Is High-Resolution Audio Irrelevant? - Page 16 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 10Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-27-2014, 06:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post

... he releases an album so distorted that it sounds like it must have been done that way on purpose, ...

It was. smile.gif

http://consequenceofsound.net/2014/04/surprise-neil-young-releases-new-album-a-letter-home-featuring-jack-white/
Ratman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-27-2014, 06:39 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,399
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 3066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post

... he releases an album so distorted that it sounds like it must have been done that way on purpose, ...

It was. smile.gif

http://consequenceofsound.net/2014/04/surprise-neil-young-releases-new-album-a-letter-home-featuring-jack-white/

 

"However, in keeping with the spirit of his new music service Pono, it’ll feature a high-resolution sound. As he explained, “You can make a lo-fi, analog record, direct to vinyl, transfer it to 192, and you have a high res copy of a lo-fi vinyl record.” consequenceofsound.net

 

Since it's difficult (if not impossible) to hear the difference between 16/44 and 24/192 (uncompressed) in the first place, why not dispense with the idea that the content itself should at least contain some information that justifies the higher resolution—even if that information is inaudible.
 

FMW likes this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
Old 05-27-2014, 08:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,661
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 315
If it starts as "lo-fi", that's how it remains.
GiGo. Unless... someone wants to digitally "enhance" (change?) the original recording. But, I don't think that was the intent either of JW or NY. They just digitized for marketing the album to the "digital crowd" (CD, downloads, etc.)

They recorded on "antique" equipment for a specific reason. Artist's intent. If they wanted a "sanitized" recording, they would have used a conventional recording process.

I tip my hat to both. They do what they envision as artists and throw greed to wind.
Ratman is offline  
Old 05-27-2014, 01:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 5,748
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I found that in almost all cases 13-14 bits was undetectable given that the music was close to being normalized.

Sure, 13 bits is about as good as the finest analog tape recorders, but without the distortion and flutter and frequency response errors.
Quote:
It appears that there are a number of freeware Bitcrusher VST plugins

I did exactly that in my AES Audio Myths video, in the section starting at 45:48 about bit depth. A bit crusher plug-in doesn't use dither, so this shows a worst case example.

--Ethan

RealTraps - The acoustic treatment experts
Ethan's Audio Expert book

Ethan Winer is offline  
Old 05-27-2014, 02:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan Winer View Post

Sure, 13 bits is about as good as the finest analog tape recorders, but without the distortion and flutter and frequency response errors.
I did exactly that in my AES Audio Myths video, in the section starting at 45:48 about bit depth. A bit crusher plug-in doesn't use dither, so this shows a worst case example.

--Ethan

Mixing in another channel with a noise source demonstrates the effect of dither on the quantization/bit crusher error.
Frank Derks is offline  
Old 05-28-2014, 10:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 5,748
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Derks View Post

Mixing in another channel with a noise source demonstrates the effect of dither on the quantization/bit crusher error.

Sure, but the point of my demo is to show how bit depth affects quality, and not using dither makes it a worst case example. People obsess over the importance of 24 bits even though they've never tested it!

--Ethan

RealTraps - The acoustic treatment experts
Ethan's Audio Expert book

Ethan Winer is offline  
Old 05-28-2014, 10:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
I think it makes a good demo to crush to 4 bits and fade in the noise. The obsessives can hear how the dither noise linearizes the quantization errors. It may cure some of them. smile.gif
Frank Derks is offline  
Old 05-28-2014, 05:07 PM
Member
 
hogger129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The Dark Side Of The Moon
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 38
I don't think it's worth it unless your playback system is very high end. For example, I own five? different version of Dark Side Of The Moon - Black Triangle CD, MFSL CD, 1980s Capitol CD, 2011 Immersion CD, 2011 Immersion DVD-A/BD, and the 1973 Blue Triangle Harvest vinyl.

I can't tell a difference between the digital versions if I rip them and play them back on my Fiio or Sansa. If I put my BD in my PS3 and play it back on my main system, you can really tell there is more dynamic range and clarity over the 2011 Immersion CD. The vinyl I like a lot too but the dynamic range isn't there like it is with the CD or BD.

So, I'm happy with buying the CD or digital download. And if I buy the CD, I usually just rip it to 256k AAC anyway. (CD's are cheaper than just buying the album on iTunes and give flexibility if you want other formats down the road). All my vinyl is old stuff my parents left to me.
hogger129 is offline  
Old 05-29-2014, 11:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Utopianemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Why is it that we're not talking about whether Blu-Ray movies with 24/96 lossless audio sound better than their 16/48 DVD counterparts? I've done a lot of comparing of the two formats(easy to do, since many Blu-Ray discs today come with both versions, and pretty much every Blu-Ray with a lossless soundtrack has the Dolby Digital 5.1 track on it as well), and it's fairly easy to tell the difference, even with my "just ok" system.

I've never heard anyone say that there's no audible difference between 24/96 lossless movie STs and their Dolby Digital counterparts(other than people like my wife, who don't pay attention to that type of thing). Why is everyone making such a stink about hi-rez music vs. cd? Is there a crucial difference between movies and music I'm missing here?
Steve119 likes this.
Utopianemo is offline  
Old 05-30-2014, 04:29 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,328
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopianemo View Post

Why is everyone making such a stink about hi-rez music vs. cd? Is there a crucial difference between movies and music I'm missing here?

Yes. You are comparing lossy to lossless and they are comparing lossless with different bit depths and sampling frequencies. Apples and oranges.
FMW is offline  
Old 05-30-2014, 06:42 AM
Member
 
WayneJoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 146
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Also 99% of movies on Blu-ray are 16/48khz or 24/48khz. 96khz sampling rate is barely ever used in movies.
WayneJoy is online now  
Old 05-30-2014, 06:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed1em2 View Post

I think one of the problem regarding digital recordings is the quality (or the lack of quality) of the primary A/D conversion during recording process. IMO that conversion(A/D) is far from being perfect. I dare to say it's quite bad sometimes even with expensive studio gear. I 've noticed noone mention that very important link from the whole chain.

You can think what you will, but reality is what it is.

A/D and D/A conversion are among the most perfected of all kinds of audio processing. The one thing that has changed over the years is price/performance - it has steadily improved to the point where $1 chips can be sonically transparent.

Studios as a rule have been as a rule been using really good converters that are sonically transparent since the late 1980s. They used to cost serious money but now $100 portable stereo recorders have converters that have artifacts that are below audibility.

High End audio purveyors of overpriced gear would seem to like you to believe that it is still 1983...
RLBURNSIDE likes this.
arnyk is offline  
Old 05-30-2014, 06:53 AM
Member
 
hogger129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The Dark Side Of The Moon
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopianemo View Post

Why is it that we're not talking about whether Blu-Ray movies with 24/96 lossless audio sound better than their 16/48 DVD counterparts? I've done a lot of comparing of the two formats(easy to do, since many Blu-Ray discs today come with both versions, and pretty much every Blu-Ray with a lossless soundtrack has the Dolby Digital 5.1 track on it as well), and it's fairly easy to tell the difference, even with my "just ok" system.

I've never heard anyone say that there's no audible difference between 24/96 lossless movie STs and their Dolby Digital counterparts(other than people like my wife, who don't pay attention to that type of thing). Why is everyone making such a stink about hi-rez music vs. cd? Is there a crucial difference between movies and music I'm missing here?

What Blu Rays have a 24/96 track? All the ones I own have 24/48 as Dolby TRUEHD or DTS-HD Master Audio, or they have a 16/48 PCM track. For the lossy it's 16/48 either Dolby Digital or DTS.

But I am one of those who can't really tell a whole lot of difference when I take the HD audio and create a 640k AC3 5.1 track with it.

As for 'high-rez' music, I think it's just marketing nonsense to make you buy the same albums over again. CD is perfect when mastered right. Even lossy 256k downloads sound fine for most music.
CruelInventions likes this.
hogger129 is offline  
Old 05-30-2014, 06:57 AM
Member
 
WayneJoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 146
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by hogger129 View Post

What Blu Rays have a 24/96 track? All the ones I own have 24/48 as Dolby TRUEHD or DTS-HD Master Audio, or they have a 16/48 PCM track. For the lossy it's 16/48 either Dolby Digital or DTS.

But I am one of those who can't really tell a whole lot of difference when I take the HD audio and create a 640k AC3 5.1 track with it.

As for 'high-rez' music, I think it's just marketing nonsense to make you buy the same albums over again. CD is perfect when mastered right. Even lossy 256k downloads sound fine for most music.

Some concert Blu Rays have 24/96 tracks. The newly re-released Chicago Blu Ray has an upsampled 24/96 track.
WayneJoy is online now  
Old 06-01-2014, 02:48 PM
Newbie
 
jsalsburg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 13

In my recording studio, I create 24 bit, uncompressed, Masters of the artist's work. The benefits are not apparent to the recording artist until I play these high resolution Masters on my big system, it blows away the 16 bit, compressed, versions. The recording artists figure this is the way their "Masters" will sound on the CD. I have to remind them that this is not the case. While the 16 bit versions are sent to the CD house for distribution, the 24 bit versions are sequestered in my studio. I would like to make the 24 bit versions available to those purchasing the CDs but have not figured out how to do this yet, in an automatic way so the purchaser of the CD can download the high resolution versions with ease and convenience. If anyone has any good ideas how to do this, please chime in.

Utopianemo likes this.
jsalsburg is offline  
Old 06-01-2014, 02:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JWhip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wayne, PA
Posts: 4,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 286
I guess it depends on who the artists are and their record companies. Seems to me that the record companies will control this. I am not sure what you can do as you can't offer them as downloads, provided that their is a record company involved. If not, offering them as downloads would be an option.

Louder is NOT better!
JWhip is offline  
Old 06-01-2014, 02:57 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,399
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 3066
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsalsburg View Post
 

In my recording studio, I create 24 bit, uncompressed, Masters of the artist's work. The benefits are not apparent to the recording artist until I play these high resolution Masters on my big system, it blows away the 16 bit, compressed, versions. The recording artists figure this is the way their "Masters" will sound on the CD. I have to remind them that this is not the case. While the 16 bit versions are sent to the CD house for distribution, the 24 bit versions are sequestered in my studio. I would like to make the 24 bit versions available to those purchasing the CDs but have not figured out how to do this yet, in an automatic way so the purchaser of the CD can download the high resolution versions with ease and convenience. If anyone has any good ideas how to do this, please chime in.

 

Why do you have to compress the audio when you go to 16 bits?


Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
Old 06-01-2014, 02:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsalsburg View Post

In my recording studio, I create 24 bit, uncompressed, Masters of the artist's work. The benefits are not apparent to the recording artist until I play these high resolution Masters on my big system, it blows away the 16 bit, compressed, versions.
When you can show you can reliably tell which version you're listening to without knowing, I'll believe you.
A9X-308 is offline  
Old 06-01-2014, 03:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 3,229
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 639 Post(s)
Liked: 384
Originally Posted by jsalsburg View Post
Quote:
In my recording studio, I create 24 bit, uncompressed, Masters of the artist's work. The benefits are not apparent to the recording artist until I play these high resolution Masters on my big system, it blows away the 16 bit, compressed, versions.


Compression (and lossy encoding or transcoding ) are different from down sampling or (decimation)
Decimation is the process of reducing the sampling rate of a signal.
and thus * usually * reducing the bit rate also.
e.g., while 24/96 and 24/48 have the same bit rate, they have different sample rates vs 24/48 and 16/44
that each have different sample and bit rates .
also see sample rate conversion and up sampling (interpolation ) also
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Why do you have to compress the audio when you go to 16 bits?

I was Thinking the same thing , but at least you asked the question !

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -
tubetwister is online now  
Old 06-01-2014, 03:26 PM
Member
 
Steve119's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Why not create bluray audio? Can't be that difficult is it? Fair dos not every artist has a half decent sound system but still be pretty cool to have the option? Or is it only a download option you are after? :/

7.1 IIz heightsOnkyo Tx-nr626 a/v receiver
Boston acoustics soundware xs se surrounds and Sub
Boston acoustics A360 Floorstanders with A25 bookshelf Centre.
Youview box, PS3, Apple TV
Steve119 is offline  
Old 06-01-2014, 04:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. US Don't trust any air I can't see ☺
Posts: 3,229
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 639 Post(s)
Liked: 384
Expensive storage media and (huge waste of disk space ) although it can be done and is being done without much difficulty . BD storage density and data transfer rates are overkill for 2ch audio all by itself . High res digital downloads are already available now also as are ready made 24/96 Blue Ray Audio discs
See also , High Fidelity Pure Audio Blue Ray

Decently mastered 16/44 is plenty at playback .

If ~ 95% of commercial CD's were not mastered/compressed into all but 10dB (often much less that that ) of available redbook CD dynamic range (loudness wars ) nobody would be talking much about hires audio playback ...... or they wouldn't need to .

Not trying to prove higher res can't sound different or better I will leave that argument to those here that are better qualified.
I'm willing to say 16/44.1 vs higher res. shouldn't sound different or better though due to sampling rate /bit depth differences alone .

I did the CD/SACD/DVD / audio thing for a good while, and hires download for a short while, all things being equal e,g., recording /mastering quality a 16/44.1 CD sounds *just as good to me *There are times when hi res media and files *may sound better* due to better mastering quality ,source material ,and or recording when an equivalent quality 16/44.1 or exact copy 16/44.1 file or disc is not available .
Utopianemo likes this.

Hires Music formats ..............."Why does it sound like a CD ?" ............. can we make it louder "?
"The wireless music box has no commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
- David Sarnoff's associates at RCA the 1920's -
tubetwister is online now  
Old 06-03-2014, 11:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
WiWavelength's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,807
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopianemo View Post

Why is it that we're not talking about whether Blu-Ray movies with 24/96 lossless audio sound better than their 16/48 DVD counterparts? I've done a lot of comparing of the two formats(easy to do, since many Blu-Ray discs today come with both versions, and pretty much every Blu-Ray with a lossless soundtrack has the Dolby Digital 5.1 track on it as well), and it's fairly easy to tell the difference, even with my "just ok" system.

Trust me, the "difference" you hear between lossless and lossy audio on the same BD is attributable to mix changes, decoded level disparity, or placebo effect.

The following article on the subject has been frequently cited and is a real eye/ear opener. Read the relevant excerpt below:
Quote:
Next, we compared the original to the Dolby Digital Plus version (that codec is found on numerous BD titles, and like TrueHD, is fully backward compatible with regular Dolby Digital decoders). Even on this extremely high-end system, we couldn’t hear any difference between the uncompressed and the compressed. Then, we compared the higher bitrate (640 kbps) that is found on the Dolby Digital tracks on Blu-rays to the original. “Golden Ears” Morrison was able to hear the difference, but I, and most others in the room with us, did not. Each of us had our turn in the prime listening chair, and couldn’t know the origin of the clips or their order of presentation.

The shocker came when we compared the lower 448 kbps Dolby Digital DVD bitrate to the original. There was an audible difference, but it was only ever-so-slightly noticeable (and this is with a high end audio system in an acoustically controlled environment that is so far beyond what typical home theater systems are capable of resolving). There was just the slightest decrease in presence with the DD version, not exactly a softening of the sound, but just a tad less ambience and a similarly small tightening of the front soundstage’s depth. Quite a remarkable result, I thought, and I was highly impressed with how much fidelity can be packed into such a relatively small amount of bitspace. If I was doing actual scoring, I would have awarded a 4.8 grade to the results I heard – the audible difference was that subtle.

http://www.electronichouse.com/article/signal_to_noise_-_dolby_truehd_dts-hd_ma_vs._uncompressed_pcm/

AJ
antoniobiz1 likes this.
WiWavelength is offline  
Old 06-03-2014, 12:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,381
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1404
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post

Trust me,

AJ

LOL, thought this was an objective science forum?

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
Old 06-03-2014, 12:53 PM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,328
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 470 Post(s)
Liked: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post

LOL, thought this was an objective science forum?

What made you think that?
FMW is offline  
Old 06-03-2014, 12:57 PM
Senior Member
 
Utopianemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Why do you have to compress the audio when you go to 16 bits?
headroom.
Utopianemo is offline  
Old 06-03-2014, 01:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Utopianemo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiWavelength View Post

Trust me, the "difference" you hear between lossless and lossy audio on the same BD is attributable to mix changes, decoded level disparity, or placebo effect.

The following article on the subject has been frequently cited and is a real eye/ear opener. Read the relevant excerpt below:
http://www.electronichouse.com/article/signal_to_noise_-_dolby_truehd_dts-hd_ma_vs._uncompressed_pcm/

AJ
Who are you? Excuse me for being blunt, but I don't know you, I've never met you, and you don't know me. Feel free to tell me whatever you want and quote whatever you want, and I'll feel free to trust my own ears when it comes to enjoying content in my own house on my own system.
Steve119 likes this.
Utopianemo is offline  
Old 06-03-2014, 02:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopianemo View Post

headroom.
You mean that that recording session had greater than 96 dB of actual music dynamic range? Rally?
CharlesJ is offline  
Old 06-03-2014, 02:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopianemo View Post

..., and I'll feel free to trust my own ears when it comes to enjoying content in my own house on my own system.

I guess your brain has never mislead you with your perceptions? wink.gif
CharlesJ is offline  
Old 06-03-2014, 03:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,399
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 477 Post(s)
Liked: 671
Sometimes I think the people here that are the closest to the science may be the farthest from the art.

On the other hand, during a little lunch party at my old house in The Woodlands, a lady was sitting in the chair, I asked how does it sound?

With her cajun drawl, she said "I don't know. I don't listen intellectually."
eljr and briansxx like this.

I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest > Sweetspot
RayDunzl is online now  
Old 06-04-2014, 10:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 5,748
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post

Sometimes I think the people here that are the closest to the science may be the farthest from the art.

Unless you take a poll asking for the artistic background of those who are science-minded, you're merely guessing. I'm as science-minded as they get, and I've been a musician and recording engineer for my entire adult life. I've played lead guitar in bands and on radio commercials, and I've played the cello in several orchestras. I've written pop tunes and composed orchestra scores.

I know for certain that some others here who are also science-based play musical instruments, possibly at a high level. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the opposite - that those who distrust the "science" aspect of audio are not musicians or involved otherwise in "audible" arts.

Is it possible to post a two-level poll here asking 1) if you're mostly an objectivist or a subjectivist, and 2) how many musical instruments you play and at what level? This would be an interesting poll!

--Ethan

RealTraps - The acoustic treatment experts
Ethan's Audio Expert book

Ethan Winer is offline  
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off