Hi-Rez Highway New high resolution SACD releases, players and technology.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Hi-Rez Highway ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Re: A counter challange Re: A candid exchange with John Atkinson:

Posted by Norman Tracy (M) on March 9, 2004 at 22:28:23

In Reply to: Re: A counter challange Re: A candid exchange with John Atkinson: posted by regmac on March 9, 2004 at 07:06:48:

R.L. McConnell wrote:

"I fear you're making this harder than it has to be. What I want is for someone to prove his ability to differentiate SACD from CD without the benefit of knowing which format he's listening to. That strikes me as a fair request."

Actually I believe you are the one who is making it harder than it has to be. Here is the easy process I follow when a new audio gizmo arrives:

1. I arrange a demo so I can hear it for myself, If I like it go to step #2, else go to step #3.
2. Add new audio gizmo to list of Toys I Must Own. Vote with my dollars to support the gizmos I like.
3. Go on with my life. If this new audio gizmo is still around later I may loop back to step #1 in case the previous demo was flawed or rev 2 of the gizmo is better.

The things you are demanding making it harder than it has to be is first you want an expert critic to pass judgement for you but only after he has proven a certain level of sensory acuity. You seem to want to follow a guru but only after he has proven his powers by levitating a stone. The latest guru you offered to apostle yourself to was John Atkinson. Could it be that the guru just does not need any more followers? Alas judging from the trend that Stereophile's page counts are on I believe what this guru needs is more paid up advertisers over fawning apostles.

"Problem being, every time I offer to arrange such a demonstration I don't get any takers; only embarrassed faces and myriad excuses. Why do you suppose I encounter so much equivocation on this issue? Odd that. Nor am I naive enough to believe we will ever reach consensus in a hobby as neurotic as this one. Mine is merely a personal project."

Of course implied in your snide tone is that you "don't get any takers" because much of high-end audio is smoke and mirrors employed to sell toxic tonics to the village rubes. Here are two other possible explanations:

1. Done correctly the test you propose is quite expensive and time consuming. In ABX testing the first requirement is we have to be certain the CD and SACD programs are played back at identical levels. At the core of your premise is our ears are not sufficient to the job so we will have to measure this. Alas none of my music CDs or SACDs starts with 0 dB 1kHz reference level tracks. I believe the way around this is to assemble the CD and SACD players to be used and record the CD and SACD tracks to be used in the test into a digital audio workstation. Then use the DAW's mastering software to give us a average RMS level over the entire length of the piece. Only then can we know to the standard of "in which definitive results are established using scientific criteria" that Kind Of Blue track 2 on the CD version is 0.85 dB louder than track 2 on the SACD version. Now repeat that process for each set of tracks to be used in the test logging the level offsets needed. And your technician needs to be certain that each recording begin and end at the same points or differing amounts of silence before or after the music will throw off the result. As we are after "definitive results" we better make it a double blind ABX test so we are going to need a computer programmed to mask the identities of the source and add or remove that 0.85dB level shift depending on if the subject is hearing the CD or SACD version. So a quick and dirty experiment design for your merely personal project shows we need high quality CD and SACD players; amp and speakers up to the task (erring on the too expensive side lest we be accused of masking the difference in the case of a null result); a pre-amp with repeatable volume control (does anyone have a Levinson or Roland we can borrow for awhile?) and a computer to control it all. I bet we are going to have to write some custom software to control it all. And PLEASE do not tell me this is way over engineered because you demand from us we stop "continue to take refuge in pure subjectivism". Given the cost and time involved no it is not "a fair request" you are making.

2. This is really all about Alpha male posturing and the "embarrassed faces and myriad excuses" you encounter result from the other males in the group being unwilling to lock horns. One of the things I loved about the late lamented and sorely missed Dr. Harvey "Gizmo" Rosenberg was that he called us out on this. He wrote articles reveling in the glories of male bonding and posturing evidenced in our practice of our audiophile mania. A good percentage of audiophiles are guys who are all about "mine is bigger than yours". We are by nature competitive creatures and while for some it is about the sublime art of great music I detect you are looking for bragging rights. When you use language like "sooner or later one must step up to the plate and hit the ball", "Parker continues to uphold his reputation by PROVING his ability", and " What I want is for someone to prove his ability"; well it just sounds a lot to me like words used for millennia when males meet and its time to establish a pecking order.

"We would disagree about technology. The technology sector offers myriad examples in which definitive results are established using scientific criteria. One thinks of aerospace, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, defense, chemical manufacturing, metal mining, semiconductors to cite but a few examples. I'm afraid federal regulations make it so."

Say what? That is rich, I am sitting here in my office/lab with four oscilloscopes, signal generators, and a logic analyzer and you imply I am anti-technology &/or scientific method?!? I was the one who tossed you the easy pitch citing Dr. Toole's work using blind ABX testing to develop a set of criteria in speaker design. Go listen to a pair of Revel Ultima Salons to hear what happened when Sidney Harmon gave him a blank check to apply that bit of results established using scientific criteria.

The seven industries you cite have TONS of cash poured into them paying for the scientific and engineering R&D upon which they obviously rest. With that paragraph you veer completely off track because each of the seven industries you mention have as their ultimate results fairly binary black or white results. The airplane stays in the sky or it falls. The drug is effective or not. The M1 tank blows the top off a T-72 or it, well actually it does. The mine is safe and profitable, or it is not. And the CPU of this PC will boot 1000 times without fail or it will not. In the high-end audio industry our R&D budget is 0.00000001% of that of any of the seven giants you mention. And compounding that is that rather than a binary black or white result we are after the subtlest of results. Like your wine industry analogy the final question is "how does this new bottle/format taste/sound?" The definitive results you long after when they involve such a subtle effect are very expensive to produce. Who's business is furthered by embarking on such a program?

happy listening

Norman Tracy
www.audiocraftersguild.com

• The Wizard of Gizmos   (Open in New Window)

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Kimber Kable

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---