In Reply to: RE: Comparisons/Marketing/Etc. posted by ahendler on October 28, 2016 at 11:11:54:
Hi,This is a great story you told. That's also a pretty respectable sample size.
What's interesting to me is that 3/4 found no difference, 1/4 found a tiny difference. What's missing is if the 1/4 found the MQA better, or if they found the other better. Can you elaborate?
What's especially intriguing about this is that a portion of the press has thrown around some pretty big phrases, such as "game changer" and "beyond high resolution." But here we have JA's differences being not reliable and 3/4 of the people here hearing no difference, with 1/4 hearing a tiny difference. That doesn't sound like a "game changer" to me. I also can't help but wonder if that's why MQA doesn't like comparisons. In Munich, I asked for a comparison -- and didn't receive.
Doug Schneider
SoundStage!
Edits: 10/28/16
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Great Story -- But Small Differences Again... - Doug Schneider 11:56:43 10/28/16 (6)
- RE: Great Story -- But Small Differences Again... - ahendler 14:19:55 10/28/16 (1)
- RE: Great Story -- But Small Differences Again... - Doug Schneider 14:32:05 10/28/16 (0)
- RE: Great Story -- But Small Differences Again... - Isaak J. Garvey 12:02:43 10/28/16 (3)
- RE: Great Story -- But Small Differences Again... - Doug Schneider 12:12:45 10/28/16 (1)
- RE: Great Story -- But Small Differences Again... - Isaak J. Garvey 12:16:59 10/28/16 (0)
- I wonder how much Robert Harley was paid? - hawkmoon 12:11:03 10/28/16 (0)