The 10 Biggest Lies In Audio - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 64Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 581 Old 01-31-2009, 02:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
lcaillo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 3,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

So no, not everything is pure unsupported opinion, no matter what they taught you in art appreciation class. ;-)

Can't say that I ever took one of those, and I would not disagree with you on this point. My point was that you are likely pissing in the wind to try to bring good sense to a thread like this. I have voided in that hurricane myself.

Yes, calibration is important...every user should be calibrated.

Need electronics repair? A great place to start looking for a shop in your area: http://www.tvrepairpros.com/
lcaillo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 581 Old 01-31-2009, 04:26 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,111
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2247 Post(s)
Liked: 2110
I humbly request a reference to Post #2.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is offline  
post #33 of 581 Old 01-31-2009, 05:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
lcaillo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 3,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I humbly note that you nailed it right off. And as you know humbly doesn't come easy sometimes for me.

Yes, calibration is important...every user should be calibrated.

Need electronics repair? A great place to start looking for a shop in your area: http://www.tvrepairpros.com/
lcaillo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 581 Old 02-03-2009, 10:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jarrod1937's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,212
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:


oh i forgot about your watch example. i find it funny that the most accurate time piece on the planet is still the myan calander. the atomic clock had to be reset again by a second when was the last time someone reset the myan calander? So that annalogy really doenst work.

Are you seriously comparing a calender (myan or otherwise) to an atomic clock? I can confidentally say that is a terrible comparison. For one, calenders measure large sums of time, not seconds. Secondly, our current best atomic clock in use is accurate to 1 second in 80 million years... A new atomic clock that exist but is not in action is accurate up to 1 in 300 million years... Unless this comment is a joke that i don't get.
jarrod1937 is offline  
post #35 of 581 Old 02-03-2009, 11:52 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,111
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2247 Post(s)
Liked: 2110
Hopefully you will use the "Mayan Calendar" ... the "Myan" is a fake marketed by Monster.

If the Mayans are correct, this thread will end on 12/21/12 if you have an open mind.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is offline  
post #36 of 581 Old 02-06-2009, 06:35 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
MadJazz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Detroit Rock City
Posts: 32
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

There's no debate among knowlegable people, the article is just plain wrong.

The howstuffworks article even looks familiar to me. It reminds me of an article on the same topic was posted on Wikipedia, and quickly edited into shape by people who know their stuff.

I seem to recall that other howstuffworks articles also resemble Wikipedia articles. Maybe the howstuffworks people cribbed a copy of Wikipedia, but since they don't have such a good review process, they got stuck with this turkey.




I can't believe that you made it trough 3 semesters of electronics without learning enough to detect the obvious flaws in this article.

Perhaps your 3 semesters of electronics were under James Boyk at Caltech? Just for the record, Boyk is a far better musican than audio technologist.

No it wasn't at Caltech. Not only did I make it through 3 semesters, I received an A for the first 2, and did pretty well in the 3rd. However, I did struggle quite a bit in that 3rd semester. And that's the one where I was taught by my instructor about vinyl's advantages over CD/digital. So, me not being able to detect the inaccuracies of the article, largely have to do with what I was taught.
MadJazz is offline  
post #37 of 581 Old 02-06-2009, 07:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
EnergyOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 961
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Setting aside the advantages/disadvantages of tubes vs ss or digital vs vinyl, there is a certain romanticism missing from much modern equipment. The glow of tubes, the physical interaction demanded by the turntable, the over-engineered switches and knobs that look like they were built to last thermonuclear war. I think a lot of us who are attracted to tubes and/or vinyl know that its technically and sonically inferior to modern day ss and digital equipment (although it wasn't always that way) but its the same as those who are attracted to an antique or classic car. Its the feel, the styling, the sound (even if its not technically perfect).

Plus we can make our own tubes if need be. Try doping your NPNs in your garage.

The sleeper must awaken.
EnergyOwner is offline  
post #38 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 01:09 PM
Member
 
JTik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I don't understand why this is even a debate. Couldn't something like this be scientifically proven or disproven? Couldn't they just measure or graph the original analog data, then convert the analog to digital, then convert that digital back to analog and measure/graph that analog? Then overlay the two graphs and see if they are identical? I would assume something like this has been done before. If the article is correct then the graphs should be identical to 20kHz assuming a CD with the sampling rate of 44.1. Does anyone know if something like this has been done?

Also, what I seem to notice is the people that say digital is just as good or better seem to all agree on their explanation. The Vinyl supporters seem to be all over the place when trying to explain why. Some Vinyl supports agree digital is just as good but they say the sample rate on cd's isn't high enough and that is why they use vinyl. Others say the digital is inferior at any frequency range.

All of this is fairly moot to me, because even the vinyl people have to agree that even if there is a difference it is extremely small and in order to actually be able to hear that extremely small difference I would need a sound system that is far more expensive then I could afford.
dareelest1 likes this.
JTik is offline  
post #39 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 02:20 PM
 
atdamico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by JTik View Post

I don't understand why this is even a debate. Couldn't something like this be scientifically proven or disproven? Couldn't they just measure or graph the original analog data, then convert the analog to digital, then convert that digital back to analog and measure/graph that analog? Then overlay the two graphs and see if they are identical? I would assume something like this has been done before. If the article is correct then the graphs should be identical to 20kHz assuming a CD with the sampling rate of 44.1. Does anyone know if something like this has been done?

Also, what I seem to notice is the people that say digital is just as good or better seem to all agree on their explanation. The Vinyl supporters seem to be all over the place when trying to explain why. Some Vinyl supports agree digital is just as good but they say the sample rate on cd's isn't high enough and that is why they use vinyl. Others say the digital is inferior at any frequency range.

All of this is fairly moot to me, because even the vinyl people have to agree that even if there is a difference it is extremely small and in order to actually be able to hear that extremely small difference I would need a sound system that is far more expensive then I could afford.

You see, this post illustrates what the problem is. Did you ever stop to consider instead of there being "vinyl people" or "digital people" that, in fact, they are both??? I and most other "vinyl people" as you call us have both vinyl playback and digital playback. We listen to both digital and vinyl music as they both offer very different experiences. Vinyl didn't replace digital music for me, it added to my system and offers me both. And for the record (pun intended ) Most "vinyl people" would agree that CD has the potential to be superior to vinyl but most also agree that the mastering process of CD is in a HORRIBLE state while most mastering of vinyl these days strives to meet or exceed the process of decades ago. This is not an US or THEM argument, we are us and them.
atdamico is offline  
post #40 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 02:55 PM
Senior Member
 
Will-san's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cadbury8 View Post

the job of a light bulb is to make light. an incandesent light burns for around 5000 hours. a flourescent light burns about 10,000 hours. they both produce light. one light isnt better than the other. the flourescent light requires less maintence because you dont have to change the bulb as often. But when you have to service the fixture its going to cost alot more then replacing an incandescent lamp. But again... they both produce light which you need and if they are both set to the same color there will be no noticeable difference.

slightly off topic: I don't take issue with your point - but the lighting analogy is deeply flawed. they both have pros and cons regarding maintenance and such as you say (Incandescent can also be dimmed) but the way the produce light is very different. I can always tell the difference between fluorescent and incandescent light.

"I was just reading here on my internet that Tofu is made from little baby seals". - Strong Bad
Will-san is offline  
post #41 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 03:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,156
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 378
Quote:


Couldn't they just measure or graph the original analog data, then convert the analog to digital, then convert that digital back to analog and measure/graph that analog? Then overlay the two graphs and see if they are identical? I would assume something like this has been done before. If the article is correct then the graphs should be identical to 20kHz assuming a CD with the sampling rate of 44.1. Does anyone know if something like this has been done?

Yes, with the proviso that there are more sophisticated ways to compare two analog outputs than "overlaying graphs." Nothing is perfect in the real world, of course, so those outputs will always measure a little differently, so there's always room to argue. That's why we also need listening tests.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #42 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 03:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,156
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 378
Quote:


You see, this post illustrates what the problem is. Did you ever stop to consider instead of there being "vinyl people" or "digital people" that, in fact, they are both??? I and most other "vinyl people" as you call us have both vinyl playback and digital playback. We listen to both digital and vinyl music as they both offer very different experiences. Vinyl didn't replace digital music for me, it added to my system and offers me both. And for the record (pun intended ) Most "vinyl people" would agree that CD has the potential to be superior to vinyl but most also agree that the mastering process of CD is in a HORRIBLE state while most mastering of vinyl these days strives to meet or exceed the process of decades ago. This is not an US or THEM argument, we are us and them.

It might be more accurate to call them "vinyl partisans" and "digital partisans," recognizing that many folks are neither, and the labels don't do a lot of us justice. I'd be considered a "digital partisan" in this debate, for example, because I consider digital to be technically superior. But I also collect old jazz LPs, and love their sound.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #43 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 03:51 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,111
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2247 Post(s)
Liked: 2110
30+ years ago, we'd be discussing vinyl vs. reel to reel vs. 8-track vs. cassette.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is offline  
post #44 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 04:22 PM
 
atdamico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

It might be more accurate to call them "vinyl partisans" and "digital partisans," recognizing that many folks are neither, and the labels don't do a lot of us justice. I'd be considered a "digital partisan" in this debate, for example, because I consider digital to be technically superior. But I also collect old jazz LPs, and love their sound.

I agree and you agree but many don't. If I say that I like vinyl then I am labled at once and start taking shi* off of those who seem to have an axe to grind. You weren't around then but a while back there were some "heated" exchanges that went on for quite a while on this topic. Those that preferred digital (CD) were relentless. Those that preferred vinyl seemed to prefer it due to the mastering process that I was speaking of earlier. But some just can't seem to get it. When its actually very simple. CD clearly has the potential to be a much superior format but the way CD is being mastered today leaves a lot to be desired, consequently some of us are adding (not replacing) vinyl to our systems. I collect old Blues and theres just something about blues and vinyl that seem to go together! By the way, I liked your post in the amps sound the same thread. You synopsized it prefectly. We may not agree on Technics tt's but we do on most else.
atdamico is offline  
post #45 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 04:24 PM
 
atdamico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post

30+ years ago, we'd be discussing vinyl vs. reel to reel vs. 8-track vs. cassette.



I vote for reel to reel
atdamico is offline  
post #46 of 581 Old 02-09-2009, 05:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,156
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 154 Post(s)
Liked: 378
Quote:


I vote for reel to reel

You would.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #47 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 01:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mr. Audio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I just read the article and I'll give my 2 cents.

The Cable Lie. Totally agree with.

The Vacuum Tube Lie. This one is hard to really prove since you just can't go out and buy a tube receiver anymore for the normal price of a solid state. However what I can go on his how people who swear by tube always describe the sound the exact same way. Soft, smooth and warm. While I haven't heard a tube amp next to a transistor amp, I can't say for sure, but I'm inclined to agree with the author because tubes are not as quick as on the switch as transistors are therefore I can see them yielding a softer, warmer and less accurate sound. I don't believe that you need two systems to accurately reproduce HT and music. The tube sound would naturally not be good for HT. So why would it be good for music? It sounds to me that tubes cover up harsh highs and midrange with their inability to react as fast as solid state. In the end the harsh music sounds better, but good recordings sound muffled.

The AntiDigital Lie. Might as well face it. Even if it does sound better in some respects, the record is destroyed by the needle a little more every single time it is played which slowly kill it's upper frequency response. Even the cleanest record pops. Oh, and they don't make mainstream records anymore. I've never done a comparison between the two with the same recordings because most of the stuff I listen to never came out on LP. Plus recording quality back in LP days was not as good as todays even though a lot of todays music sucks. Nobody can actually prove that vinyl sounds better than CD because most people don't have a record player anymore. I personally seriously doubt that vinyl can out perform a CD with an exact same recording.

ABX listening Tests. I totally agree with the author.

Negative Feedback. I totally agree with the author.

Burn In Lie. I totally agree with the author.

The Biwire Lie. I totally agree with the author.

Ok to cut it short, I totally agree with the rest of the article. It was very well written. It should help people make much wiser decisions on what to buy and do to make a substantial audio difference instead of piddling around with overpriced garbage that makes no difference other than in the weight of your wallet and buying extra speaker wire to hook your speakers up twice. Not to mention to help stop the bickering about a dead technology that is seen as great simply because it is dead.

It's better and cheaper to spend money on room treatments and speakers. Those two alone will drastically improve sound for much less than all the little expensive audiophool tweaks that have no logic to them whatsoever.
dareelest1 likes this.

Your system can shine no matter what it's made of.......except if it's Bose.
Mr. Audio is offline  
post #48 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 04:51 AM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,420
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1251
Quote:
Originally Posted by JTik View Post

Couldn't something like this be scientifically proven or disproven?

Long ago.

Quote:


Couldn't they just measure or graph the original analog data, then convert the analog to digital, then convert that digital back to analog and measure/graph that analog?

Tha has been done long ago, and we can do it any time we want to quite easily with modern tools.

Quote:


Then overlay the two graphs and see if they are identical?

Nothing in the world of analog data is identical.

Quote:


I would assume something like this has been done before.

Right.

Quote:


If the article is correct then the graphs should be identical to 20kHz assuming a CD with the sampling rate of 44.1. Does anyone know if something like this has been done?

This has been done, and can be redone whenever.

Quote:


Also, what I seem to notice is the people that say digital is just as good or better seem to all agree on their explanation.

If you say so. ;-)

Quote:


The Vinyl supporters seem to be all over the place when trying to explain why. Some Vinyl supports agree digital is just as good but they say the sample rate on cd's isn't high enough and that is why they use vinyl. Others say the digital is inferior at any frequency range.

They get to be wrong.

Quote:


All of this is fairly moot to me, because even the vinyl people have to agree that even if there is a difference it is extremely small and in order to actually be able to hear that extremely small difference I would need a sound system that is far more expensive then I could afford.

It doesn't take a great sound system to hear how much worse vinyl sounds than a CD, given equally good music on both. Ever hear a CD go "tic-tic-tic"?

Ever hear a LP that didn't?
arnyk is offline  
post #49 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 05:32 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,111
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2247 Post(s)
Liked: 2110
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Ever hear a LP that didn't?

Yes... stop by for a demo.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is offline  
post #50 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 05:59 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:


due to the fact that a digital recording can't capture the entire soundwave, and sounds that transition too quickly for the sample rate, will be distorted. A vinyl record's groove's match the waveform exactly. CDs can't replicate this 100%.


Someone else already replied but once again this is 100% false. Its amazing that people will post something like this to further defend their favorite format

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #51 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:02 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:


Ok to cut it short, I totally agree with the rest of the article. It was very well written. It should help people make much wiser decisions on what to buy ....


Very true!!!!

But its too bad that not everyone in the audio game will play by the scientific truths....we have snake oil audio salesmen, we have dumb student audio salesmen and just simple/ignorant/dumb salesmen to distort all those truths

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #52 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:05 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:


most also agree that the mastering process of CD is in a HORRIBLE state while most mastering of vinyl these days strives to meet or exceed the process of decades ago.


Could you post the link that has those "most experts"?

or when you say "most" you are really not talking about the "most experts", Im sorry but I find it unthinkable that a music recording studio would create a CD that is not techincally superior to any vinyl record?

This does not mean you should like Vinyl, go ahead and enjoy it but lets atleast agree with the fact that technology has exponentially improved over the years.

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #53 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:09 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:


it's the bull*****iing young kiddies that I don't respect even on forums I just don't want to know them because there full of it!

JBL, you still live with your mom so I doubt you have much of a leg to stand on when you post that "young kiddies that I dont respect" speech.

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #54 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:17 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:


One outstanding example of this kind of hysteria that I've personally witnessed invovled Fremer from Stereophile. I would have been physically intimidated if I wasn't so much bigger than he. :-(


I have read about Fremer many, many times....how many people really want to kick his ass? It just seem that if he was in a bar (where Im from) that would have happened many times.

Note: Im from Hockey Town Canada, where even best friends would throw down the gloves and beat the crap out of each other

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #55 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
SpectralD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think people often conflate the "loudness wars" and related mastering issues with the rise of digital delivery formats. Rock and pop albums mastered back in the days of vinyl often make better use of the available dynamic range, but that's not a vinyl vs. CD thing. It's a shift in practices that happened over time.
SpectralD is offline  
post #56 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:25 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:


Rock and pop albums mastered back in the days of vinyl often make better use of the available dynamic range, but that's not a vinyl vs. CD thing.


How does vinyl have "better" dynamic range? Is there even a "dynamic range" spec on vinyl recordings?


I would think that we can do almost anything digitally so we could just improve even the dynamic range on a CD.

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #57 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Rutgar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 5,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Audio View Post

I just read the article and I'll give my 2 cents.

The Cable Lie. Totally agree with.

The Vacuum Tube Lie. This one is hard to really prove since you just can't go out and buy a tube receiver anymore for the normal price of a solid state. However what I can go on his how people who swear by tube always describe the sound the exact same way. Soft, smooth and warm. While I haven't heard a tube amp next to a transistor amp, I can't say for sure, but I'm inclined to agree with the author because tubes are not as quick as on the switch as transistors are therefore I can see them yielding a softer, warmer and less accurate sound. I don't believe that you need two systems to accurately reproduce HT and music. The tube sound would naturally not be good for HT. So why would it be good for music? It sounds to me that tubes cover up harsh highs and midrange with their inability to react as fast as solid state. In the end the harsh music sounds better, but good recordings sound muffled.

The AntiDigital Lie. Might as well face it. Even if it does sound better in some respects, the record is destroyed by the needle a little more every single time it is played which slowly kill it's upper frequency response. Even the cleanest record pops. Oh, and they don't make mainstream records anymore. I've never done a comparison between the two with the same recordings because most of the stuff I listen to never came out on LP. Plus recording quality back in LP days was not as good as todays even though a lot of todays music sucks. Nobody can actually prove that vinyl sounds better than CD because most people don't have a record player anymore. I personally seriously doubt that vinyl can out perform a CD with an exact same recording.

ABX listening Tests. I totally agree with the author.

Negative Feedback. I totally agree with the author.

Burn In Lie. I totally agree with the author.

The Biwire Lie. I totally agree with the author.

Ok to cut it short, I totally agree with the rest of the article. It was very well written. It should help people make much wiser decisions on what to buy and do to make a substantial audio difference instead of piddling around with overpriced garbage that makes no difference other than in the weight of your wallet and buying extra speaker wire to hook your speakers up twice. Not to mention to help stop the bickering about a dead technology that is seen as great simply because it is dead.

It's better and cheaper to spend money on room treatments and speakers. Those two alone will drastically improve sound for much less than all the little expensive audiophool tweaks that have no logic to them whatsoever.

And I pretty much disagree with almost everything you agree with. So there.

Rutgar is offline  
post #58 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:52 AM
Advanced Member
 
Mr. Audio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 775
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar View Post

And I pretty much disagree with almost everything you agree with. So there.

Is that so? Why?

Your system can shine no matter what it's made of.......except if it's Bose.
Mr. Audio is offline  
post #59 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 06:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ovation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. Hubert, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 3,616
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 187 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

How does vinyl have "better" dynamic range? Is there even a "dynamic range" spec on vinyl recordings?

It's not that vinyl has "better" dynamic range--it's that better use of its range is often made than that of mainstream CD releases of recent years. Even within the CD format itself, this is apparent if you have CDs that are old enough. It has been well-documented that pressure from marketing departments, coupled with the fact that far more music is listened to "on the go" (car, iPod, background while doing something else) than it used to be, has led to a deliberate compression of dynamic range to, on average, under 6 dB total range (the actual useful range for the vast majority of listeners, IIRC, is about 60-70 dB and CD has 96 dB of room. I believe vinyl has about 60-70, though I'm sure more knowledgeable people in here can provide more precise figures). I believe his point was that vinyl tends to be less "compressed" in its dynamic range than modern CDs, so it makes "better" use of the range available to it. All things being equal, there is no reason why vinyl should be more accurate than digital (assuming CD quality or better). Vinyl introduces distortion that CD does not (that too has been documented). The distortion is often described as euphonic (leading to a more pleasing, if less accurate, reproduction of the original recording). Similar distortion frequently occurs with tube-based gear. The euphonic nature of this distortion is what leads to these "debates" about which is "better". There is no way to resolve such a debate. Which is "more accurate", however, can be resolved with instrumentation and digital wins hands down. But, just like a speaker that is more "neutral" (more accurate) can make some recordings less pleasant because they do not "mask" the technical shortcomings of the recording, some people feel "digital" is "less pleasant" and so they turn to vinyl.
dareelest1 likes this.
Ovation is offline  
post #60 of 581 Old 02-10-2009, 07:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
SpectralD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 882
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

How does vinyl have "better" dynamic range? Is there even a "dynamic range" spec on vinyl recordings?


I would think that we can do almost anything digitally so we could just improve even the dynamic range on a CD.

You misread me -- I said the recordings back then tended to make better use of the available dynamic range, not that the available dynamic range was greater. These days a lot of recordings are mastered with heavy dynamic compression, so the overall volume is more consistent (and tends to be as loud as possible). This kills dynamics.
SpectralD is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Audio Theory, Setup, and Chat

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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