Jump to content

Arg

  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Arg

  • Rank
    Needy and insecure

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I will not endorse as Product of the Decade any product that is not available to large swathes of audio consumers. Please check the global distribution extent of products before making awards.
  2. I totally agree and thank you very much to haggis for doing it.
  3. I'm new to this thread and I would just like to know how to rip an SACD using my Oppo 105. Where do I look (in the thread)? cheers
  4. OK that's it, I have twice lost my reply, so, sorry, not happening. Too much typing and time wasted. Please redesign your page so the Reply to Thread button is not right under the Quick Reply box.
  5. An excellent attempt, although your discussion of targets is flawed, and your attempt to correlate the unequalised response of the test speaker to outmoded target curves is crude. I'm glad you liked the sound of the unequalised speaker. It needs quite a bit of equalisation to maximise it, though.
  6. Let's apply my patented Truth Test to the issue. Take what Stereophile is saying about any audio topic, then say "What is the exact opposite?", and there's your truth. Stereophile say, "MQA Takes Off Big Time in 2016".
  7. My Oppo 105 certainly plays your .m4a test files in MCH (although 'LFE' comes from left front). Both the AAC-LC and HE-AAC files.
  8. ^^ probably the first big error you've made Sure, technically true, but so is "I can't know who I am, and you can't know who you are, so neither of us can know how the world is." The most useful response to both our statements is, "True but so what?" The world changes, constantly. We grasp what we can. We do what we can. It has an effect. So what? Isn't it more useful to try and correlate than to claim it's impossible on theoretical grounds? I think the general idea behind Waldrop's statement is that you can for the purpose of a discussion, not a phd thesis, propose t
  9. What a naive fool I was, to think that by coming to a CA forum I would be freed from the insane, biased, manipulative, propaganda-based, disinformational, anti-digital, analog-worshipping that is the nearest thing to the audio equivalent of the black plague on progress. We had all this with photography. Finally, after far, far too long, there are now only flotsam and dregs of the poison remaining in that sphere. But audio seems to be far more deeply and systemically poisoned, to the point where I think we are just going to have to wait for people to die of old age. Maybe my children's gene
  10. I certainly got the answer to my question, "Are audio people arrogant, delusional, confused about science vs religion, unbalanced debaters, focused on unimportant priorities, or all of the above?" No need for further discussion!
  11. 96 titles in MCH (they call it surround), I didn't know about this one, thanks.
  12. It's a turn of phrase. I appreciate your assistance. Must be a cultural difference if you were offended, I apologise.
  13. I dare you to do that and click through the results and find any that are actually not stereo-only. I only sampled a few but none of them were MCH. So the filter doesn't work.
  14. So Waldrep is right then? I got lost. What's the summary?
×
×
  • Create New...