On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 00:19:27 +0100, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

TBH I'm sick of this circular argument, if I'm never going to hear a
master tape, I'm never going to worry about comparing everything to it.
I have a reasonable 'audio memory' and can remember reasonably well what
instruments sound like so I like my system to sound convincing, I don't
demand that it be 100% accurate to the original.

Which 'original' anyway? Music recorded in a concert hall will rarely
reproduce what anyone actually in the hall hears and can't possibly
reproduce all of the variants depending on where they sit, what the
people around them are wearing, the effects of acoustic reflections at
various places, etc. No matter how good the engineering the result will
always be 'artificial' to some extent.

Just like with written fiction, a "pleasing result" is a matter of
whether the result is believable enough so that it the person receiving
it can pretend that they are 'there'. For different people that will be
affected by different aspects. In audio, some will notice the noise
floor, some the high frequencies, some the low frequencies, some the
digitisation, etc. That's the point, no system will ever be 'perfect',
the difference is purely in what type of imperfections and how much of
them are acceptable.

De gustibust nil disputandem est...

Chris C