Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Archimago

  • Rank
    Freshman Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Vancouver, BC, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No way @STC!!! Digital output is different from the analogue sound! Also, clearly blind tests don't tell us nothing about the constipated bits. It's all qualitative, you see...
  2. @The Computer Audiophile, this is rather easy to explain... You see, if you press Pause, the data is still being held in a buffer for awhile until unpaused whereas if you press Stop then Play, you're reading everything fresh and brand new... The data stuck in the buffer on pause is constipated. It gets old and putrefies; hence sounds terrible when unpaused. Instead, if you press stop, the data is purged, and we get "flow-thru" when music is restarted. No buffered bits. No constipation. The digital pipeline runs smoothly with no further obstruction - "ex-laxed" fully - like the bowels just before a clean colonoscopy. Sounds great and smells even better. Prove me wrong.
  3. Nice. Is the circulation system absolutely silent? We might get another -5dB THD but wouldn't want the ambient SPL in our room going up, right? 😉
  4. Come on Frank, have a little faith 🤔. Surely you must consider the readers here are much more sophisticated than this! I bet you many will spend time thinking and considering if it makes sense for them. As in all things, some people may find benefit and others may not. At least it'll encourage experimentation. In the same way, I put my ideas out there on my blog recognizing that I'll catch flack at times. But if thoughts are worth sharing, then come what may... It's not like you (or I) are asking people to pay for something "guaranteed" to work. Rather, let's just talk, think, and show in a free marketplace of ideas.
  5. Sounds good... But here's a perfect example - since you're taking the time to gather thoughts and pieces, why not just create a blog post with the text, maybe links, again, maybe pictures of what you're doing and what the materials and procedure looks like? Since this thread is called "step-by-step surgery", remember that surgical textbooks are very visual and need to incorporate illustrations of anatomical landmarks as well as visual aids for teaching procedures... (Exhibit A)
  6. Okay. Like many areas of sound reproduction, let's say that the drivers themselves have reached a level of quality where distortion is low enough and generally the frequency reproduction and dispersion patterns are good enough that one can find adequate positioning to minimize issues. True, improving cabinets is important. Perhaps you can write a blog post summarizing what you can do with the cabinets, materials, and procedure to reinforce the cabinet? As usual, pictures I think would help and very much enhance the article for something like this!
  7. Good article. Wish they had edited it a little better. This is a powerful finding: The point about vision's primacy among the hierarchy of human sensory modalities is important. This is also seen in the brain architecture with surface area and volume subserving visual processing over audition. Many "Golden Ears" seem to either not be aware of this or even actively deny it...
  8. There are some things I can agree with: Sure. It'll be nice to have "live sound" - but only if the recording is supposed to sound that way. Agree. No need to spend lots of money. Sure, it's only as good as the limiting factor in the audio chain. And if there are distortions preventing the optimal sound, should deal with it. Sure. getting the most expensive stuff doesn't mean it sounds the best. Many things like DACs and music servers are IMO not limiting the sound. But it's this comment that still gets me with your beliefs: Plus this quote from the comment above: Naw man. This devaluation of speakers simply does not jive in my corner of the universe. In fact, this is such an important foundation to the overall belief system that unless this is resolved, there's no way to even begin to understand anything else! Want to try being more specific about this?
  9. For a good GP, he / she takes a history and listens first? Can't think of a situation when there's actually a significant problem and one can "understand, almost immediately, what is wrong with you as you start talking". Unless of course the person has clear physical signs like typical lesions of chicken pox, a black eye or obvious fracture - probably a good number of those should be going to the ER! As for the Sharp mini hi-fi box, as you can imagine, I would not have had any specific idea what the speakers you're referring to looked like until you showed me that picture. In fact, it appears that's not even a picture of your actual set-up but some girls room? (BTW, you don't honestly believe "200W" printed on the front is meaningful and even refers to actual power handling to make you "go with them", do you?!) Typing into Google "sharp mini hifi" yielded pages of images and while it might have been a 2 second job for you, look at it through the lens of others. In fact, perhaps this is the key point about what you're saying and why I suspect many don't get it... You need to be considerate of the perspective of what others might be thinking. Can they truly follow where you're coming from and share the same basic beliefs from which you're approaching this? As you can imagine... I don't follow and find many of your beliefs, both simple and complex are being expressed without adequate logical connection. I think that's all I can say.
  10. Light Harmonic - now that's a sad chapter. Given how they were perpetually "doubling down" with products and incentives without much to show, disappointment looked inevitable.
  11. Exactly... As I said, the man is truly gifted! He has insights and deep awareness into the heart and soul of those he's selling those aluminum pieces to. How I wish to possess even a modicum of that level of perception, knowledge or of course aluminum-chopping ability. 😥
  12. Hmmm. You're describing a perceptual phenomenon here. How do you know this happens to everyone? Remember, I was responding to your claim that you can find a situation where even gross treble/bass tone changes make no audible/perceptual difference! Sorry, I've never experienced such phenomenon, nor to be honest would I really want to be so insensitive to sound changes! This doesn't mean I can't enjoy the music mind you, so long as the frequency anomaly isn't extreme. Sure. But if you're not able to define the "distortion" you're talking about, then how do you eliminate it? Again, if you use the "doctor" analogy, you have not demonstrated the "pathological etiology" of the disorder you're talking about. How do you know which treatment to prescribe? Not every word, but even that 1st "Part 1" post is lacking in background and I have no concrete context as to accept what you're claiming. How can a person continue to read the other parts without understanding what you're saying? Like I say, you should really just summarize everything in a few posts. Start from first principles. From there, build your case. And pictures do help keep readers interested plus allows the reader to better contextualize! For example, what does this cheap system with NAD CDP and amp look like? Show me this Sharp "boombox speaker" since you didn't even publish a product model in that post! How do you know it was exaggerated? What if this was how the soundtrack was produced and the equipment accurately replicated the intent? Sure. Maybe. How do I know? Unless you tell me what pipe organ CD you used, what track sounded bad, which sub(s) this guy has, what kind of system he's using, perhaps even what the room looks like... This is "hearsay" testimony. You do realize that the value of a comment like this is limited, right? And why shouldn't I? You said rooms don't make a difference. Also, you said that it's possible to optimize a system so that tone controls no longer had an effect! I find those statements extreme and invitations to counter with obvious examples... Okay. As I've said above. Please clearly highlight these "pillars" which I interpreted abstractly as elements of your "first principles" in your writings so everyone is clear as to what you're saying and doing... Sorry, disagree. The idea of a doctor being able to diagnose based on first impressions and only on intuition (without digging deeper) can only go so far and with only certain conditions. Trust me on this one...
  13. Wow. Ted Denney's "The Man"; a truly gifted audio designer extraordinaire! Presumably the 516 comments were complimentary before admin closed it? BTW I can't seem to find this post on Facebook... Anyone got a link?
  14. Curious @ARQuint if it might be good to go back to the archives and publish a few of these key articles like Stereophile has done with their archive articles? Despite our disagreements, I appreciate you being here Andy. There is indeed a "gulf". But to bridge that gulf - which is one of philosophical approach and about values, not just communication - the "sides" do have to figure out what it is they're after and what beliefs held are non-negotiable. So let's talk... Over the years, I've tried to be clear about what I'm after as a "more objective" audiophile. I've tried to encapsulate them into 2 main articles: This one on being a "Rational Audiophile" - a discussion on us as hobbyists, personality traits, embracing both intellect and emotion. This one on the goal of the "Hardware Audiophile" - a discussion about achieving "high fidelity" and "transparency" - words that I hope audiophiles still can appreciate whether we tend towards objective analysis of the hardware/technologies or subjective adjudication of whether something sounds "good". These words also have meaning in that they point to an intent, an ideal of sorts referencing the direction (a "True North" if you will) for audiophiles to follow if they should prescribed to this philosophy. You do not need to respond here (since we're deviating from MQA), but I invite you to think about the points raised. If we do want to talk deeper, perhaps you can review those thoughts and write deeper about what you / your magazine / HP are after... Perhaps consider some of those elements as worthy of an editorial through 2020 (a very appropriate year!) in your magazine as topics to discuss. What is your magazine's stance on "transparency to the source recording" for example when writers take on a piece of equipment. As you can see, my invitation is not about either / or. It's about both embracing subjective experience as important for ourselves but also objective analysis including measurements (higher quality ADCs for example easily available to hobbyists these days to do their own tests unlike back when HP started writing). Can we build an internal understanding of audio that provides clarity for ourselves and when others come asking? Let's have fun, even if it means admitting to our own neurotic tendencies! 😉
  15. Some things are clean. Others not so clean. But for the sake of the comment and in this particular circumstance, I see no need for concern about this "line". If you want to make a case for "holy water" in audiophilia, I'm happy to consider arguments...
  • Create New...