Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

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.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: Truncated experience?

Posted by Pat D on June 24, 2010 at 10:57:24:
One wonders what you are talking about. You have just said that the mic feed and the recording sound just the same based on anecdotal evidence, including that of Stan Ricker, just as Stan Ricker said the Soundfield 16/50K recording sounded the same as the mic feed in 1978 when he was younger and could hear better.

So, do you think the digital masters deteriorated over time? Because unless you do, your objections have no force at all.

Meyer and Moran said:

"The usefulness of the increased dynamic range afforded by longer word lengths for mixdown has never been in question."

Now, in a world of dual layer SACDs and issues of recordings in more than one stereo format, there is nothing unreal about what was tested.

You seem to have no evidence that there is anything wrong with the system described, and your only criticism of the Pioneer player is its price! Tsk, tsk, shame on you.

Again, I just pointed out that no one said the Pioneer player was perfect--indeed, Meyer and Moran pointed out a flaw, audible at very high levels, but which no one managed to hear at listenable levels on music. But then no one showed they heard a difference using a number of other players, either.

You have no objections against the data; you have no substantiated objections against the equipment used.

There have been suggestions that some changes would result in a better test. That's always possible.

You seem to wish something else had been tested, but haven't specified what or how.