|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
For Sale Ads |
Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.
Original Message
RE: Precisely
Posted by Pat D on June 23, 2010 at 19:47:43:
If we're comparing Stan Ricker anecdotes, which could hear better: the Stan Ricker in 1978 or the Stan Ricker over 20 years later? In any case, what is unreal about comparing the SACD or DVD with a 16/44.2 kHz recording of it? After all, there are dual layer SACD/CDs.
E-stat
"I have also heard a direct feed from the original Soundstream recorder when I participated in the ASO recording of the Firebird."
Nice recording. I have it both on LP and CD. But we discussed this before: as I recall, you didn't compare the direct feed from the mic with the feed from the Soundstream recorder.
E-stat
"Yep, that is what happens when you assume a $250 player is audibly perfect."
This is a fantasy in more ways than one. First, a number of other players were also used, including a Sony, a Yamaha, and a Denon. Second, I should point out that at very high gain levels, the testers could hear some low level nonlinearities in the left channel of the Pioneer player. Hmmm . . . the ABX switcher didn't cover that difference up, now, did it? That's not an assumption. I am also shocked that you characterize the players by their price!
Now, as well, at high gain levels, the noise levels of the CD loop in the test was audible--but the level was uncomfortably high for listening to music. My, my! The ABX switcher didn't cover that up, either. That's not an assumption, either.
In fact, with DBTs employing an ABX switcher, a number of positive results have been obtained, and you haven't come up with anything that the ABX switcher covers up.