Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Get a view of an entire thread on one page

Critic's Corner

It is not: and is there is a decided lack of data on all

12.189.30.98

In Reply to: RE: Why so few vinyl reviews in TAS and Stereophile? posted by ruxtonvet on March 18, 2009 at 14:25:59

sides....

We have all kinds of numbers out there, the major labels are making claims to support their position; then the labels and various download sites are making claims to support the growth of their scene. Then, you have the record stores, moving used and new product.

Part of that resurgence, 5 years ago, was DJs still mixing with vinyl. IME, recent, everyone's mixing with their MAC these days.

My very active and large local audiophile society has lined up a series of either computer based audio playback meetings, or tweak meetings, or combinations thereof.

With a dead economy, the dying art of listening for its own sake, the desire for extreme portability, the desire for multifunction, big old vinyl records that don't sound very good compared to CD and SACD, are even more of time waster than SACD: which is also dying as more and more classical music fans go away.

I can't imagine why any magazine would want to address cassette tapes, vinyl, etc.

He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
He turns to us and speaks

Follow Ups:

Je ris mon mauvais rire. Audiophiles get the sound they deserve.(nt) - samtellig 13:24:34 03/20/09 (11)
(nt)
- RE: Je ris mon mauvais rire. Audiophiles get the sound they deserve.(nt) - thetubeguy1954 11:56:47 03/25/09 (0)
  Hello Sam!
  
  Not trying to start anything with you here. I don't believe true audiophiles, who I'd refer to as subjectivists, are getting what they deserve. I believe one of the problems lies with the LFO (Lunatic Fringe Objectivists) constantly attempting to either:
  
  a) save all newbies from subjectivist mags & audiophiles.
  b) convert subjectivists to their LFO audio religon.
  
  I can understand why many mainstream audio manufacturers are selling what they sell. They must be reading where LFOs are declaring only speakers and their interaction with the room affects the sound or perhaps they've read the other LFO claim that all properly designed wires/cables and audio components that are functioning properly have no sound of their own. If that's what your consumer base believes why should audio manufacturers build them better wires/cables or audio components?
  
  Then there's Peter Aczel's BS about the 10 Biggest Lies In Audio, as well as the other problem which came about with the demise of Audio, High Fidelity & Stereo Review. When those mags passed Stereophile as well as the other audio mags picked up a lot of their old readership. Readership that is in many cases, was a lot closer to the LFO religon than it is to subjective audiophile listening. So if these readers believe virtually all audio components sound the same of course they're going to whine about expensive audio components and why shouldn't they "if" they really believe that? In their mindset the $100 amp sounds like the $100K amp.
  
  These days to declare you're a subjective audiophile that trusts their ears and allows them to be their final arbitrator earns one nothing but ridicule, where subjective audiophile is turned into subjective audiophool! Personally I thank Stereophile, TAS, FI, Ultimate Audio, Listener and magazines like them for teaching me so much when I was much younger ---{ I've read most of these mags from issue #1 }--- as I learned, I also learned to trust my own ears and judgement. I'm glad they're still reviewing components subjectively as well! These days I read Stereophile & TAS more to know what's out there than anything else.
  
  I'm grateful for manufactuers/designers like John Curl, Charles Hansen, James Bongiorno, Manley, VAC, Mastersound, Lowther etc. It's these folks who have helped keep audio alive for true audiophiles everywhere.
  
  Thetubeguy1954
  
  Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
- And you're doing your best to help them it seems - Myles B. Astor 17:25:54 03/20/09 (6)
  nt
  Myles B. Astor
  - Nah, Myles, I write for audiophobes.(nt) - samtellig 21:30:50 03/20/09 (5)
    (nt)
    - Is that what the latest SP survey says? - Myles B. Astor 03:36:26 03/23/09 (4)
      nt
      Myles B. Astor
      - Myles, a lot of people are turned off by extreme high-end -- or "ultimate" -- audio.(nt) - samtellig 06:59:30 03/23/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Is that what the latest SP survey says? posted by Myles B. Astor on March 23, 2009 at 03:36:26
        
        (NT)
        
        I think more are "bothered" or "upset" they don't have the money to be involved in it......... - Awe-d-o-file 04:54:17 03/24/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Myles, a lot of people are turned off by extreme high-end -- or "ultimate" -- audio.(nt) posted by samtellig on March 23, 2009 at 06:59:30
        
        I'm not jealous or bothered but I don't have the money to invest the 100-200K I would if I had it.
        
        ET
        
        Question "Authority", the mainstream media sucks - Go Independent and hold BOTH parties accountable instead of just the other guys!
        
        I need music to help forget the reality of today
        
        I'd rather have an olive farm in Sicily - Sordidman 13:19:25 03/24/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I think more are "bothered" or "upset" they don't have the money to be involved in it......... posted by Awe-d-o-file on March 24, 2009 at 04:54:17
        
        next door to Ginger Baker.
        
        He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
        near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
        He turns to us and speaks
        
        You can't make everyone happy.... - Myles B. Astor 13:41:08 03/23/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Myles, a lot of people are turned off by extreme high-end -- or "ultimate" -- audio.(nt) posted by samtellig on March 23, 2009 at 06:59:30
        
        Tell me why they aren't turned off by:
        
        Expensive watches
        Cars
        Pens
        Food
        Wine
        Women.....
        
        Because when have u seen anyone in their respective industry knocking their own products?
        Myles B. Astor
- Truer words are rarely spoken -t - Sordidman 14:13:07 03/20/09 (2)
  .
  
  He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
  near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
  He turns to us and speaks
  - Absolutely true. Now... - Jim Austin 17:45:09 03/20/09 (1)
    ...if I could only figure out what those words mean. ;-)
    - Ha! - Sordidman 21:46:00 03/20/09 (0)
      Couldn't resist quoting the Gang of Four
      
      "I know that you think that you know what I said, but do you realize that what I said is not what I meant?"
      
      :-)
      
      Hope that you're enjoying some great music fellow Jim, and a great weekend!!
      
      He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
      near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
      He turns to us and speaks
You're Joking Right??? - Myles B. Astor 07:22:43 03/20/09 (30)
YJR?
Myles B. Astor
- Do you think so? -t - Sordidman 13:18:27 03/20/09 (29)
  .
  
  He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
  near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
  He turns to us and speaks
  - Then That's a Sad Commentary - Myles B. Astor 14:15:40 03/20/09 (28)
    Your logic is sadly flawed. Why don't u look and give us numbers on the number of turntables being sold, both low and high end as well as record cleaning machines? Those sales are still rock solid.
    
    Who cares about what sayeth the record companies? They're the ones who touted the perfection of digital and couldn't wait to switch (yet the overwhelming majority of engineers I've spoken with didn't like the sound of digital). Why? So they could make a bigger profit margin. No one to this day has ever answered the question why record companies charged more for CDs than LPs when clearly CD cost far less to manufacture than did LPs (like 0.50 or less each). And now that CD sales have tanked thanks to the internet, record companies are now releasing vinyl so they can make more money. Record companies would sell their grandmother down the river just to make another buck.
    
    Why don't' u check with someone like Chad Kassem, Jim Davis or Bob Bantz as far as their LP sales? They keep a far more reliable pulse on the music (and high-end audio) industry than the record companies. One can't but be impressed by the number of new LPs (and we're not talked dance vinyl) appearing on Acoustic Sounds, Elusive Disc, Music Direct Websites every week. The new 45 rpm Blue Note jazz releases are simply spectactular, esp. given the age of the master tapes. Do you think Chas would continue releasing jazz lps if there wasn't any demand? In fact, he's coming out with the Impulse catalog on 45 rpm.
    
    I've done my homework, having done comparisons in the studio among the different formats as well as assembling some pretty good examples of SOTA analog, digital and RTR front ends (including early copies of 15 ips/2track tapes) in my reference system. I'm sorry but CDs and SACDs just don't cut the mustard or come remotely close to the sound of the original master tapes. If u don't believe me, read Steve Hoffman's comments where he's compared the final versions of the CD,SACD and vinyl to the tape he's mastered. The sound of the SACDs were the furthest from the master tapes, followed by the CD with the lp being the closest. SH has no axe to grind; he's going to do the best with each of the mediums he works with as evidenced by his getting the best gear for each.
    
    Furthermore in my listening sessions, the turntable comes the closest to the sound the 15 ips/2 track tapes than does the CD/SACD by a wide margin. Go compare the Tape Projects release of Bill Evans with the LP and the CD/SACD and tell me which is closer to the tape. I've an early 15 ips 2 track copy of Kind of Blue and it blows all the other mediums out of the water - but digital makes the poorest showing. The same holds true for Reiner's Scheherazade. Digital just doesn't cut it when it comes to tonality, low level information, ambience retrieval, etc. Oh and if we're talking about dynamic ease across the musical spectrum, nothing but nothing touches the 15 ips tape-but the vaunted digital is still the worst.
    
    Digital is better than when it was first released in 1980 but it still is lacking in the quintessential elements important for musical reproduction. Digital may sport impressive specs but it just sounds amusical. It still sounds mechanical. So what if it's quiet during a piannisimo if it doesn't sound like music? While analog has its own set of colorations, they are clearly more consonant with the recorded music.
    
    Myles Astor
    
    Myles B. Astor
    - http://cgi.audioasylum.com/systems/8938.html (Open in New Window)
    - The dinosaurs became extinct, or...... - Sordidman 21:43:27 03/20/09 (10)
      evolved into beautiful birds.
      
      You can be expansive, or contract. But reality is coming.
      
      Sad? Maybe yes, but, perhaps there are new opportunities.
      
      I don't think that Rega or Rockport are having to stop taking new orders in order to fill their massive backlogs. And, 15 year old girls aren't lining up to get that new 180gram LP of the Firebird Suite.
      
      Sure, people are going to restore old opera house radios, you can still buy the tubes on Ebay. Some will even listen to ragtime music and pine about the good old days of "better sound:" the Shadow knows.
      
      You know the truth, that is why you write so passionately, I picture you banging hard on the keys.
      
      Yeah, I've been to the mastering studio. I have had two CDs mastered at KDisK, and have lived around the corner from Fantasy Studios in Berkeley. My best friend is a studio engineer and the guitar player and founder of the Counting Crows. We had a Lacquer master made there, it was great fun. I've played on and helped record some of the Crow's demo tapes. I've heard many reel to reel two inch master tapes in the studio. And, have sat in on several mastering sessions, both DAT, and 2inch. None were the same. And believe me, your mastering engineer, never gets it right to lacquer or glass the first, or third, or fifth time. There's a lot of evil compressed from those DAT and 2 track two inch tapes. And the poor engineer, always the victim of the Record Company, telling them to make it louder, and squeeze out those quiet parts; cause we can't have no dead air, ya know?
      
      We're talking about the medium, and the message. There are plenty of shite recordings, - long before they get to the poor mastering engineer, who has the weight of the world, caught in between his own sense of "right" and the label. Then, they get mastered.
      
      I've heard recordings that sound better on vinyl, yessireee. There're recordings that sound better on SACD. Heck, I've even heard some SACDs, - (Jazz at the Pawnshop), that sounds a lot better on redbook JVC than vinyl or SACD.
      
      All it takes is one listen to a "good" redbook recording on a VRDS-NEO Esoteric transport to know that there's more info to get out, and it is improvement on your average $2000 transport.
      
      MikeL has it all, but does it take a $50,000 Rockport to equal a $10,000 Meitner for SOTA playback? And what about Mr. Snap, Crackle, and POP? How much would you sacrifice for the willing suspension of disbelief in your average, scrape and play?
      
      Make no mistake, no one is going to be building any redbook CD transports any time soon. What few will be left in the future, will be DVD, and those too will be gone with the Mastadon.
      
      Solid State hard drives are nice and quiet, and offer a big step up. If you haven't heard Wavelength USB, Empirical USB junction, or some of the new Firewire, you're not only behind, but missing out on some good fun.
      
      And that's what it's all about, right? But, scraping a little pointy piece of metal along a very large black piece of static-plastic is no way to reproduce music, and it deserves to be put in the museum with the old man's story of his past, those $3000 cleaning machines, and his romanticized nostalgia. And there's nothing wrong at all with that, but it is, what it is.
      
      We have something better now.
      
      He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
      near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
      He turns to us and speaks
      - "we have something better now" riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight - Analog Scott 09:42:40 03/22/09 (9)
        
        In Reply to: RE: The dinosaurs became extinct, or...... posted by Sordidman on March 20, 2009 at 21:43:27
        
        Where can I get the download of Coltrane's Bluetrain for my hardrive that will sound better than my AP reissue played back on my Forsell/Koetsu/ARC SP 10? I-tunes?
        
        HifiTracks.com will have it soon - Sordidman 10:39:09 03/23/09 (8)
        
        In Reply to: RE: "we have something better now" riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight posted by Analog Scott on March 22, 2009 at 09:42:40
        
        if it's worth having.
        
        The best implimentation of Coltrane is on JVC, and that's REDBOOK CD!! It's richer, more detailed, better balanced, more natural sounding.
        
        Once that stuff gets transferred to digital files, and the issue of the transport (especially those noisey crackling, scraping needles), gets out of the way, we're really going to be groovin'
        
        And of course, there're always going to be some singles, obscure little live performances, bootlegs, that are never going to make it. Some of that is definitely a bummer, (I've got a couple of discs on vinyl only).
        But, in the long term, big picture; clearing that space on the equipment for something better is a good thing. Throw out those VHS tape decks...
        
        He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
        near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
        He turns to us and speaks
        
        Let me get this straight..... - Analog Scott 19:52:59 03/23/09 (7)
        
        In Reply to: RE: HifiTracks.com will have it soon posted by Sordidman on March 23, 2009 at 10:39:09
        
        > > if it's worth having.> >
        
        IF??? you are suggesting that LPs are dinosaurs based on some format that does not actually exist as of now and may not deliver the goods?
        
        > > The best implimentation of Coltrane is on JVC, and that's REDBOOK CD!! It's richer, more detailed, better balanced, more natural sounding.> >
        
        Than the AP 45rpm? I'd have to hear that for myself. Do you have a link to the JVC where I can buy it?
        
        > > Once that stuff gets transferred to digital files, and the issue of the transport (especially those noisey crackling, scraping needles), gets out of the way, we're really going to be groovin'> >
        
        If only it were that simple.
        
        > > And of course, there're always going to be some singles, obscure little live performances, bootlegs, that are never going to make it. Some of that is definitely a bummer, (I've got a couple of discs on vinyl only).
        But, in the long term, big picture; clearing that space on the equipment for something better is a good thing. Throw out those VHS tape decks...> >
        
        We are talking about a nonexistant unproven format with god knows what kind of mastering are we not? I don't think I'm going to clear my shelves just yet. I'm not trading in my car in hopes of getting a fusion powered hovercraft either.
        
        Guess we can't be talking about the same thing - Sordidman 11:58:43 03/24/09 (6)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Let me get this straight..... posted by Analog Scott on March 23, 2009 at 19:52:59
        
        ""IF??? you are suggesting that LPs are dinosaurs based on some format that does not actually exist as of now and may not deliver the goods?""
        
        What do you mean? Of course the format exists. SACDs, CDs, and now digital files have been around for a quite a while. Some recordings, and implimentations are better than others, contingent on the recording and the implimentation of the format.
        
        ""Than the AP 45rpm? I'd have to hear that for myself. Do you have a link to the JVC where I can buy it?""
        
        Nope, don't know if it exists. I was referring more to Coltrane JVC CDs that I've compared to the vinyl; and rendering my opinion.
        I'm not aware of that particular Coltrane EP and certainly wouldn't be able to comment on its availability. And, I also said that one will be able to find a ton of stuff like this that would be considered by most to be an obscure, or not so popular moment in an artist's career that is not going to be 'worth it' to transfer. I might consider hooking up my old Dual turntable at somepoint if I get a preamp or an analog input on my APL so that I can play my band's EP and a Simple Minds EP. (Right now, it'd be stupid for me to spend my time and money for a couple of songs). If it's worth it to you, FABULOUS, as I said, vinyl isn't going completely away: so enjoy.
        
        "If only it were that simple"
        
        Pretty much is, but nobody said that you can't use your old vinyl rig, it just won't sound as good.
        
        ""We are talking about a nonexistant"
        NO it's here and sounding great.
        
        "unproven format"
        
        Don't know what you mean by unproven?? Care to explain? There's nothing to prove in high end audio. Do you mean if it works or "sounds better?" most people who've experimented say that SACD and computer based playback sounds better than redbook, (with the right redbook player), all formats "sound better" than the horrible scraping, IMO. Lots of people have removed vinyl inlieu of SACD. As computer based audio grows, more and more people will be pulling SACD and CD. Practically the only people that are saying that their computer audio rig doesn't quite measure up to redbook playback, are the people who are comparing it to the Esoteric VRDS-NEO transports; and they are pretty darn expensive.
        
        "with god knows what kind of mastering are we not?"
        
        ?????? Mastering can possibly, and sometimes is, on a digital file.
        
        "I don't think I'm going to clear my shelves just yet."
        
        Nobody's asking you too, but that doesn't have anything at all to do with the fact that you don't get scraping sounds and pops and clicks.
        
        "I'm not trading in my car in hopes of getting a fusion powered hovercraft either.""
        
        of course that's a ridiculous analogy considering the fact that there is no such thing as a fusion powered hovercraft and SACDs, CD, and digital files are here and being improved upon as we write.
        
        He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
        near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
        He turns to us and speaks
        
        I see you don't understand mastering and believe that if it is digital it is better - Analog Scott 18:01:35 03/24/09 (5)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Guess we can't be talking about the same thing posted by Sordidman on March 24, 2009 at 11:58:43
        
        that means your opinion is worthless on the subject. sorry to be so blunt and dismissive but that's the facts. anyone with any reasonable experience with real world LPs, CDs and the like alrady knows that the mastering is far more significant than the medium. It seems you don't even understand what mastering is.
        
        "?????? Mastering can possibly, and sometimes is, on a digital file."
        
        your foot, your mouth.
        
        I've been included on several mastering sessions - Sordidman 09:52:34 03/25/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I see you don't understand mastering and believe that if it is digital it is better posted by Analog Scott on March 24, 2009 at 18:01:35
        
        with my own band, the Counting Crows: and at KDisc in NYC and Fantasy Studios in Berkeley.
        
        Do you know what mastering is?
        
        Did you know that you can't run the same EQ set up if you're making a Lacquer master that you can with a glass master?
        
        Do you know how many masters (copies) are made in a typical Lacquer or glass production run?
        
        Did you know that many of the first CDs that came out in the 80s used the same EQ settings as the vinyl Lacquers?
        
        My comment about the digital files were that there are artists who are taking their two channel mixed down DAT tapes, (and also recording directly to computer/digital files), and then putting them up on sale on the Internet, without ever doing any mastering, (pre-press to glass or lacquer EQing), whatsoever.
        
        "It seems you don't even understand what mastering is."
        
        It seems that you don't!
        
        ""anyone with any reasonable experience with real world LPs, CDs""
        
        knows that ALL ASPECTS of the RECORDING PROCESS are CRITICAL to making a good recording. And there are VARYING DEGREES of QUALITY and CARE that goes into every aspect of the project.
        
        If you ever compare the vinyl of anything as silly as the Genesis discs that were made in the USA by Atco/Atlantic and the discs that were made my Charisma in England; you'd be able to tell that the mastering and pressing and maybe even the grade of vinyl was crap with Atco as the Charisma discs sounded notably better: with the same two channel mix downs. The first production runs of the CDs, (ie the glass masters), were made from the same crappy EQ settings that were set up with vinyl. This made them sound way hot, bright, and tinny. Finally, the SACD remasters that were released just last year, had both the 24 track to two channel mix-down redone; then the mastering, (final EQ), was done specifically for SACD glass master.
        
        To sit down and claim that everyone who has any experience whatsoever with vinyl and digital will ALWAYS choose vinyl over digital if they just listened; is crap. Because there are many engineers, artists, producers, with a great amount of knowledge and experience, with many different techniques and approaches; who are promoting different ways of doing things. There are many vinyl mastering EQ jobs that sucked, cranked up loud for radio, and compressed to death.
        
        ""your opinion is worthless on the subject. sorry to be so blunt and dismissive but that's the facts.""
        
        What are the "facts" Scott? When you're talking about a "preference" there are no facts. It is certainly not a fact that vinyl lacquer pressing EQ jobs are always better prepped for lacquer than for glass.
        
        Finally, I'd rather get a little worse overall sound, and not have to listen to all of the pops, clicks, and scraping surface noise, - which really takes one out of the experience. The willing suspension of disbelief can be a tall mountain to climb over.
        
        He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
        near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
        He turns to us and speaks
        
        You do all this posturing to gain credibility but you destoryed your credibility by saying... - Analog Scott 11:21:31 03/25/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: I've been included on several mastering sessions posted by Sordidman on March 25, 2009 at 09:52:34
        
        "What are the "facts" Scott?"
        
        in regards to Coltrane's Blue Train you said
        
        "The best implimentation of Coltrane is on JVC, and that's REDBOOK CD!! It's richer, more detailed, better balanced, more natural sounding."
        
        Then when asked for a link to it you said
        
        "Don't know if it exists."
        
        Seriously, how do you expect to have any credibility when you talk about the a CD being "richer, more detailed, better balanced, more natural sounding." When it doesn't even exist?
        
        Scott, - c'mon man pull it together - Sordidman 12:29:42 03/25/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: You do all this posturing to gain credibility but you destoryed your credibility by saying... posted by Analog Scott on March 25, 2009 at 11:21:31
        
        IT WAS CLEAR THAT I WAS NOT TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT YOUR UNIQUE COLTRANE EP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        
        Is it obscure? I don't even know. Whether or not you or I think vinyl is better than SACD, CD, or digital hi-rez files has nothing to do with your Coltrane EP. Just because one can't acquire that Simple Minds single, (or Coltrane EP), does not mean that one format or another sounds better than another.
        
        Are you really trying to argue that? Really?
        
        What I said was the best implimentation of COLTRANE. (NOT YOUR EP), but Coltrane in general, where there are available formats that are BOTH GOOD. Vinyl and JVC CD.
        
        I was comparing the JVC discs to the vinyl. Soultrane, Black Pearls, et al.
        
        What does that have to do with your EP? Because I don't have your EP, haven't heard it, or compared it, does that mean that I can't have an opinion about my experiences?
        
        If I heard your EP or the Soultrane or the Black Pearls vinyl on $50,000 Rockport turntable as the source of a $245,000 system and the JVC discs on $3000 total system, with a $125 CD player, - of course it would sound better on the Rockport.
        
        Look dude,
        
        I'm not attacking you. I have no investment in changing you, or demeaning you. This isn't a competition, and there is no right or wrong. If you love your vinyl, then have at it. You are the man: you're doing what you love.
        
        But are you really trying to assert that vinyl sounds better because there's a great Coltrane performance that's only available on that format? I hope not, I would like to think that you think that vinyl sounds better because you think that it ACTUALLY DOES SOUND BETTER! And the only way to know if YOU think that vinyl sounds better is to compare the same DAMN thing on vinyl to something that's available on other formats.
        
        There's nothing wrong with building an entire audio system and hobby centered around making 1 Coltrane EP sound great. But, there're are a lot of legitimate music fans and audiophiles out there that are just as "credible" as you or I that have no vinyl, and don't even know who Coltrane is, - or listen to music older than 8 years ago.
        
        Our experiences have the most credibility to us as individuals. People with more experience, USUALLY, have a wider perspective and move tend to move toward of less pronouncements and judgments.
        
        I noticed that you didn't comment on any of my other points, but instead chose to take one small element out of context, and mistakenly labeled it as not credible.
        
        He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
        near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
        He turns to us and speaks
        
        dude, back at you - Analog Scott 19:11:12 03/25/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Scott, - c'mon man pull it together posted by Sordidman on March 25, 2009 at 12:29:42
        
        > > IT WAS CLEAR THAT I WAS NOT TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT YOUR UNIQUE COLTRANE EP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!> >
        
        It was clear that I was talking about a specific Coltrane LP. This was exactly what I said "Where can I get the download of Coltrane's Bluetrain for my hardrive that will sound better than my AP reissue played back on my Forsell/Koetsu/ARC SP 10? I-tunes?" Your response was equally specific in it's description so no, it was not clear that you were not talking specifically about the same recording. Of course the fact that you were giving such a specific description but did not have any specific recording in mind also underminds your credibility. Apparently you seem to think if it is digital it is by default better. If you really understood mastering you would understnad how you have destroyed your credibility on every level.
        
        > > I was comparing the JVC discs to the vinyl. Soultrane, Black Pearls, et al.> >
        
        To what? What did you not undertsnad about "Where can I get the download of Coltrane's Bluetrain for my hardrive that will sound better than my AP reissue played back on my Forsell/Koetsu/ARC SP 10? I-tunes?" Is the new answer get a different recording???
        
        > > What does that have to do with your EP?> >
        
        1. It's an LP. *L*
        2. Again I have to ask what didn't you understand about my initial question "Where can I get the download of Coltrane's Bluetrain for my hardrive that will sound better than my AP reissue played back on my Forsell/Koetsu/ARC SP 10? I-tunes?"???
        
        > > Because I don't have your EP, haven't heard it, or compared it, does that mean that I can't have an opinion about my experiences?> >
        
        About this particular recording on this particular mastering on my particular system? Yes it means you can't have any *meaningful* opinion. And yet you decided to express one didn't you? Go back and look at your response to my question. Then try wiping the egg off your face.
        
        > > If I heard your EP or the Soultrane or the Black Pearls vinyl on $50,000 Rockport turntable as the source of a $245,000 system and the JVC discs on $3000 total system, with a $125 CD player, - of course it would sound better on the Rockport.> >
        
        Well gee wiz, Some of us are looking for that. That being "better sound." That is why reviews of such things as LPs are actually relevant despite your hand waving about dinosaurs and scraping of plastic. Some of us actually care about the results more than the means.
        
        > > Look dude,
        
        Dude, I call people dude here. Don't steal my style.
        
        > > I'm not attacking you. I have no investment in changing you, or demeaning you. This isn't a competition, and there is no right or wrong. If you love your vinyl, then have at it. You are the man: you're doing what you love.
        
        It's not about loving vinyl. It's about getting better sound with *music that I love* I don't care what format that happens on. but the reality is it happens quite often on vinyl. So your advice/opinion seems to be at odds with the quest for better sound.
        
        > > But are you really trying to assert that vinyl sounds better because there's a great Coltrane performance that's only available on that format?
        
        Where did I assert that? What I am asserting is that for real world recordings, if one is interested in the best sound they can get one will often find it on vinyl. That is why the format is still relevant.
        
        > > I hope not, I would like to think that you think that vinyl sounds better because you think that it ACTUALLY DOES SOUND BETTER!> >
        
        Yes, when it does sound better.
        
        > > And the only way to know if YOU think that vinyl sounds better is to compare the same DAMN thing on vinyl to something that's available on other formats.
        
        You are missing the point. It's not about the formats as much as it's about the mastering. The thing is, when there is a choice, all to often the better mastering is on vinyl.
        
        > > There's nothing wrong with building an entire audio system and hobby centered around making 1 Coltrane EP sound great. But, there're are a lot of legitimate music fans and audiophiles out there that are just as "credible" as you or I that have no vinyl, and don't even know who Coltrane is, - or listen to music older than 8 years ago.> >
        
        What does that have to do with anything? I'm not trying to make my audio system sound great for just one recording. that was just one example of many. as for the "audiophiles" that limit their choices of mastering by ignoring vinyl, that is their loss. And I assure you it is a loss. Unless they are building their systems on one recording or less.
        
        > > Our experiences have the most credibility to us as individuals. People with more experience, USUALLY, have a wider perspective and move tend to move toward of less pronouncements and judgments.
        
        Dude, you are the one declaring vinyl, a dead antiquated dinosaur that is just wasting space on the shelves of audiophiles. Maybe you should take your own words to heart.
        
        > > I noticed that you didn't comment on any of my other points,
        
        You had already destroyed your credibility IMO.
        
        > > but instead chose to take one small element out of context, and mistakenly labeled it as not credible
        
        "One small element out of context?"
        Again, I suggest you reread my original question and your response.
        
        RE: dude, back at you - Sordidman 09:06:33 03/26/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: dude, back at you posted by Analog Scott on March 25, 2009 at 19:11:12
        
        Fair enough.
        
        You're correct, you were speaking of something very specific and I did not address that, assuming that you were speaking more generally. Sorry for carrying this on for so long, - with a more than fair share of extrapolation.
        
        Cheers,
        
        He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
        near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
        He turns to us and speaks
    - RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - theaudiohobby 16:35:56 03/20/09 (16)
      > > Digital is better than when it was first released in 1980 but it still is lacking in the quintessential elements important for musical reproduction.
      This is one of the most amusing comments I have come across in years. Much like the steam engine enthusiast claiming that only steam engines capture the quintessential elements of train travel, false of course though steam engines have their own allure. The key reasons vinyl is alive and kicking are economic i.e. listening to music has no direct economic value and cost of building the vinyl hardware and software is relatively low vis-a-vis the margins, factors which allow idiosyncratic music lovers such as yourself to indulge their idiosyncrasies without much let. To claim that only analog captures "quintessential elements important for musical reproduction" moreso than digital is parochial, the humble MP3 brought on board as whole new set of music lovers, many of which would never bother with an analog contraption as fiddly as an LP playback system, or is it your point that iPod users are missing the "quintessential elements important for musical reproduction."? Like so many (especially older) audiophiles, you seem unable to distinguish judgement on music reproduction from your personal preferences.
      > > While analog has its own set of colorations, they are clearly more consonant with the recorded music.
      This statement is pure nonsense on a number of levels, IMHO. tapes, LPs etc are evolutionary steps in the development of portable music, artefact's of the technology of the day. It bears repeating once again, if analog were genuinely sonically superior to digital folks will have little trouble identifying analog under controlled blind conditions. However even at the dawn of CD folks couldn't successfully do this, that tells me that the much professed sonic superiority is a myth.
      Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
      
      Edits: 03/20/09
      - RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - Myles B. Astor 17:22:13 03/20/09 (13)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by theaudiohobby on March 20, 2009 at 16:35:56
        
        {This statement is pure nonsense on a number of levels, IMHO. tapes, LPs etc are evolutionary steps in the development of portable music, artefact's of the technology of the day. It bears repeating once again, if analog were genuinely sonically superior to digital folks will have little trouble identifying analog under controlled blind conditions. However even at the dawn of CD folks couldn't successfully do this, that tells me that the much professed sonic superiority is a myth.}
        When you understand something about U shaped central nervous system (CNS) arousal, short term memory reliability and adaptation effects, get back to me. First, I suggest u read Charles Shea's Bible on Motor Control and Learning, now in its God knows what edition, to understand about short term memory, how it works or doesn't work, depending upon what it's called on to do (and DBT listening ain't one of them).
        Next read Schmidt and Wrisberg book on Motor Learning and Performance, paying careful attention to the chapter dealing with CNS arousal and how it affects perception eg. the greater the CNS arousal, the smaller the perceptual abilities. Or to put it in another way, an Olympic lifter needs maximal CNS around (leading to very little perceptual ability) when they compete; otoh, a pianist needs the least CNS arousal when performing because they want to take in the most information about their surroundings and performance. The same holds true for any DBT and it just can't happen. Ones perceptual abilities (among other things wrong) are severely diminished-and when doing listening tests that call for careful attention-simply fall flat on their faces and are totally unreliable.
        Another body of work to pay careful attention to is the seminal work of the Canadian physiologist Hans Selye to understand about how our bodies adapt to different physiological stresses, be they of they heat, cold, mechanical, aural, etc. type. In other works, the stimulus-effect relationship.
        Then give a gander to Levitan's NY Times best seller This is your Brain on Music.
        Finally, get a copy of the first edition of Scientific American Mind and find the article that deals with hearing and how interindividual listening differences swamp out any attempt to identify listening preferences. From a simple stat perspective, and we ran into this with drug testing, one might need say 10,000 patients enrolled in a drug study to show that say 30% of the individuals might show a response or are helped by a particular medication. Then it's onto identifying those features of this population so they can benefit from this particular drug.
        Just because a test works in one situation, doesn't mean that one mindlessly applies it to all fields eg. drug research to listening DBTs. Any true scientist understands this. I did scientific research for over 20 yrs and if there's one thing I learned it's that each assay must be carefully prequalified for each test. The tests that you refer to are simply invalid and could and would not be published in any scientific peer reviewed journal (OK maybe a third rate, self published one).
        Oh and yes, what master tapes have u made comparisons to???
        Myles Astor
        Myles B. Astor
        
        Edits: 03/20/09
        
        RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - theaudiohobby 03:08:19 03/21/09 (12)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by Myles B. Astor on March 20, 2009 at 17:22:13
        
        Oh, I get your point, we should abandon controlled blind tests for audio and surrender to the vagaries of personal anecdote.
        > > The tests that you refer to are simply invalid and could and would not be published in any scientific peer reviewed journal (OK maybe a third rate, self published one).
        Which tests do you think I am referring to? Do you think any peer-reviewed paper supports your position? Or is this another case of wanting it both ways?
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
        
        Edits: 03/21/09
        
        RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - Myles B. Astor 06:23:12 03/24/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by theaudiohobby on March 21, 2009 at 03:08:19
        
        I'm not going to get into one of these internet pissing contests. I gave u five references to problems associated with any type of testing. These references contain peer reviewed articles in first rate scientific journals-that btw are the only ones that count in academics and toward one's app't to full professorship.
        
        You've given me an opinion in a review that isn't peer reviewed. That btw doesn't count when one is being considered for promotion in academics. Go read these piece about neurophysiology and learning and get back to me. Then we can talk intelligently.
        Myles B. Astor
        
        RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - theaudiohobby 10:28:29 03/24/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by Myles B. Astor on March 24, 2009 at 06:23:12
        
        Let's see if I got this right, you gave me five references to problems associated with any type of testing, which u attempt to use as a basis to repudiate findings of controlled blind audio tests. Then you put forward commentary (partially referenced in the title of this post) that has no basis in any formal opinion or tests whatsovever. Could you be more illogical and unreasonable if you tried? Otherwise, could you give me a reference to a peer-reviewed article that puts forward an opinion analagous to your commentary?
        Your response is a classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees.
        
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
        
        Edits: 03/24/09 03/24/09 03/24/09
        
        RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - Myles B. Astor 20:44:11 03/25/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by theaudiohobby on March 24, 2009 at 10:28:29
        
        {Let's see if I got this right, you gave me five references to problems associated with any type of testing, which u attempt to use as a basis to repudiate findings of controlled blind audio tests. Then you put forward commentary (partially referenced in the title of this post) that has no basis in any formal opinion or tests whatsovever. Could you be more illogical and unreasonable if you tried? Otherwise, could you give me a reference to a peer-reviewed article that puts forward an opinion analagous to your commentary?
        Your response is a classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees.}
        
        What part don't u understand? Consistency is not a virtue. If u do something wrong 100 times, it does not make it right. Go and learn something about rigourous scientific research-the key being reading the materials and methods section and learn how to critically assess the testing methodology rather than just accept everything at face value. That's real science.
        
        I provided five books with scads of references refuting the validity of DBT when it comes to listening/hearing tests. Do some real research instead of repeating something u read like a moonie.
        Myles B. Astor
        
        RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - theaudiohobby 03:41:19 03/26/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by Myles B. Astor on March 25, 2009 at 20:44:11
        
        > > What part don't u understand?
        
        You still don't get it, do you? The lack of understanding is yours, i.e. your argument is built on a logical fallacy, The issue at hand is your faulty commentary on the comparative quality of analog audio system vis a vis digital audio systems. Your argument basically boils down to this, "The merits of DBTs in audio are debatable therefore my opinion based on sighted listening test holds true", that's bullocks. Sighted listening tests have more problems than dbts not less. Furthermore objective data clearly demonstrates that analog especially LPs and R2R are inferior to digital. Which brings me back to my original question, does any formal opinion support your comments on the comparitive quality of analog audio (LPs, R2R) vis a vis digital audio? Do you have any formal basis for your comments at all? Or is it just a case of proof by assertion?
        
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
        
        Perhaps.. - mkuller 11:22:24 03/21/09 (7)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by theaudiohobby on March 21, 2009 at 03:08:19
        
        > Oh, I get your point, we should abandon controlled blind tests for audio and surrender to the vagaries of personal anecdote.>
        
        Oh, so it appears you'd prefer to keep a flawed, unvalidated pseudoscientific listening test instead of relying on experienced, skilled observational listeners familiar with live music.
        
        One tends to under-report differences and the other tends to over-report them. Neither are perfect.
        
        This is a hobby. One really only needs to convince himself of differences, no one else. You are free to use whatever method you chose.
        
        But if you want to apply actual science to it, then first validate the test you are using for the purpose.
        
        RE: Perhaps.. - theaudiohobby 03:53:09 03/22/09 (4)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Perhaps.. posted by mkuller on March 21, 2009 at 11:22:24
        
        > > Oh, so it appears you'd prefer to keep a flawed, unvalidated pseudoscientific listening test instead of relying on experienced, skilled observational listeners familiar with live music.
        
        And who determines what's flawed, unvalidated, pseudioscientific for audio? Yourself? Harry Pearson? or Art Dudley? who really?
        
        Amusing stuff....
        
        > > This is a hobby. One really only needs to convince himself of differences, no one else
        
        That's advice for yourself, Myles etc and all those like yourself who make absolute pronouncements based on personal anecodote and preferences. You cannot have it both ways.
        
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
        
        Who, indeed... - mkuller 10:45:59 03/22/09 (3)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Perhaps.. posted by theaudiohobby on March 22, 2009 at 03:53:09
        
        > And who determines what's flawed, unvalidated, pseudioscientific for audio?>
        Do you understand what 'scientific validation' of a test is? It is proof the test is appropriate and actually works for the use you intend.
        Part of the scientific method.
        Without it, you're just guessing or inferring - that's not science.
        Like with audio DBTs...
        > That's advice for yourself, Myles etc and all those like yourself who make absolute pronouncements based on personal anecodote and preferences. You cannot have it both ways.>
        Of course we can express our opinions, just like you. But we aren't claiming our opinions about the way equipment sounds is scientifically validated.
        
        Edits: 03/22/09
        
        RE: Who, indeed... - theaudiohobby 02:39:39 03/23/09 (2)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Who, indeed... posted by mkuller on March 22, 2009 at 10:45:59
        
        > > Do you understand what 'scientific validation' of a test is? It is proof the test is appropriate and actually works for the use you intend
        Might I suggest you look at ITU and EBU recommendation BS-1116 (Methods for the subjective assessment of small impairments in audio systems including multichannel sound systems)? Or is it your assertion that ITU has recommended scientifically invalid methods for scientific investigation of audio systems?
        > > Of course we can express our opinions, just like you. But we aren't claiming our opinions about the way equipment sounds is scientifically validated.
        Well, you can't, can you? And your comments about the veracity of our opinion is a strawman, no one is claiming that all blind listening tests are scientifically valid, and why should they? But where an opinion is based on scientifically valid data, why should we shy away from expressing it? What's wrong with expressing an opinion based on an informal listening test? You don't seem to have a problem with folks expressing opinions based on sighted tests, so why the double standard?
        
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
        
        Edits: 03/23/09
        
        Link? (nt) - mkuller 10:42:37 03/23/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Who, indeed... posted by theaudiohobby on March 23, 2009 at 02:39:39
        
        (nt)
        
        RE: Link? (nt) - theaudiohobby 03:30:38 03/25/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Link? (nt) posted by mkuller on March 23, 2009 at 10:42:37
        
        Here is a link to BS-1116, however it's a chargeable download
        
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
        
        BS-1116 (Open in New Window)
        
        Edits: 03/25/09
        
        At the end of the day...... - Sordidman 11:31:37 03/21/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: Perhaps.. posted by mkuller on March 21, 2009 at 11:22:24
        
        the issue at hand that is being argued is that the death of vinyl constitutes the loss of the "best" playback method.
        
        I say no way. Yes, it's certainly better than others, but we also have the complication of dealing with the recordings, the mastering, and many other issues such as SOTA playback devices optimized in any given room, or different idiosyncratic views on the good; or different definitions.
        
        Can one honestly say that all vinyl playback is better because MikeL's Rockport sounds better in his system on some recordings than his Meitner?
        
        And who is losing what? I don't see audiophile thought police coming to people's home to forcibly exchange their turntables for Mac minis.
        
        He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
        near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
        He turns to us and speaks
        
        Yes, vinyl sounds better... - mkuller 11:44:04 03/21/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: At the end of the day...... posted by Sordidman on March 21, 2009 at 11:31:37
        
        ...but it's not for everybody.
        
        And even though it's dying, there should be enough around to satisfy the perfectionists.
      - RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - Myles B. Astor 16:48:34 03/20/09 (1)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by theaudiohobby on March 20, 2009 at 16:35:56
        
        <
        > > While analog has its own set of colorations, they are clearly more consonant with the recorded music.
        
        This statement is pure nonsense on a number of levels, IMHO. tapes, LPs etc are evolutionary steps in the development of portable music, artefact's of the technology of the day. It bears repeating once again, if analog were genuinely sonically superior to digital folks will have little trouble identifying analog under controlled blind conditions. However even at the dawn of CD folks couldn't successfully do this, that tells me that the much professed sonic superiority is a myth.> > > >
        
        That argument is one of the biggest loads I've seen and simply smacks of the '80s argument that analog people have a vested interest in the LP and ergo could never like the CD. Pure garbage.
        
        You know, as a reviewer, my only interest is what is the closest thing to the sound of real music, whatever the medium. You know what. If digital was truly better, I'd adopt it. But it isn't.
        
        And no matter yet, you have offered nothing to refute what I've said that the sound has to represent what was captured on the master tape. That's where the absolute fidelity lies. Tell me, have you ever actually listened to a master tape and made the comparison between mediums? If u haven't, then you're barking up the wrong tree.
        
        Myles Astor
        
        Myles B. Astor
        
        RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction - theaudiohobby 02:08:27 03/21/09 (0)
        
        In Reply to: RE: quintessential elements important for musical reproduction posted by Myles B. Astor on March 20, 2009 at 16:48:34
        
        > > And no matter yet, you have offered nothing to refute what I've said that the sound has to represent what was captured on the master tape. That's where the absolute fidelity lies.
        
        Now you have gone one better you are attempting to offer your opinion as fact. You have offered nothing but personal anecdotes to support your opinion.
        
        > > Tell me, have you ever actually listened to a master tape and made the comparison between mediums? If u haven't, then you're barking up the wrong tree.
        
        This speaks to the heart of the problem i.e. you want to have it both ways, on the one hand you want to boast about master tapes you have listened to and your uncontrolled comparisons you have made whilst on the other hand dismissing the results of numerous controlled test that undermine your position in effecting priviledging your personal experiences. It doesn't work that way and to use your own words you are barking up the wrong tree. Marc Perlman's apt summary
        
        audiophiles resist the claims of audio engineering by privileging their personal experiences, and they argue against scientific methodologies that seem to expose those experiences as illusory(Golden Ears and Meter Readers, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 34, No. 5, 783-807 (2004 )
        
        captures your position precisely.
        
        Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Now you've done it. - Bruce Kendall 12:14:03 03/19/09 (1)
Somebody somewhere is getting ready to send hordes of flying monkeys after you. ;~)
- Already got my eyes scratched out and ............. - Sordidman 17:33:23 03/19/09 (0)
  poop in my hair!!
  
  :-)
  
  He puts forth a quarter-ounce green rosette
  near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
  He turns to us and speaks

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.