Really, so much of this boils down to speakers.  Ever heard Dali
Megalines?  Spooky.  Read the review.  If you can find someone with a
pair anywhere near where you live, introduce yourself, buy a nice
bottle of wine, and beg your way over for an audition.

As for the pure subjectivity thing: it just doesn't work.  Why? 
Because we are hopelessly prey to suggestion.  Eye witness testimony is
notoriously unreliable in courts.  Notice the Bay Area Audiophile
Society study on power cords.  Or how about the psychiatric study
demontraing an equal success rate in short-term alleviation of
depression between placebos and Prozac (not LONG term)?  Or -- a
favorite, Google it somehow -- a stereophile writer who, at a show,
placed a pizza box tripod (those little things they stick in the middle
of a pizza to keep the lid up) on top of a CD player and proclaimed the
latest great tweak.  100% of the audience noticed an immediate
improvement...until she lifted the curtain.

I see a lot of this in the modding community.  We're told this or that
part will be replaced. Well, great.  But, why?  With what demonstrable
proof?  We're talking about electronics.  Electronics can be measured
and the measurements do mean something.  When someone is selling you a
$700 power cord or $700 power supply, it would behoove you to put
emotion and, yes, listening, aside, and do a lot of homework.

In the end, though, it is all about the head and the heart.  I know
perfectly well that a $400 used Carver is 95% of a $9k pair of McIntosh
mono blocs.  I know this because I have owned them in the same time. 
But, the Mc's leave me with a warm and fuzzy feeling.  I know that my
Timex Ironman is far more accurate, functional, and even readable than
one of the automatic watches I collect -- like an IWC or Rolex -- but
the automatics sure are more fun (to me!).


Pat Farrell;143902 Wrote: 
> P Floding wrote:
> > Pat Farrell;143852 Wrote: 
> >>I tend to agree with The Absolute Sound's definition when the type of
> 
> >>music fits: the sound of real acoustic instruments in real space.
> >>But most music doesn't fit those restrictions. The sound of an
> electric
> 
> > "Believing" doesn't necessarily mean the presented sound has to be
> > exactly like some listening position IRL. Just that when you hear it
> > you don't know if you listen to a live performance ot a hifi.
> 
> No problem with your definition. I have never heard any reproduction of
> 
> a full orchestra in a house that sounded real.
> 
> The computer scientists use a "turing test" where the definition of 
> artificial  intellegence is that you can't tell if the answer is from a
> 
> computer or a person. The same definition is my definition of high
> fidelity.
> 
> > BTW, my hifi sounds a lot better than most live electrified
> > performances... So lets add that is needs to be non-electrified
> > instruments.
> 
> See my paraphrasing of TAS's definition.
> "real acoustic instruments" which can be voices, string, brass, etc.
> 
> Better than a live performance may be good, but it is not high fidelity
> if 'fidelity' has the definition of the word that predates "hi fi"
> 
> Is the definintion of a high fidelity playback of The Moody Blues mean 
> the sound of a real orchestra? or the sound of a Mellowtron?
> 
> What is the definition of high fidelity for the sound of a synthesizer?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pat
> http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html


-- 
highdudgeon
------------------------------------------------------------------------
highdudgeon's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2195
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=28368

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to