What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

Why is it that most of the contributors to this group seem to be some
sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade who seem to think that all cd
players sound the same and that measurements and specs of components
are king? Have we reverted back to the 1970's when all you had to
worry about was how many watts your speakers could handle? Come on
guy's if you really don't like quality sound give it a rest and talk
about something else on another group! Maybe there's a group about
saddo's who just post controvertial stuff to annoy everyone? Maybe
their's a group about nerds who just like to see their own posts on a
screen!!

Borosteve.

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:33:48 -0800 (PST), borosteve
wrote:

Why is it that most of the contributors to this group seem to be some
sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade who seem to think that all cd
players sound the same and that measurements and specs of components
are king? Have we reverted back to the 1970's when all you had to
worry about was how many watts your speakers could handle? Come on
guy's if you really don't like quality sound give it a rest and talk
about something else on another group! Maybe there's a group about
saddo's who just post controvertial stuff to annoy everyone? Maybe
their's a group about nerds who just like to see their own posts on a
screen!!

Borosteve.

Which appears to be exactly what you have just done. Nice one.

Incidentally, in case you didn't know it, audio (the title of this
group) is the science and engineering of sound. If you want somewhere
warm and fluffy where you can talk about nice things try one of the
religious groups. See how long you last there before you hanker for
some sanity.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

"borosteve" wrote in message
...
Why is it that most of the contributors to this group seem to be some
sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade who seem to think that all cd
players sound the same and that measurements and specs of components
are king? Have we reverted back to the 1970's when all you had to
worry about was how many watts your speakers could handle? Come on
guy's if you really don't like quality sound give it a rest and talk
about something else on another group! Maybe there's a group about
saddo's who just post controvertial stuff to annoy everyone? Maybe
their's a group about nerds who just like to see their own posts on a
screen!!

Borosteve.

Speaking only for myself, I am most definitely *not* anti hifi sound, but
anti the non-scientific and engineering based opinions which, when analysed
objectively, i.e. using measurements, do not prove what is being alleged.

For many years (even before the '70s) audio engineering professionals were
aware of the limits of perception of human hearing, and that, provided the
equipment measured below that threshold, then any reduction in distortions,
noise, frequency response errors etc. would not be perceived. For amplifiers
we reached those figures many many years ago, consequently, until we started
seeing designs which deliberately introduce audible distortions, the only
difference between amplifiers was one of loudness, subject of course to the
amplifier being used within it's design parameters for level and load
impedance. So, what's the point of discussing amplifier sound?

When CD was launched, it *was* "pure, perfect sound forever", compared with
the limitations of vinyl, cassettes and FM radio. There was certainly a
question about the quality of the first CDs, some of which were made from
equalised and compressed disk-cutting masters out of ignorance of the new
medium, but that is a separate issue. D-A conversion did improve from the
first 14bit x 4 oversampling, but we have had 24 bit 96k or better
converters for years now, so CD playback quality would be pretty much a dead
issue, if it wasn't for CD production now having gone silly with
over-levels, clipping etc. It seems that CD players can sound different in
their handling of these over-levels, and that is an interesting area for
study, but it needs instrumentation and measurements, not subjective
opinions if we're ever to characterise and understand fully the processes
involved.

In my view, the valid subjects for discussions of sound quality are
loudspeakers, which are still far behind complete transparancy, vinyl
reproduction, which will never be transparent, and data-reduced digital
formats which *can* be transparent, but seldom are.

Measurements give a repeatable, verifiable indication of performance.
Double-blind controlled listening tests can highlight differences which may
have escaped measurement, but note that *everything* can be measured. If
something is audible, then it is measurable. It may be difficult to measure,
and perhaps new instruments have to be invented. As a case in point,
measurements of data-reduced formats could not be done with the conventional
analogue-based equipments, so new analysers had to be invented. The
converse, that everything measurable is audible is *not* true as there are
clearly understood thresholds of hearing.

So, when someone posts a purely subjective view of what something sound
like, you can expect those of us with a more engineering-based view of audio
to comment. Otherwise, people might go on believing that cables sound
different.....

S.


--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

"borosteve" wrote in message


Why is it that most of the contributors to this group
seem to be some sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade
who seem to think that all cd players sound the same and
that measurements and specs of components are king?

Where did you get that idea?

Have we reverted back to the 1970's when all you had to worry
about was how many watts your speakers could handle?

Where did you get the idea that audio was like that back in the 1970s?

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

In article
,
borosteve wrote:
Why is it that most of the contributors to this group seem to be some
sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade who seem to think that all cd
players sound the same and that measurements and specs of components
are king? Have we reverted back to the 1970's when all you had to
worry about was how many watts your speakers could handle? Come on
guy's if you really don't like quality sound give it a rest and talk
about something else on another group! Maybe there's a group about
saddo's who just post controvertial stuff to annoy everyone? Maybe
their's a group about nerds who just like to see their own posts on a
screen!!

Well, we could talk about the misuse of the apostrophe, for a start.

--
*If you must choose between two evils, pick the one you've never tried before

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

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

borosteve wrote:

Why is it that most of the contributors to this group seem to be some
sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade who seem to think that all cd
players sound the same and that measurements and specs of components
are king?

Whay exactly do you think you can hear that's not capable of being
measured ?

Today's test equipment can resolve non-linearities as small as 130dB below
the signal level which VASTLY exceeds the abilities of human hearing.

Reviewers who talk of differences in pace, rhythym, speed, darkness and
the like are simply blowing nonsense out of their backsides. If the they
found no differences, they'd be out of a job, so they make them up and
call them non-scientific names and claim they can't be measured so as to
ensure their next pay check. Charlatans, the lot of them.

Graham

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

Arny Krueger wrote:

"borosteve" wrote

Why is it that most of the contributors to this group
seem to be some sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade
who seem to think that all cd players sound the same and
that measurements and specs of components are king?

Where did you get that idea?

Have we reverted back to the 1970's when all you had to worry
about was how many watts your speakers could handle?

Where did you get the idea that audio was like that back in the 1970s?

If anything, back then EVEN MORE attention was paid to the 'numbers'.

Today, most serious audio kit is actually so good that one need not overly
concern oneself with frequency response, signal to noise ratio or
distortion since even run-of-the-mill kit is very competent in these
regards (aside from audiophool stuff like tube amps for example which can
have dismal numbers).

Graham

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

borosteve wrote:

Why is it that most of the contributors to this group seem to be some
sort of anti- hifi sound quality brigade who seem to think that all cd
players sound the same and that measurements and specs of components
are king? Have we reverted back to the 1970's when all you had to
worry about was how many watts your speakers could handle? Come on
guy's if you really don't like quality sound give it a rest and talk
about something else on another group! Maybe there's a group about
saddo's who just post controvertial stuff to annoy everyone? Maybe
their's a group about nerds who just like to see their own posts on a
screen!!

Well, we could talk about the misuse of the apostrophe, for a start.

Pluralisation by apostrophe ! Often called the greengrocer's apostrophe.

Seen recently in a pub (honestly) .... " Fish and Chip's ".

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/vivian....ostGrocers.htm

Graham

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Reviewers who talk of differences in pace, rhythym, speed, darkness and
the like are simply blowing nonsense out of their backsides. If the they
found no differences, they'd be out of a job, so they make them up and
call them non-scientific names and claim they can't be measured so as to
ensure their next pay check. Charlatans, the lot of them.

Agreed 100%. I remember the first time I met this sort of thing in a review,
it was for the original Linn Sondeck turntable. After describing the "sound"
of this turntable in the sort of overblown language previously only seen
from wine reviewers, the reviewer went on to claim that *any* system using
this turntable would sound better than any other system that didn't. So all
the deficiencies of a cheap arm, cartridge, amp or speakers apparently
mattered less than the supposed inferiority of all other turntables.

That was the day I stopped buying Hi-Fi magazines.

David.

What a sad excuse for a group this is...
 

On 21 Dec, 09:23, "David Looser" wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote in message

...

Reviewers who talk of differences in pace, rhythym, speed, darkness and
the like are simply blowing nonsense out of their backsides. If the they
found no differences, they'd be out of a job, so they make them up and
call them non-scientific names and claim they can't be measured so as to
ensure their next pay check. Charlatans, the lot of them.

Agreed 100%. I remember the first time I met this sort of thing in a review,
it was for the original Linn Sondeck turntable. After describing the "sound"
of this turntable in the sort of overblown language previously only seen
from wine reviewers, the reviewer went on to claim that *any* system using
this turntable would sound better than any other system that didn't. So all
the deficiencies of a cheap arm, cartridge, amp or speakers apparently
mattered less than the supposed inferiority of all other turntables.

That was the day I stopped buying Hi-Fi magazines.

David.

WOW! That stirred things up a bit!! So there we have it,Cd players all
sound the same,as do amplifiers.Cables make no difference but speakers
make all the difference. Now I now where I've been gong wrong all
these years.
Thanx guys,
Borosteve.