[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
83.84.178.82
In Reply to: RE: High end audio = musical accuracy, you must be kidding! posted by morricab on January 30, 2008 at 02:45:13
>Your "specs" are not well correlated with the listening experience and the Class D amps that are built in are audibly inferior to a top SET amp.<First of all, Olive has shown that one is able to correlate anechoic measurements with subjective listener preference, and the correlation is extremely high. Second, what makes you think that my speakers use Class D amps? FYI, they don't!!!
>Besides, very flat frequency response has been shown by B&K (the microphone profis) to not be what people perceive as natural.<
Where has this been shown? Provide the bibliographc data and I'll get a copy of the paper. If you refer to their 1974 AES convention paper "Relevant hi-fi tests at home", then you should read it perhaps a bit more carefully.
>Your flat anechoically speakers with wide, flat dispersion will likely give a very bright sound in-room.<Where do my speakers have wide dispersion? What allows you to say that they will sound very bright in-room? Have you heard them? Plus, are you aware of the fact that in-ear response is different between individuals so what may sound bright to you may sound not bright to me:
Shaw, “Earcanal pressure generated by a free sound field”, J. of Acoust. Soc. of America 1965, vol. 39, no.3, p.465
But then, I forgot, it's you who defines once and for all what frequency balance in the far-field is correct and what balance is not correct!
>Who ever said that wide dispersion was necessarily the correct idea for an in-room speaker design anyway?<
Where did I say such a thing? FYI, I didn't!!!
>Your pro monitors are probably fine for near-field monitoring but not far field and the recreation of soundstage and imaging for starters. <Does this look like nearfield?
As to MP3 vs CD, I frankly don't care. As to SET vs class D, I frankly don't care either. But then I forgot again, it's you who defines once and for all that SET amps are audibly superior to class D.As for the car analogy you brought up, if anything is rubbish, then it is this analogy. The technical goal of hifi is faithful (read accurate) reproduction of the recorded event. Very clear and only measurably accurate gear has the capability to achieve that goal. Now cars: what's the technical goal of a car? To get you from A to B. Any car with a working engine will do that, goal achieved, no need to measure anything. Now be more restrictive: to get from A to B as fast as possible, A and B being the end points of a 2 mile straight line on an airport runway. Now guess what measurements you need and which car will win?
Klaus
Edits: 01/30/08Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]