Vinyl Asylum

The article is more about Baer's enjoyment of motorcycling...

69.234.203.160

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Vinyl Asylum ]

eppis1

(A)

In Reply to: New York Phil musician is steadfast listener to . . . posted by Tightwad on August 14, 2006 at 22:49:07:

...than his personal audio choices. What else can he listen to on a bike? Also, there's no mention of the home system, just that he likes to listen while he rides, which by the way, is not a safe thing to do on a bike. Riding with a Tuba strapped to his back? Must be a genius! But then, he's a f***ing tuba player. He's probably had his brains pummeled into mush (not to mention his hearing) by life in the brass section. I rode on the street for years, and I preferred minimal distractions to the task at hand-staying alive until I reached my destinations. I think Ipod's sound okay, under the right circumstances. Not in my home system, ever. If you are making an argument for Ipod's superiority to vinyl (now or in the future), it is an unconvincing one. If you are just jesting, then tee hee hee.

Follow Ups:

Re: The article is more about Baer's enjoyment of motorcycling... - Tightwad 23:18:24 08/14/06 (13)
Given what some VA members write about redbook CD (much less MP3), I would expect any professional musician to immediately pronounce an iPod unlistenable. So this article, naturally, surprised me.
Perhaps the people on VA who consider redbook CD unlistenable perform in better orchestras than the NY Phil.
Or maybe they just have giant analog sticks up their arses.
- Geez. Where've you been? We've talked about this before. Ever see what some car salesmen drive? - artemus 04:20:52 08/15/06 (0)
  Lotsa musicians listen to boomboxes. They aren't called "starving musicians" for no reason.
  
  I only use my gun whenever kindness fails
- Just because someone plays an instrument does not mean they can recognize realistic sound. - Teresa 01:05:05 08/15/06 (5)
  For example many musicians listen to boomboxes and mini-systems while other musicians are full-fledged audiophiles. I play guitar and piano.
  "Perhaps the people on VA who consider redbook CD unlistenable perform in better orchestras than the NY Phil."
  To begin with the worst problem with redbook CD is not it's inferior sound quality but the pain in produces in my ears, especially the pain of massed strings. This still has not been solved! For me the only way to listen to digitally recorded massed strings without PAIN is with PCM at 96kHz or higher or DSD. Anything lower hurts a lot. My idea of hell is being forced to listen to 44.1kHz CDs.
  I am getting sick and tired of people belittling my pain. You evidently do not suffer from Digitallis, I do!
  Plus LPs sound not only a hell of a lot better than CDs, they are smoother and more comfortable to listen to with NO listener fatigue!
  
  "Analog is Music, Digital is mathematics"
  Happy listening,
  Teresa
  - Re: Just because someone plays an instrument does not mean they can recognize realistic sound. - arturo7 09:16:33 08/15/06 (1)
    Wow. I usually avoid this d vs a nonsense but I couldn't let this statement go by without comment.
    When speaking of the general public one could make the statement that playing an instrument does not necessarily translate to "recognizing realistic sound." But in this case the person in question is a professional classical musician. You don't get to that level without a highly critical ear.
    cheers
    - Re: Just because someone plays an instrument does not mean they can recognize realistic sound. - Tightwad 11:19:25 08/15/06 (0)
      In my experience with orchestral playing, the brass players tends to be less anal and more mensch-y. And can still make a clean pianissimo entrance on a note well above the staff.
      That this dude bikes around with his tuba strapped to his back, blaring loud orchestral pieces in his headphones, is classic.
  - Women are more sensitive to high frequencies than men. This is generally where digital generally fails - artemus 04:12:05 08/15/06 (2)
    My wife heard a high freq buzz (which was an equipment problem) and had to point it out to me. I hear fairly well, but I could not isolate that sound until it was pointed out to me and even then had to walk up to the speaker. She heard it as soon as she entered the house. The door is 35' away.
    High frequencies are generally where digital fails. I have been surprised at the number of women who have told me that they never liked cd's. OTOH, your sensitivity seems to be in a different frequency range. Still, I believe that women's hearing is probably more sensitive than men's. Could this be the reason why most women do not like loud music? My wife and I compromise. I'd like it louder; she'd like it softer.
    I only use my gun whenever kindness fails
    - Re: Women are more sensitive to high frequencies than men. This is generally where digital generally fails - Teresa 20:01:32 08/15/06 (0)
      I have another problem a hearing spike that starts raising at 10kHz and between 14kHz - 17kHz in which my hearing is elevated +5dB and starts falling off after that to 24kHz and I cannot hear anything above 24kHz.
      Where my hearing is raising most others are falling so I am real sensitive to any problems in the 10kHz to 17kHz range or upper midrange and this is where Digital PCM at resolution under 96kHz kills me. PCM at 96kHz and above does not cause the pain.
      I don't expect that designers have to make products to please my hearing range. But LPs, Cassettes, RTRs, DVD-Audios and SACDs at 96kHz or higher DO NOT HURT MY HEAD. And CD, DVD-Audios and SACDs at 48kHz or lower DO.
      
      "Analog is Music, Digital is mathematics"
      Happy listening,
      Teresa
    - This is a biological edge women over men. - cheap-Jack 07:24:40 08/15/06 (0)
      Hi.
      Generally, a man's hearing in high pitch starts to decline at least a decade earlier than a woman. Like it or not, that's the way men & women are created since day one.
      c-J
- No doubt... - eppis1 23:41:15 08/14/06 (2)
  ... my problem (and it may be a shortcoming, to be sure.) is that at any given time, I enjoy cd's and records both with equal passion. I do have a superb system (in my opinion), and I love music. I'm just rambling, aimlessly.
  - Re: No doubt... - Tightwad 23:45:17 08/14/06 (1)
    > > I enjoy cd's and records both with equal passion.
    How dare you! Don't you know that vinyl kills digital?!?!?!?
    :D
    - Wait until you listen to DVD-audio. - cheap-Jack 08:50:51 08/15/06 (0)
      Hi.
      Yup, CD is going if not gone yet.
      But what comes in to replace it for years now is its big digital brother: DVD-audio with tons of software to support it, affordably.
      DVD-audio delivers UNCOMPRESSED superb stereo sound which, IMO, is a real sonic competition to the best anaolgue media.
      c-J
      PS: I love both LP & DVD-audio.
- Re: The article is more about Baer's enjoyment of motorcycling... - henrybasstardo 23:40:16 08/14/06 (2)
  Some people will always be miserable. Looking for better sound is what we do. If you don't enjoy the ride along the way why bother? Cheers
  - Yeah. But that wouldn't start the fight he was looking for. nt - artemus 05:51:51 08/15/06 (0)
    `
    I only use my gun whenever kindness fails
  - Re: The article is more about Baer's enjoyment of motorcycling... - Tightwad 23:49:10 08/14/06 (0)
    I have no problem with people who enjoy collecting, and playing, vinyl more than digital. I am one of those people.
    The people I sometimes get annoyed with are those who claim that vinyl is objectively, and widely, superior to (for example) redbook CD. I've heard enough excellent-sounding redbook CD and vinyl, played on superior equipment, to know it's a dogmatic lie.

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

Kimber Kable

You can not post to an archived thread.