On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:06:13 +0100, Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article . 39,
MrBitsy wrote:
Supermarket pie V home made steak pie
Perfect packet Smash V Lumpy mash from pie and mash shop
Modern quiet automatic car V noisy old sports car
Modern gas central heating V open, coal fireplace

In most of these the modern equivelent lacks soul although technicaly
superior!

That you think a supermarket pie or dried potatoe mix technically superior
to the real thing says a lot about your lack of technical understanding.

So as someone who likes both, gets a lot of pleasure from both, I can
say that vinyl is more lifelike than CD although not technicaly the
same.

If it were more lifelike than CD then it would be able to imitate live
sounds better. This it certainly can't, in any test you care to try where
direct comparison, rather than your poor hearing memory, is involved.

Ooops Dave! Potatoe? Are you standing for US Vice President, or what?
.... :-)

d

_____________________________

http://www.pearce.uk.com

Dave Plowman wrote in
:

In article . 39,
MrBitsy wrote:
Supermarket pie V home made steak pie
Perfect packet Smash V Lumpy mash from pie and mash shop
Modern quiet automatic car V noisy old sports car
Modern gas central heating V open, coal fireplace

In most of these the modern equivelent lacks soul although technicaly
superior!

That you think a supermarket pie or dried potatoe mix technically
superior to the real thing says a lot about your lack of technical
understanding.

I was more getting at the preperation of the pie - techy machines,
cleanliness etc! These pies just don't taste the same as mums!


So as someone who likes both, gets a lot of pleasure from both, I can
say that vinyl is more lifelike than CD although not technicaly the
same.

If it were more lifelike than CD then it would be able to imitate live
sounds better. This it certainly can't, in any test you care to try
where direct comparison, rather than your poor hearing memory, is
involved.


What do you not understand about 'I like both formats'? For me, something
gets lost in the transistion to CD that isn't lost with vinyl. In the pie
analogy above, no machine is ever going to beat the taste of my mums
steak pie - why? Technically the process is brilliant and hygene is top
notch but something is missing - quite possibly the human touch is needed
for that home taste.

Same with CD. Something gets lost in the recording and maybe vinyl can
supply that missing something - perhaps, just perhaps, having everything
just 'right' sucks some of that 'home cooking' out of the finished
product.

MrBitsy.

Julian Fowler wrote in
:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:31:57 GMT, MrBitsy
wrote:


snip

What do you not understand about 'I like both formats'? For me,
something gets lost in the transistion to CD that isn't lost with
vinyl.

Change this to "something gets lost in the transistion to vinyl that
isn't lost with CD, but I prefer the sound of vinyl" and you have a
statement this both technically correct *and* conveys your subjective
opinion as well.

Incorrect.

I am not worried about the technical aspects of the two formats. As I
said, I listen to both formats and KNOW that something is 'missing' on
the CD. This 'missing' stuff doesn't spoil my enjoyment of the format
mind you, but there is something that is not conveyed well on CD. Not
conveyed well - thats a better phrase than missing!

I went to a level 42 concert a few weeks back. Went home and listened to
the same album on CD and vinyl. Cd was great but it didn't give me the
same thrill as seeing them live a few hours before. The vinyl copy DID
give me that feeling, it was */insert all the hated phrases here ie soul,
musicality/*.


In the pie
analogy above, no machine is ever going to beat the taste of my mums
steak pie - why? Technically the process is brilliant and hygene is
top notch but something is missing - quite possibly the human touch is
needed for that home taste.

Maybe your mum is just better at making pie :-)

Oohh she was - but don't all mums make the best pie?


Anyway, the comparison isn't between a machine-made pie and a
home-made pie, its between two different machine-made pies.

Same with CD. Something gets lost in the recording

Jeez ... this is what starts to annoy. Compared to vinyl, *nothing*
"gets lost" in the transfer to CD. A CD is a far, far more accurate
representation of the master recording than *any* vinyl. You seem to
to be grasping as pseudo-technical straws to justify your preference.
*You don't need to justify it* - you like vinyl more than CD, that's
fine.

Why does it annoy? I am not trying to justify anything - this is an audio
newsgroup and I am expressing my enjoyment of an audio format. If Keith
hadn't expressed his thoughts on vinyl then I wouldn't have heard his
system leading to my further enjoyment of music. I would like to think my
like of vinyl can be picked up by somebody else who may give the format a
try.


I happen to like Fray Bentos tinned pies, even though (compared to
something out of M&S) they're a poor approximation of a proper
home-made pie. I'm not going to start pretending, though, that
there's some magic needed to explain *why* I happen to prefer the FB
pie!


Well, follow that one through. Would you ever tell anyone else to try the
FB pie because they are so nice or would you keep your mouth shut because
there are 'technically' better pies out there ;-)

MrBitsy.

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 07:49:18 GMT, MrBitsy
wrote:

Julian Fowler wrote in
:

On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 12:31:57 GMT, MrBitsy
wrote:


snip

What do you not understand about 'I like both formats'? For me,
something gets lost in the transistion to CD that isn't lost with
vinyl.

Change this to "something gets lost in the transistion to vinyl that
isn't lost with CD, but I prefer the sound of vinyl" and you have a
statement this both technically correct *and* conveys your subjective
opinion as well.

Incorrect.

I am not worried about the technical aspects of the two formats. As I
said, I listen to both formats and KNOW that something is 'missing' on
the CD.

No, you don't know (obviously).

This 'missing' stuff doesn't spoil my enjoyment of the format
mind you, but there is something that is not conveyed well on CD. Not
conveyed well - thats a better phrase than missing!

What is it about you vinyl folks? First of all we had claims that
vinyl is more "lifelike", which turns out to be nothing related to
"like life". Then you claim that "something is missing" from CD
compared to vinyl, then turn this into a purely subjective statement
that something (not specified) is not conveyed well (whatever that
means) on CD.

Why can't you just say that you like the sound of vinyl more than that
of CD, without resorting to pseudo-technical gibberish such as "vinyl
is more lifelike", "there's something missing from CD" to do so!

I went to a level 42 concert a few weeks back. Went home and listened to
the same album on CD and vinyl. Cd was great but it didn't give me the
same thrill as seeing them live a few hours before. The vinyl copy DID
give me that feeling, it was */insert all the hated phrases here ie soul,
musicality/*.

Ummm ... no, I won't ... that would be too obvious ... ;-)


In the pie
analogy above, no machine is ever going to beat the taste of my mums
steak pie - why? Technically the process is brilliant and hygene is
top notch but something is missing - quite possibly the human touch is
needed for that home taste.

Maybe your mum is just better at making pie :-)

Oohh she was - but don't all mums make the best pie?


Anyway, the comparison isn't between a machine-made pie and a
home-made pie, its between two different machine-made pies.

Same with CD. Something gets lost in the recording

Jeez ... this is what starts to annoy. Compared to vinyl, *nothing*
"gets lost" in the transfer to CD. A CD is a far, far more accurate
representation of the master recording than *any* vinyl. You seem to
to be grasping as pseudo-technical straws to justify your preference.
*You don't need to justify it* - you like vinyl more than CD, that's
fine.

Why does it annoy?

Because you make statements like "Same with CD. Something gets lost in
the recording", which is just wrong!

I am not trying to justify anything - this is an audio
newsgroup and I am expressing my enjoyment of an audio format. If Keith
hadn't expressed his thoughts on vinyl then I wouldn't have heard his
system leading to my further enjoyment of music. I would like to think my
like of vinyl can be picked up by somebody else who may give the format a
try.


I happen to like Fray Bentos tinned pies, even though (compared to
something out of M&S) they're a poor approximation of a proper
home-made pie. I'm not going to start pretending, though, that
there's some magic needed to explain *why* I happen to prefer the FB
pie!


Well, follow that one through. Would you ever tell anyone else to try the
FB pie because they are so nice or would you keep your mouth shut because
there are 'technically' better pies out there ;-)

No, I'd say that I like FB pies in spite of (maybe even because of)
the fact that they bear only a passing resemblence to the homemade
pie. I certainly wouldn't try and claim that the FB pie is better
becauses its "more lifelike", or that "something gets lost" in the M&S
pie.

Julian

--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:25:39 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


snip

Why can't you just say that you like the sound of vinyl more than that
of CD, without resorting to pseudo-technical gibberish such as "vinyl
is more lifelike", "there's something missing from CD" to do so!

Been done hundreds of times and sooner or later (normally sooner) the
'bashers' come crawling out of the woodwork to tell the 'vinyl enthusiast'
he's 'wrong' and proceed the chant the litany of 'coloured', 'distorted',
'tainted', infected' or whatever other silly little emotional descriptive
comes to into their threatened little minds.

In those cases I'd say that the 'bashers' are plain wrong. No-one can
say you are 'wrong' to prefer vinyl. However, the very reason why
these discussions are perpetuated is that pro-vinyl folks have a
tendency to associate their valid preference for vinyl with a denial
that vinyl is a technically inferior medium, compared with CD, in
terms of accurate audio reproduction (and please note the caveat).

To me, "coloured" and "distorted" are words that summarize two of the
technical characteristics of vinyl reproduction - they don't have to
be emotive words in the way that you seem to be interpret them.
Indeed, I'd hazard a guess that the reasons for your preference for
vinyl include the very facts that vinyl reproduction *is* coloured and
distorted - except that you'd probably use words like "warm" to
describe these characteristics :-)

What is it about you digital folks? Why do you feel so strongly about
another person's expressed preference, why do you resort to your own
'pseudo-technical gibberish' to trash that expressed preference?

Huh? When have I trashed anyone's *preference* for vinyl?

Why does it
*bother* you so much?

Preferences don't bother me at all. Maybe perpetuation of technically
invalid assertions does.

It's not often you see a vinylphile go out of his way
to trash digital 'music' (despite the fact that it would be very easy so to
do) other than when put on the 'defensive'. 'Two dimensional', 'thin' and
'boring' do you for a start?

Fine, these all sound like nice subjective words about your response
to CD - at least, I'm assuming that you're using these subjectively,
and not suggesting that CD reproduction is like a surface or a solid
whose third dimension is smaller than the first and second! At least
you haven't tried to claim that CD has "something missing" with
respect to vinyl :-)

The good news is that soon, hopefully, you people won't have to put up with
these unsettling claims and the vinyl contingent will have somewhere to
express their enthusiasm and appreciation without having to deal with the
ankle-biters here in ukra - which has become the domain of a very small
number of extremely immature and bigotted people who only seem to want to
play some sort of 'cigarette card' game with technical specs.

Yep, there's some of that ... but, you must admit, that there are also
a fair number of those whose pro-vinyl / anti-digital stance borders
on the religious.

AFAIAC, ukra has become a very boring place. I've seen the 'digi****'s'
feeding on newbies for far too long and I'm all jerked out with it. My
question is 'Who gets it next?'.

As I've said before, I suspect that you and I read different
newsgroups (albeit both labelled uk.rec.audio).

Once the 'vinyl freaks' have been seen off,
is it the 'multichannel freaks' turn? Should this group be renamed
'uk.rec.audio.2 channel.digital'?

Um ... I don't notice too many posters claiming that their
multichannel, DVD-based home cinema system is technically superior to
a dedicated CD-based stereo system!

Julian


--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk

"Julian Fowler" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:25:39 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


snip

Why can't you just say that you like the sound of vinyl more than that
of CD, without resorting to pseudo-technical gibberish such as "vinyl
is more lifelike", "there's something missing from CD" to do so!

Been done hundreds of times and sooner or later (normally sooner) the
'bashers' come crawling out of the woodwork to tell the 'vinyl
enthusiast'
he's 'wrong' and proceed the chant the litany of 'coloured', 'distorted',
'tainted', infected' or whatever other silly little emotional descriptive
comes to into their threatened little minds.

In those cases I'd say that the 'bashers' are plain wrong. No-one can
say you are 'wrong' to prefer vinyl.


Thank you.


However, the very reason why
these discussions are perpetuated is that pro-vinyl folks have a
tendency to associate their valid preference for vinyl with a denial
that vinyl is a technically inferior medium, compared with CD, in
terms of accurate audio reproduction (and please note the caveat).


Yes, because they apply a different set of criteria to the finished product.
Digiphiles usually refer to measurements, vinylphiles tend to use 'real
world' comparisons (as I do) and use non-specific (subjective, if you
prefer) phases such as 'lifelike', engaging', involving'. What price
'accuracy' if someone prefers something which is (supposedly) quantifiably
'inaccurate'?

Perhaps it will help you understand my pov if I explain that I often find it
hard to stop putting LPs on, no matter what the hour and that I simply can't
be botherd to hear a CD all the way through unless I put it on and wander
off to do something else. A CDP with a remote control in *anybody's* hands
will demonstrate what I mean.

Put another way - LPs last 4 mins per side, CDs last for months, in my
book - they simply do *not* hold my attention.

The difficulty is that both vinylists and digtalists both seek 'the best
possible sound' toward their different ends by vastly different means. I can
only reiterate that vinylists (IME) seem to be better able to accept this
fact and are a lot less prone to hissy attacks and personal abuse than the
'vinylphobes' (until provoked)......



To me, "coloured" and "distorted" are words that summarize two of the
technical characteristics of vinyl reproduction - they don't have to
be emotive words in the way that you seem to be interpret them.
Indeed, I'd hazard a guess that the reasons for your preference for
vinyl include the very facts that vinyl reproduction *is* coloured and
distorted - except that you'd probably use words like "warm" to
describe these characteristics :-)

What is it about you digital folks? Why do you feel so strongly about
another person's expressed preference, why do you resort to your own
'pseudo-technical gibberish' to trash that expressed preference?

Huh? When have I trashed anyone's *preference* for vinyl?


You're doing it now.......


Why does it
*bother* you so much?

Preferences don't bother me at all. Maybe perpetuation of technically
invalid assertions does.


........ by applying your own criteria (right or wrong) to other people's
expressed opinions and by trying to define what criteria are 'acceptable'
and what are not, by implication.



It's not often you see a vinylphile go out of his way
to trash digital 'music' (despite the fact that it would be very easy so
to
do) other than when put on the 'defensive'. 'Two dimensional', 'thin' and
'boring' do you for a start?

Fine, these all sound like nice subjective words about your response
to CD - at least, I'm assuming that you're using these subjectively,
and not suggesting that CD reproduction is like a surface or a solid
whose third dimension is smaller than the first and second! At least
you haven't tried to claim that CD has "something missing" with
respect to vinyl :-)


Oh, but is has IMO - the thing is do I need 'your permission' to state what
I think it is? Tell you what, I'll continue your pie analogy - CDs are like
a meat pie without any gravy!

How's that? :-)



The good news is that soon, hopefully, you people won't have to put up
with
these unsettling claims and the vinyl contingent will have somewhere to
express their enthusiasm and appreciation without having to deal with the
ankle-biters here in ukra - which has become the domain of a very small
number of extremely immature and bigotted people who only seem to want to
play some sort of 'cigarette card' game with technical specs.

Yep, there's some of that ... but, you must admit, that there are also
a fair number of those whose pro-vinyl / anti-digital stance borders
on the religious.


No-one is more 'pro-vinyl' than me, I promise you. If you prefer and enjoy
your digital music then I am truly delighted for you. If you had accused
vinylphiles of being mad, given the extra work and expense involved in the
pursuit of 'vinyl nirvana', I could do no other than utterly agree with you.
Now, does that sound fervently religious or particularly 'bigotted' to you?

CDs didn't get where they are today because they are 'better', they occupy
the 'lions share' of the market because lazy old Joe Public put them there.
Within 5 years (tops) SS digital music will topple them from top slot, wait
and see.

(In fact, these posts are my breaks from re-titling and 'resampling'
approximately 100 more albums worth of unnecessarily large MP3 files.....
;-)



AFAIAC, ukra has become a very boring place. I've seen the 'digi****'s'
feeding on newbies for far too long and I'm all jerked out with it. My
question is 'Who gets it next?'.

As I've said before, I suspect that you and I read different
newsgroups (albeit both labelled uk.rec.audio).


Kinda looks like it! Mine's full of mile-long 'vinyl is crap' threads -
what's yours got?



Once the 'vinyl freaks' have been seen off,
is it the 'multichannel freaks' turn? Should this group be renamed
'uk.rec.audio.2 channel.digital'?

Um ... I don't notice too many posters claiming that their
multichannel, DVD-based home cinema system is technically superior to
a dedicated CD-based stereo system!


Um...Possibly because this isn't an HT forum. The 5.1 SACD and DVD-A 'music'
boys are already starting to be accused of 'perpetuating technically invalid
assertions'.......

Tell you what Julian, drag your CDP and a few disks round to mine and we'll
have a 'shoot out' (or 'Circle Jerk' as it is known in some quarters) - I'm
fully prepared to put my needle where my mouth is.

Warning - my £350 'Disco Deck' and cheapo Ortofon cart held off and still
had a slight edge over the best (£3K) CDP I have ever heard, my new £1,350
RPM9/Shure V15 rig will blow your CDs into the weeds, I promise you. - You
will tell me that, however, I *never* make these claims, I leave it to the
'victims'! (Never failed yet! ;-)

Contact me off-group and we'll do it on the sly. I never mention it here -
one of the less regular posters here popped in last week to hear the killer
'valves & vinyl' combination. He didn't even say he liked it (already a
confirmed 'vinylist' mind) but he made it plain he would call in again
'soon' with more LPs*. (I can only assume he didn't 'hate' it too
much.....???? :-)


*Open house, me - when it comes to spinning the black stuff!

:-)

"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"Julian Fowler" wrote in message
...
snip

Perhaps it will help you understand my pov if I explain that I often find
it
hard to stop putting LPs on, no matter what the hour and that I simply
can't
be botherd to hear a CD all the way through unless I put it on and wander
off to do something else. A CDP with a remote control in *anybody's* hands
will demonstrate what I mean.

ROFLMAO!

As Keith will confirm, the deck I got off him has a remote control - nice
old one with one mother of a thick cable running from the deck to the
listening position! I did actually connect this remote control for the first
few session but I never used the bloody thing. The deck will even allow
programming individual tracks - havn't used that yet either!


Put another way - LPs last 4 mins per side, CDs last for months, in my
book - they simply do *not* hold my attention.

The difficulty is that both vinylists and digtalists both seek 'the best
possible sound' toward their different ends by vastly different means. I
can
only reiterate that vinylists (IME) seem to be better able to accept this
fact and are a lot less prone to hissy attacks and personal abuse than the
'vinylphobes' (until provoked)......

Its like the digital guys are saying, 'damm, technically CD is better so
everything DOES sound better on it'.

Can one of you 'cd only' people tell me why classic cars are so popular? Why
would somebody drive around in a car that is noisy, bumpy and less fuel
efficient? They couldn't argue that technically the modern car is 'better'
but I bet they would say things like 'classic', 'wind in the hair', 'more
soul' etc. What? Cars havn't got life or a soul surely? In fact, comparing a
modern to an old car is very similar to CD/vinyl. Modern car is quiet,
smooth and air conditioned. I could argue that an older car would give more
'ambience' to the drive without suggesting the modern car was somehow
flawed!

However, we would KNOW what they are trying to get across with those
descriptions and I guess you would not argue with them!



To me, "coloured" and "distorted" are words that summarize two of the
technical characteristics of vinyl reproduction - they don't have to
be emotive words in the way that you seem to be interpret them.
Indeed, I'd hazard a guess that the reasons for your preference for
vinyl include the very facts that vinyl reproduction *is* coloured and
distorted - except that you'd probably use words like "warm" to
describe these characteristics :-)

What is it about you digital folks? Why do you feel so strongly about
another person's expressed preference, why do you resort to your own
'pseudo-technical gibberish' to trash that expressed preference?

Huh? When have I trashed anyone's *preference* for vinyl?


You're doing it now.......


Why does it
*bother* you so much?

Preferences don't bother me at all. Maybe perpetuation of technically
invalid assertions does.

I have never suggested anything technically invalid - you take my
descriptions of the music I hear as such!

Snip

CDs didn't get where they are today because they are 'better', they occupy
the 'lions share' of the market because lazy old Joe Public put them
there.
Within 5 years (tops) SS digital music will topple them from top slot,
wait
and see.


I can agree with that. I sat my sons (16 & 14) in front of my CD system for
a couple of hours and they had a great time. They both agreed the music was
'clear' and 'really good'.

The next night we sat in front of the deck for a couple of hours. First
thing was 'blimey dad - that bass is really deep'! They then started talking
about 'lifelike', 'live', 'like being there' - why?

They know nothing about the technicalities. Neither of them has been to a
live concert so what were they talking about with their descriptions? I
think they were talking about the ambience associated with wedding
receptions and the like. I know the sounds a pretty dire at wedding
receptions but my boys understood immediately about 'ambience' without any
prompting from me.

Of course, when I asked them when they were going to buy a deck they both
said they wouldn't buy one of those old things! Strange considering they
prefered the sound!

snip

Tell you what Julian, drag your CDP and a few disks round to mine and
we'll
have a 'shoot out' (or 'Circle Jerk' as it is known in some quarters) -
I'm
fully prepared to put my needle where my mouth is.


If he takes up your offer then give him some time to tune into the vinyl
sound. When I first came to your place and heard vinyl, I thought it sounded
bloody horrible LOL! Mind you, after 10 hours (bloody hell!) of listening I
had found the 'missing ingredient' I was after in my music.

Warning - my £350 'Disco Deck' and cheapo Ortofon cart held off and still
had a slight edge over the best (£3K) CDP I have ever heard, my new £1,350
RPM9/Shure V15 rig will blow your CDs into the weeds, I promise you. - You
will tell me that, however, I *never* make these claims, I leave it to the
'victims'! (Never failed yet! ;-)

Yeh, Keiths new deck certainly takes the music by the short and curlies and
tames it!


Contact me off-group and we'll do it on the sly. I never mention it here -
one of the less regular posters here popped in last week to hear the
killer
'valves & vinyl' combination. He didn't even say he liked it (already a
confirmed 'vinylist' mind) but he made it plain he would call in again
'soon' with more LPs*. (I can only assume he didn't 'hate' it too
much.....???? :-)


Blimey - the valves only go to aid the ambience of the vinyl to make it
lovely!

MrBitsy.

Tell you what Julian, drag your CDP and a few disks round to mine and
we'll
have a 'shoot out' (or 'Circle Jerk' as it is known in some quarters) -
I'm
fully prepared to put my needle where my mouth is.

Warning - my £350 'Disco Deck' and cheapo Ortofon cart held off and still
had a slight edge over the best (£3K) CDP I have ever heard, my new £1,350
RPM9/Shure V15 rig will blow your CDs into the weeds, I promise you. - You
will tell me that, however, I *never* make these claims, I leave it to the
'victims'! (Never failed yet! ;-)

Contact me off-group and we'll do it on the sly. I never mention it here -
one of the less regular posters here popped in last week to hear the
killer
'valves & vinyl' combination. He didn't even say he liked it (already a
confirmed 'vinylist' mind) but he made it plain he would call in again
'soon' with more LPs*. (I can only assume he didn't 'hate' it too
much.....???? :-)


It was an experience I hope to repeat in my own home some time in the the
not too distant future.
One which those from the 'B' ark seem to want to deny to anybody who doesn't
accept that it is inferior.



*Open house, me - when it comes to spinning the black stuff!

:-)

"MrBitsy" wrote in message
. 240.39...
Dave Plowman wrote in
:

In article . 39,
MrBitsy wrote:
What do you not understand about 'I like both formats'? For me,
something gets lost in the transistion to CD that isn't lost with
vinyl.

No it doesn't - don't you ever read anything here? You can transcribe
an
LP to CD and I defy anyone to tell the difference. The LP is *adding*
components to the original master that don't exist in reality.


So what?

I play both formats but prefer vinyl. I am expressing my like of vinyl on
an audio newsgroup. Whats wrong with that?

Perhaps cd needs something adding to it? It is a very accurate format but
it doesn't convey the 'life and soul' of the music well at all. I think
vinyl does convey that soul very well. If that is done by 'adding' stuff
then thats fine by me. I don't care about the numbers of the format -
only the sound that enters my head.


I agree.

Even then. By the time it's travelled through those fleshy funnel things on
the side of our heads, tickled an ear drum, been converted into a signal to
be passed to our brains and finally processed by our minds, all of which are
probably unique to each individual, I very much doubt that any two people
'hear' the same thing anyway. Which is why I claimed that there are no
absolutes in a previous posting. Yes. I know that all the things people
commented on are *absolutes* but they are absolutes in an equation, I
suspect, full of variables which would mean that the end result is as
variable as the No of people listening. (Sits back and waits for criticism
and ridicule)
Call me strange, I've always thought that the medium and boxes used to bring
the sound to my ears are a means to an end. Not that I deny anybody the
right to play tents at night fantasising over tech' spec's.

I'll just try to enjoy my music as best as I can if that's alright with
everybody.

In article ,
Ray Keattch wrote:
The next night we sat in front of the deck for a couple of hours. First
thing was 'blimey dad - that bass is really deep'! They then started
talking about 'lifelike', 'live', 'like being there' - why?

If their description of the bass 'being really deep' on your record
player, but not on your CD, one is faulty - forget any nuances. If it
happens on all nominally the same recordings.

--
*He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn