"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
I seem to recall that Scott claims to have heard
differences due to cables, in a single-blind test.

More likely in a sighted test, like all the rest of his
listening "tests".

We call "single blind" tests "Egregiously flawed double blind tests". ;-)

Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-)

MrT.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Steven Sullivan wrote:
In rec.audio.tech Keith G wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
wrote in message
ups.com


Well, we disagree about the transarency of 16/44.1

That's due to your religious belief that there's something that still
needs to be fixed with the CD format to make it as accurate as LPs.


Accurate? Do you mean as in *lifelike*....???

Try all it likes, CD will never beat a good LP for a sense of
*realism*.....

Achieved via introduction of distortions that some find pleasing.

I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a mastering
engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying that he often found the
LPs he mastered often sounded more lifelike than the original master
tapes even when he did a flat transfer with no processing. It stands to
reason that it would be the introduction of colorations that lead to
that effect. Now while the idea of distortion may bother the meter
readers because it makes for uglier numbers, for those who ar
interested in sound quality this shouldn't create a philisophical
dilema. Sounds better is better. It's a simple and pure philosophy.


**Bingo!**


:-))

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
I seem to recall that Scott claims to have heard
differences due to cables, in a single-blind test.

More likely in a sighted test, like all the rest of his
listening "tests".

We call "single blind" tests "Egregiously flawed double
blind tests". ;-)

Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-)

They aren't tests at all.

No joke.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
I seem to recall that Scott claims to have heard
differences due to cables, in a single-blind test.

More likely in a sighted test, like all the rest of his
listening "tests".

We call "single blind" tests "Egregiously flawed double
blind tests". ;-)

Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-)

They aren't tests at all.

That's why I put the word in inverted commas.

No joke.

You missed it, but otherwise correct.

MrT.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Now where's the specs on the cutting lathe though :-(

The cutting lathe probably performs better than the
user's cartridge, etc.

I'm not so sure about that myself. I'm sure there were
worse cutting heads than my Shure V15VMR, and there are
FAR more expensive cartridges available.

Or there were and probably still are some bad cutting heads, but most that
were used to produce most records were pretty good.

In fact half
speed mastering was to reduce the deficiencies of the
cutting lathes,

Sort of. Half speed mastering mostly addressed HF losses and excess heating
in the cutting heads.

t a cartridge doesn't need to cut a
groove as it goes. (although some do :-)

That may seem to be intuitively clear, but there are some hidden details.
One hidden detail is that it is quite easy for a cutter to create a groove
that can't be properly tracked by *any* cartridge.

Still not sonically transparent, though.

Depends on whose "ears" are being used obviously, going
by all the other posts :-)

There's a very few die-hards who find accurate reproduction to be adverse to
their tastes.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
I seem to recall that Scott claims to have heard
differences due to cables, in a single-blind test.

More likely in a sighted test, like all the rest of
his listening "tests".

We call "single blind" tests "Egregiously flawed double
blind tests". ;-)

Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-)

They aren't tests at all.

That's why I put the word in inverted commas.

It wasn't reproduced that way in OE.

"Keith G" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
oups.com

IME the percieved dynamic range of Redbook and Vinyl at
their best are neck and neck.

You live near a busy road and are plagued with road
noise in your listening room?

You have hearing problems, you say?

Or is it your legacy technology tubed audio components
that are mucking up the works?

You can whine about how
that doesn't fit the measurements but again that would
the classic scenerio of meter readers damning the
aesthetics becuase they don't meet thier expectations
based on the numbers.

I always thought that vinyl was noisy. Apparently so did
about 99% of the rest of the music lovers on earth.


Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful
are the things that are now killing it - miniaturisation,
ease of handling and lifestyle.

Nahh, it was the generally improved sound quality that made CD the hugely
sucessful product it became

Miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle without improved sound
quality had already been tried twice. The results were called 8-track and
compact cassette.

Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a
******** about *quality* per se

A claim that is belied by all of the types of media that did have the
advantages of miniaturization, ease of handling and lifestyle, but failed to
be as sucessful as the CD.

- quite plainly proved byhis ready (eager?) acceptance of the lowering of
your
precious 'bitrates' in digital music...

A very unfair comparison, because the lowered bitrates were *sold* to the
public using a very compelling inducement: Free music that used to cost real
money.

"Keith G" wrote in message

wrote in message
oups.com...

I think thre is something to this claim. I remember a
mastering engineer, I think it was Stan Ricker, saying
that he often found the LPs he mastered often sounded
more lifelike than the original master tapes even when
he did a flat transfer with no processing.

The hidden agenda is that many masters that sound very lifelike on the
master tape or digital master, can't possibly be transferred to vinyl
without significant amounts of processing.

It stands to
reason that it would be the introduction of colorations
that lead to that effect.

Not at all. Nothing like a little LP tracing distortion to put a lost edge
back onto a poorly-made or tired analog tape master.

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Forget all that. The things that made CD so successful are the things
that are now killing it - miniaturisation, ease of handling and
lifestyle.

Quite obviously not around or interested when it was released. I was both,
and like all my colleagues who were privileged to attend a pre-release
demo - using all sorts of programme material - was absolutely stunned by
the quality and instantly recognised it as a great step forward in
domestic playback systems. And at the time, the only ones who weren't
knocked sideways by it were those with a financial axe to grind - ie some
turntable makers with all their eggs in one basket - and a few flat earth
types of course. You get those in any society at any time.

Joe Bloggs (Britain's No 1 music *buyer*) doesn't give a ******** about
*quality* per se - quite plainly proved by his ready (eager?) acceptance
of the lowering of your precious 'bitrates' in digital music...

And your excuse for accepting a poor listening room, crappy single driver
horns, SET amps and vinyl is?

--
*The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
Yes, but what do you call sighted "tests" then :-)

They aren't tests at all.

That's why I put the word in inverted commas.

It wasn't reproduced that way in OE.

Mr.T used quotation marks which aren't top set characters so may or may
not come out correctly on your reader depending on a number of things.
Same as the pound sign "£" (that could be fun) so should called gbp on
newsnet. For this reason most use inverted commas rather than quotation
marks as these are top set characters.

--
*Strip mining prevents forest fires.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.