Patrick Dixon;220773 Wrote: > Yes - that was just my little joke. > D'oh.
Patrick Dixon;220773 Wrote: > > No that wasn't my point at all. I think what was significant about > your test was that you were reasonably consistent (within the limits > stated elsewhere here) at telling one source from another. That > doesn't completely surprise me, but it is contrary to other assertions > on this forum. You also clearly had a preference for one over the > other, and my point is only that this preference may be completely > different if you listen to each over a longer period. It wasn't a > sales-pitch at all - that was just opaqueice's smokescreen. I'm communicating well today! My comment about not dragging it in was directed more at opaqueice. There are arguments about the statitistical strength of 4/4 but we were picking out traits consistently, blind, which agrees with your point that different digital sources sound different. I am open-minded about sources but I am cautious about conclusions (=spending money) without blind listening. Unless my opinion changes drastically I will eventually audition an SB+ and Transporter (or whatever else is current by that time comes!). But I will want to listen blind, one way or another, because I don't trust myself sighted. 1. Blind testing is essential. 2. Digital sources sound different and are important. Ok, there are arguments and opinions on these, but they are NOT exactly the same discussion. Darren -- darrenyeats Monarchy CLD-M401 transport or SB3 -> Sony DAS-703ES DAC -> Krell KAV-300i -> PMC AB-1 (home-made room treatments and supports) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ darrenyeats's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10799 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=37553 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
