offer any examples from personal experience. But I place a high value on the credibility of people like designer John Curl, who virtually always expresses reservations about the relationship between measurements and sound quality in his talks at seminars. He offers examples of electronic components that measure the same, but do not sound the same. While measurements obviously play a very important role in his design process, the fine tuning that results in his final designs is always the product of listening.
  21. Aesthetics aside, the most obvious answer is because it sounds better to them. How much an individual is willing to pay for diminishing returns is a personal decision, based on how important it is to them and, presumably, their ability to pay for it.
  22. Is that really the issue? They may want to believe this, but they know that measurements do not necessarily predict sound quality. Listening remains the final arbiter. 🙂
  23. The irony of those objectivists, who refuse to accept a reasonable code of civil conduct, presenting themselves as victims is truly palpable.
  24. There's another element at play here, George, As you know, those who insist that sonic differences are impossible, readily dismiss all experiences of those hear them as "expectation bias". However, they ignore the fact that expectation bias can work both ways, i.e. if you are convinced that there can be no sonic difference, you won't hear it if it's there. That is not to say that expectation bias does not exist. It does, but it cannot possibly explain sonic differences heard repeatedly over extended and different listening sessions.
  • Create New...