Originally Posted by MadJazz
I personally disagree with him about vinyl/analog not sounding superior to CDs/digital. Though I'm sure many of you do agree with him.
As has already been stated, no one can truly disagree with your "opinion" on this matter. But technically speaking, CD's are superior to vinyl in many ways. Furthermore, in my opinion there is no actual analog vs digital argument... but more so analog sources vs. digital sources argument. I say this, because cd's merely hold the information digitally, but in the end, its all converted to analog when outputted to the speakers through a dac... Along with this fact, any analog input that goes into a receiver for pro logic, or any other processing besides straight mono and stereo, goes through a adc that converts it to digital information so that it may be processed. At this point, the analog signal you inputted is the equivalent of the digital signal. Because of this, it all boils down to the nyquist theorem on whether or not the sample rate is high enough to allow the dac's to properly reconstruct the signal into ana analog waveform... and it has been proven that this is the case.
Though i'd like to state, that as someone pointed out to me in a previous discussion, some research has been shown that people prefer audio with frequencies higher than our natural limit of 20 khz. If you consider this, the sample rate of cd's are not enough to reconstruct frequencies too much higher than 20 khz. But, correct me if i am wrong, but i believe lp's have their frequency range shrink with degradation (even if well taken care of), so even lp's, unless brand new, have similar limitations.
I've always thought tube amps sounded better than solid state ones, but I could be wrong.
As the article you linked to states, if there is a difference, it is from coloration that has been added to the signal, if any difference at all is heard. If you study some electrical engineering and study how both tubes and transistors work, you would realize there is no magic or anything behind it. They both in the end do the exact same thing, basically they're just switching on and off depending on the input signal.
But, as stated, you may have a "preference" for tube amps, and no one can argue against that.
As far as "The Golden Ear Lie", I'm of the understanding that 5% can hear what 95% cannot. Call it a "trained ear", or a "golden ear", or whatever.
As the author states, and i agree, the "golden ear" is probably nothing more than a more experienced person interpreting, what we all hear, a bit better. I've ran into a case where i could clearly hear harsh high frequencies and distortion from some tweeters... yet my dad (who i gave the speakers too) could not. This distortion was around the 8 khz range, and could clearly be heard when watching movies, and i know he was capable of hearing it too, yet he didn't seem too. That is until i played a straight 8k tone, and then he did. Now, i am not stating i have a "golden ear" or anything, but i am stating that i seem to be able to pickout specific points or sections from complex audio better than he is able too.
Our ears, barring any type of impairment, all "hear" the same thing, assuming you're human. But it is how we interpret this information that may vary.