Jump to content

Ajax

  • Content Count

    869
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ajax

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Sydney

Recent Profile Visitors

8516 profile views
  1. Hi everyone, A thoughtful & well constructed article from Archimago. http://archimago.blogspot.com I would urge those wishing to get value for their hard earn dollar to take note of his comments on all "hi-res" offerings but in particular those analogue recordings made prior to digital i.e. prior to the late 80's. Pls don't waste your money buying 24/96 (or 24/192) of classic rock from the 70's and 80's. All you are doing is buying a bigger shell for the same size oyster.
  2. Hi Paul, Boy, you sure are a sucker for punishment I have followed this thread with interest and despite the illogical, and at times personal attacks (on Amir), at no stage can I fault your demeanour. I really don't know how you do it. My experience has been that you will never convince any of these guys that they need measurements because they have the potential to undermine "their" hobby. Who wants to be told that they just spent a heap of doe on a piece of gear that doesn't do anything. Who wants to look like a fool? What confuses me is that A
  3. Hi Everyone, Result from the listening tests below. However, I don't anticipate it will change many people's thinking as time and time again human beings will pick the emotional outcome, or what feels good, over what is rational. What is important for those subjectives amongst us is that Mark Waldrep (Dr Aix) was originally of the view that Hi-res was necessary.i.e. if anything his bias was towards Hi-res, not what his findings show. (I'm taking about playback here, not the extra headroom 24 bit affords while recording). From his email below:
  4. Hi Paul, I'm not sure if my attitude is "so negative", however, I truly believe most people, whether they are audiophiles or whatever, allow their emotions to dictate their actions. That is why your thread is so welcome as bias MUST dictate how we perceive the world or a piece of audio equipment. To not acknowledge that we all influenced by what we are told to expect or what see as well as what we hear is full hardy. In my post above I stated "I would also commend those looking for a more rational approach to audio reproduction to view Archimago's Musings' blog and the
  5. Hi Paul, Your intent in establishing this blog is honourable, and your patience while attempting to enlighten the naysayers such as Alex has been exemplary. Unfortunately the majority of people (not all) put their emotions and beliefs first and will often cherry pick or alter the facts to match them. Very few take a rational approach to a subject that has feelings associated with them. Just look at the rebound in the sharemarket, which assumes that the Pandemic will not affect the economy, despite the evidence that things are gong to get a lot worst before they get better.
  6. Hi Paul, Thanks for the effort you have put into this, I believe it is incredibly relevant to how we choose audio equipment. I'm really at a loss to understand why more audio enthusiasts don't recognise (or accept) the negative effect of bias and the need for DBT. Maybe it is just too hard and will spoil their fun but with 30 day return offers I'm not sure why audio clubs for example do not promote them at their regular get togethers. I would have thought manufactures would jump at the chance of having 20-30 of their target market listen to their gear. FYI they just com
  7. Hi Beer, I have not heard any other streamers besides the Auralic Mini & Chrome-cast, however, I share the views of Firedog and Archimago (he doesn't host a forum just a blog) in that if you can guarantee bit perfect into a well engineered DAC (such as a Benchmark) then little else is required except for DSP. Check out Archimago's review of the inexpensive Chrome-cast Audio - his main argument is that it is irrelevant what jitter etc is produced by the streamer (as long as it is bit perfect), with the final result from the DAC being what is important, which makes a
  8. Hi Beer, Your question is a good one. I don't participate in the forum that much anymore as I favour a more objective approach as propagated by Archimago and Amirm from Audio Science. If you are looking for good gear for less than US$3k then I strongly suggest you visit their sites (as well as Computer Style) to get a more "rounded" view that does not include the nonsense surrounding power supplies, cables and purpose built servers. I have a variety of systems of varying expense. Interface: Personally I find using either my iPhone or an iPa
  9. Hi Rexp, Your obviously not a good judge of character
  10. Hi Blake, I take your point, however, I think my promotion of a particular system is little bit different than stating that a whole new technology sucks. I guess "my problem" is how does a first timer know where and how to find good gear. To my knowledge there is no real way to gain the required knowledge and having self appointed experts denounce an emerging technology, which is obviously not crap, is IMO extremely unhelpful. I understand we all have to do some research, and for me that is part of the fun, however, there is so much misleading information th
  11. Sure if you have experience, however, what about the first time guy interested in getting a decent system. Where does he go to find information that is concise and easy to follow that will help him purchase inexpensive gear with great sound.
  12. Hi Chris, I've have no evidence, nor any specific incident, but I seriously doubt GUTB was reinforcing your aim for the forum to be a place to come and learn and have fun. His constant degrading of cost effective and great sounding equipment (such as the hypex D class amps) was misleading to those who have had no experience with such gear. I disagree that it's a totally different issue. Again no evidence to support my proposition, however, do you think it encourages newbies lurking at sites such as AS to become audiophiles when they read that gear below a certain cost p
  13. I still don't think you are actually reading and comprehending what I'm saying. You may be well versed in what you like but this hobby DOES need saving from the likes of GUTB, and the thousands like him, who spout their BS opinions as facts. WHY? Because he and others create so much confusion for newbies. That's all you need to understand. This hobby will continue to die, as Guttenberg alluded to in his opening statement, because no one sits and listens anymore and the music plays second fiddle to another activity i.e. it's all background music and hence th
  14. Hi Audio doctor, Please see my comments above to the bomber. What's "ridiculous" about getting pissed off with members sprouting nonsense? I have been a member of this forum for nearly 10 years and it was once a place to come and learn and be educated. I have a learnt a lot here, and I am grateful for that, and I don't want to see the forum's standing trashed by members stating BS as fact. I guess my real gripe with GUTB is the arrogance with which he and other state their opinions. Anyway we are talking across each other so I will move on.
  15. Hi audio bomber, Maybe I didn't articulate my view correctly. If you re-read my comments you will see I am actually agreeing with you that "we like what we like", my point is that some members state their opinions as fact (All D class amps suck), and compound it by suggesting that if you don't spend enough money then you can not possibly achieve hi fidelity, which is of course nonsense. This is not about objectives vs subjectives, or any other silly stereotyping, we are all individuals with our own tastes, it is about sprouting BS as the truth. N
×
×
  • Create New...