Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads
In Reply to: RE: You think so? posted by Analog Scott on June 26, 2023 at 22:06:39
"Humor often doesn't translate well. I thought he was joking. Now I'm not so sure"
No anti-analog scott, I am not.
OK you are not joking. Ironically though you providing yet another example of the very thing that permeates high end audio. Beliefs in audio mythology over facts and science.
The Cars LP you speak of that you believe you can hear a digital step in the mastering chain is by all accounts an all analog mastering. Is it *possible* that Kevin Gray and everyone at Rhino involved in the making of this LP are collectively lying? It's *possible* but given the environment of multiple class action lawsuits against companies for failing to disclose a digital step in their transfer/ mastering chain it would seem like a needless risk to take by a company whose parent company literally owns that master tape to make unambiguous claims that the record was an all analog mastering. From the Rhino website:
"Cut From The Original Analog Master Tapes By Kevin Gray
Pressed On 180-Gram Heavyweight Vinyl At Optimal
Heavyweight Glossy Gatefold Jacket
Features A New Interview With Elliot Easton And Producer Roy Thomas Baker's Tracking Notes For "Good Times Roll"
Limited & Numbered To 5,000
Available Now, Exclusively At Rhino.com
ABOUT RHINO HIGH FIDELITY
Rhino is synonymous with high-quality reissues, setting the standard with award-winning audio releases for the past 45 years. Now we're raising the bar with a new premium vinyl series, Rhino High Fidelity. These high-end, limited-edition vinyl reissues of classic albums represent the pinnacle of sound and packaging.
To ensure consistent sonic excellence, Kevin Gray will cut lacquers for all Rhino Hi-Fi releases, and Optimal will press the 180-gram vinyl records. The releases boast high-quality glossy covers and "tip-on" jackets, an old-school aesthetic that evokes the golden age of vinyl."
Given the fact that the total gross revenue from this record will be $800,000.00 and that Mofi had to pay no less than $370,000.00 to settle their lawsuit. (that does not include the costs of their own council) It would be profoundly stupid for them to lie about this.
So you hear a digital step in an all analog record. Just like so many AAA devotees including Michael Fremer failed to hear digital steps that were in the transfer/mastering chain of various LPs by Mofi and other labels. AND OTHER LABELS. (more to come and that one)
Sorry it's nonsense and is counter productive. Nobody can hear a proper hi res digital step. No one. It is not physically possible.
Goober, if you are reading this, does my fight seem so unreasonable now? This is NOT an isolated opinion. It is an example of the loudest collective voice in audiophile vinyl.
As a side note. I am certainly not "anti-analog." Understanding analog and the effect it has on audio does not make one "anti-analog" OTOH I am pro fact and pro science and pro rational thought. The choice of audio mythology and anecdotal evidence derived from non controlled casual listening over objective evidence and research from an entire field of science is the opposite of being pro fact, pro science and pro rational thought.
It is the single biggest problem in the high end audio industry. It's why we get records that are made avoiding digital and is inferior as a direct result. It's why we have a market for $40K power cords that do absolutely nothing to the audio signal. It is the reason audiophiles will buy a bag of magic rocks for $300.00. It's the reason why most of the audiophile community is wallowing in inferior sound anchored in and held back by antiquated technology while ignoring and even demonizing real innovations in audio.
" Goober, if you are reading this, does my fight seem so unreasonable now? "
Yes. Here's why -
" The choice of audio mythology and anecdotal evidence derived from non controlled casual listening over objective evidence and research from an entire field of science is the opposite of being pro fact, pro science and pro rational thought. "
Non controlled casual listening is exactly how I evaluate audio gear. Objective evidence and research from an entire field of science will never trump casual listening. Choosing audio equipment and building audio systems is an art not a science just like making an album is an art not a science.
Objective evidence and research only plays a part in this art. However one values the results varies from each system owner to the next.
"Non controlled casual listening is exactly how I evaluate audio gear. Objective evidence and research from an entire field of science will never trump casual listening."
That is a point of major disagreement. Which is fine. It's audio. But at the same time I have offered Michael Fremer and numerous other folks who think their hearing perceptions under such casual conditions trump science a $20K bet that under double blind conditions their "hearing" won't do what they think it can do. I have even gone so far as to make it my $20.K vs. My travel expenses to come to whoever thinks they can hear these differences. I'm talking in most cases better than 10-1 odds!
No one will take any of the bets. No one! If the shoe were on the other foot? I'd be all over those offers. ANYONE who wants to bet me $20K that I can't hear differences in anything audio that I firmly believe makes an audible difference will immediately be taken up on such an offer.
Honestly, what do you think an entire field of science is missing and getting wrong that casual audiophiles are routinely picking up on? Does that really seem feasible to you?
"Honestly, what do you think an entire field of science is missing and getting wrong that casual audiophiles are routinely picking up on? Does that really seem feasible to you?"
This question is getting old. Measurements cannot tell us how a component audibly performs beyond the most basic criterias.
Actually it's your anti scientific audio religion that is getting old. Wanna take my bet? I'll bet you whatever you want to risk that you can not reliably identify difference between the analog audio signal of your choice, using the source material of your choice on the stereo system of your choice from a real time hi res ADC/DAC step in the signal.
1. Level matched
2. Double blind ABX
3. A positive has to meet the basic scientific statistical criteria of 95% confidence level.
I look forward to your excuses not to take the bet
"Sorry it's nonsense and is counter productive. Nobody can hear a proper hi res digital step. No one. It is not physically possible."
As hearing acuity is direct tied to ones intellect, perhaps I the Great Genius am the only one that can reliably do so.
The Cars reissue sounds exactly like the very distinctive degrations of digital, with no true air and space around the instruments/performers, and a lack of fine resolution, texturing and inner detail!
You do know that Beethoven was stone deaf when he composed much of his greatest work right?
So how do you explain you hearing degrations of digital in a recording in which is aaa?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: