jaap wrote:
Serge Auckland schreef:
jaap wrote:
Don Pearce schreef:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:37:01 +0200, jaap wrote:
It's a public secret there's only a small market for better
sounding equipment. Most people don't bother because they want
to hear amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality,
especially when expensive. There lays the problem manufacturers
are facing.
I think that lost something in the translation from Dutch. Could
you
elaborate?
d
Alright. Being a public secret is a saying (over here) and means
as much as being common knowledge to most people.
No, I got that bit - it was all the rest that had me puzzled.
d
Look around you, probably within your family or among your friends.
Most people won't be bothered by new disk standards, color of face
plates, brand names, fourfold wiring with precious metals, quantity
of loudspeakers etcetera. It's all about enjoying the music, not
how it is reproduced.
OK, there exist a group of people running to the shop every year
for the last model but I don't think this is because they enjoy the
music so much. See my point?
Yes, but what did you mean when you said that people want to hear
amplified sound and do not enjoy the quality?
I gave you two examples. It is about the music, not how many watts or
how large the stack.
Another example: TV sets. It's only for a couple of years
manufacturers are paying attention to better sound reproduction.
Many of us are having terrible reproduction quality and still enjoy
the moving pictures.
I shouldn't think many of us on this group use the sound system
supplied with a TV.
In my circle there's no one who has the tellie linked to his or her
hifi. I did on some occasions watching war movies because of the
impressive explosion sounds. Only got the pets and the wife upset 
Manufacturers can produce better sets but what happens if customers
don't want to spend more money on a TV or HiFi?
Jaap
Nobody has produced anything better for many years.
You're missing the point here. Manufacturers can upgrade -lets say- a
midprized set by putting in more expensive capacitors. That set would
sound better because there's less fuzz in the audio. On the other
hand the higher expense has to be payed by the consumer and they
don't. One explanation can be that consumers want better cyphers when
they put down more money. My explanation is massconsumers don't think
a small gain in quality is worth a large amount.
Absolutely *NOT*. Changing capacitors won't make one jot of
difference. Just measure it and you'll see. IF you would rather
believe your ears than objective measurements, then I have a Bridge I
can sell you.
Quality plateaued once the initial reproduction problems with CD had
been understood and addressed.
Personally I never liked the 'digital' sound with its harsh highs and
unnatural dynamics. But OK, tastes differ (we say over here).
Digital has no "sound". CD is a transparent carrier, in that whatever
goes in comes out, to the limits of the 16 bit 44.1 system, which
comfortably exceeds the human ability to hear. You may not like what
is being done with CDs (I also hate today's Mastering, it's all bout
loudness, not quality) but that's nothing to do with the carrier,
which is transparent to well past the limits of human hearing.
S.
Sorry, I do not agree with you. Sound is affected by everything it comes
in contact with. The surrounding, electronic parts, the hairs in your
ears, noise, air temperature and more. Talk with a musician and stop
believing technicians have a complete picture of nature.
I agree measurements are necessary, but please come down from your high
horse telling science knows everything. Was it you who said all (good)
amplifiers and players sound the same? Not true.
Jaap, this is where we have to disagree. All good amplifiers *will*
sound the same into sensible loads. I accept that 1ohm Scintillas will
cause some amplifiers to sound different, but sensible loads on modern
sensible amplifiers will sound the same. They can't not sound the same
when their specifications are both comfortably below hearing thresholds.
Please do a simple test exchanging capacitors in the PS of your audio
equipment or in your speaker crossovers. It might or might not be
measurable but one can hear definitely the change of coloration. Unless
you don't listen to music of course
Again, if the measurements don't show any change in performance, there
can't be any change in the sound. Sound doesn't change for "magic", if
there is a change in sound, then there is a measurable change in audio
parameters.
One of the problems with Digital audio is that only part of the actual
information is recorded. For most people this 'sound' is good enough (as
most consumers don't want to pay for higher quality). Have you ever
compared a recording on a Telefunken M10 to your favorite CD or DVD?
It is not a "problem" with digital audio as *all* the information is
recorded to the limits of 16 or 24 bit resolution, and to a little less
than half the sample rate frequency. Even with 16/44.1 systems, the
accuracy is so very much better than any analogue machine could manage,
that the suggestion that an M10 is better than a CD is just plain
foolish. You may prefer the sound of the M10, but every objective test
would show the CD to be better. *Much* more information is recorded on
CD than on an analogue machine which is limited at best to a S/N ratio
of some 60dB if distortion is to be kept low. Bass woodles on analogue
tape prevents the bass end from recording flat, and speed variations
(W&F) are many orders of magnitude worse than CD, although still below
audibility.
I think you should consider carefully your position. It is perfectly OK
for you to claim that you prefer the sound of your system to a modern
digital one, but to claim that it is better, is just foolish when all
the measurements are against you.
S.
Jaap
--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com