|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.3.91.159
In Reply to: RE: How should I know? posted by E-Stat on November 08, 2012 at 15:38:09
"Thank you for illustrating my point. Apparently, you only have blind faith in the notion that all audible differences can be measured."
Nope measuring the preamp functions I list, plus signal path distortion, will reveal all sonic differences between preamps - audible or not.
There's no blind faith here.
You can, but it's gonna mess you up, jumping from discussing component performance and system integration the way that you are doing here.
"Ask any competent engineer and you'll find out there are no magical graphs or metrics that full quantify the performance of any audio component."
Wishful thinking on your part - if there's any group more skeptical of audiophiles than audiophile wives it is engineers. Don't give me this competent engineer BS - engineers in hoards think audiophiles are full of BS!
And further good equipment designers measure and quantify a components performance based on the characteristics of performance that represents their values.
"
Resolution
Dynamic punch
Soundstaging
Frequency extension
"
What the F - this is all integration stuff - yea your preamp will have an effect but the i/o characteristics between components including the room between your speakers and ears all play a much bigger part?
But if you got enough power, well integrated system (including room) and a dynamic mostly smooth full range frequency response you've got all that.
I know it's tough but our perception of resolution, soundstaging, frequency response and dynamic has as much or more to do with how well integrated a system is, between components (io characteristics) and with our room than it does with the quality of the gear.
Follow Ups:
Nope measuring the preamp functions I list, plus signal path distortion, will reveal all sonic differences between preamps - audible or not.
Then quantify those criteria for the two preamps I mentioned. Data on both of them is easy to find. Best of luck to you!
Don't give me this competent engineer BS - engineers in hoards think audiophiles are full of BS!
The non-experiential theorists.
...but the i/o characteristics between components including the room between your speakers and ears all play a much bigger part?
As I suspected, you have no understanding of the concepts I delineated.
But if you got enough power, well integrated system (including room) and a dynamic mostly smooth full range frequency response you've got all that.
It is a shame you never got past the mediocre. We both share owning NAD components. I find them good sounding and great value for the money. Their sins are mostly of omission and fare much better than the hard, edgy sound of pro gear. On the other hand, they are not even close to the performance level available in audio. You will never be fooled that you are in a live environment listening to them.
You have no idea.
Then quantify those criteria for the two preamps I mentioned. Data on both of them is easy to find. Best of luck to you!"What difference would such a comparison make? What's more important to me would be how they work in my system! I wouldn't have any problem doing listening comparisons with one of NADs better preamps with one built by Audio Research.
The non-experiential theorists.
Engineers or detectivist audiophiles equal well fit the bill.
As I suspected, you have no understanding of the concepts I delineated."
What concepts? You mean the verbiage you use to describe what you hear when you listen to an audio system and have confused with how one might characterize a preamps performance? Like I said, which apparently you fail to understand, is that your verbiage is a discussion of a systems performance not a characterization of a components performance (outside of that system).
It is a shame you never got past the mediocre. We both share owning NAD components. I find them good sounding and great value for the money. Their sins are mostly of omission and fare much better than the hard, edgy sound of pro gear. On the other hand, they are not even close to the performance level available in audio. You will never be fooled that you are in a live environment listening to them.
You have no idea.
Well everything is relative but my main system moved beyond NAD several decades ago. But if Spendor and Roksan Xerxes and Exposure classic and Living Voice are what you consider mediocre well then so be it. I don't care and my experiences with Audio Research is that it's not the gear for me - you buy that as truth me I haven't left an AR demo without feeling like I've been listening to someone scratching on a chalk board. The harshest most unlistenable equipment I've ever heard. Take that back there was this Counterpoint stuff that was worse. I know I haven't heard it all but if you ask me NAD sounds better for lots less...
And FWIW I won't be fooled into believing I'm listening to live music via any stereo. I have classical musicians in my family and I attend live shows on a regular basis - maybe if I was less experienced it would be easier to fool me.
Edits: 11/08/12 11/08/12
What difference would such a comparison make?You continue to illustrate my point.
I wouldn't have any problem doing listening comparisons with one of NADs better preamps with one built by Audio Research.
But obviously, you have never done so.
What concepts?
That would be the four I listed. Apparently, they are beyond your grasp.
But if Spendor and Roksan Xerxes and Exposure classic and Living Voice are what you consider mediocre well then so be it.
So, exactly what measurements quantify the audible differences between NAD gear from Exposure? You really have no idea, do you? All in faith.
And FWIW I won't be fooled into believing I'm listening to live music via any stereo.
Sorry to hear that.
Edits: 11/08/12
Components will never measure the same. Whatever point it is you are trying to make you are doing a very poor job of it.
That would be the four I listed. Apparently, they are beyond your grasp.
I'm gonna say it again - obviously it you that doesn't get it. The items you listed soundstage, resolution, bass impact, etc that you listed describe a systems performance not a components performance. YOU'RE THE ONE WHO WANTED TO TALK ABOUT PREAMP PERFORMANCE.
Sure there may be a better soundstage given this preamp or that but thats a function of system integration not necessarily preamp performance. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?
"So, exactly what measurements quantify the audible differences between NAD gear from Exposure? You really have no idea, do you? All in faith."
Of course I don't - why in heavens name should I care if I purchase based on listening comparisons not reading specs?
Without a doubt, components will never measure the same, and even well designed and well manufactured components of the same model will measure somewhat differently than each other.
Sorry to hear that.
I'm not and I'm happy you can be fooled by your stereo into believing you are listening to live music.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: