Pat Farrell;175573 Wrote: > thomsens wrote: > > I guess you make a good point about budget assumptions. My budget > > isn't so limited that I'm concerned about a transient issue of my > > library being MP3 driving my system choice or that the transporter > is > > $2K. I'd rather set myself up for the inevitable re-rip to FLAC and > > other nextgen hd formats that might come along. > > There is no need to ever re-rip, even if FLAC becomes obsolete and some > > other cooler format comes along. All you have to do is convert the FLAC > > back to PCM uncomressed files, and them recompress with whatever cool > thing there is. > > I'm not holding my breath for something fundamentally different than > FLAC. It is getting all the bits that are on a RedBook CD. Sure, you > might get a little more compression, but that really doesn't matter > much. And FLAC can get better if something cooler comes along, newer > tags or whatever. > > I was hoping that something better than RedBook would connect, but the > > idiot vendors with their idiotic format wars killed the whole idea. > The fact is that RedBook audio is flawed, and could have been fixed > fairly easily. SACD and DVD-Audio were overkill, IMHO. What was needed > > was 20 or 21 bits and 60kHz or so sample rate. > > > As I said in the original post, 3 different shops were blown away by > > the MP3 disc I played. > > So find a better shop. > > > So, if I get a high-end system, I can listen to MP3 most of the > > time, or simply put a higher quality source in if I want to > critically > > listen. > > You started out with the term "high end" which among audiophiles has > very specific meanings. Nothing that costs less than $20,000 is going > to > count as "high end" since audiophiles spend $5000 or more on > turntables, > and $1000 or more on speaker wires. > > > > Your definition of audiophile is extreme, which is fine, but it's > > different than what I was thinking. > > I'm using the standard definitions of audiophile and high end, from The > > Absolute Sound, Stereophile, and other popular magazines. These are the > > terms that the 'audiophile shops' use. > > > > There are plenty of us who not > > satisfied with a Tweeter system of any variety, > > No one seriously considers Tweeter as a high end, or audiophile shop. > They are a big screen theater retailer. > > > So I guess we need a term that means discerning audio fan, but not > > perfectionist. In any case, I don't see it so black or white. > > You can use any terms you want, but the ones you have used are well > defined in the audiophile and high-end space. If you use terms with > your > own private definitions, you should expect confusion. > > > > -- > Pat > http://www.pfarrell.com/music/slimserver/slimsoftware.html
Either you aren't actually reading my posts, or you simply can't understand where I'm coming from. I'd have to spend more time correcting your understanding of what I said than replying...so, we'll drop it. -- thomsens ------------------------------------------------------------------------ thomsens's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1352 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=32232 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
