Phil Leigh;617085 Wrote: > Must be a Mac thing... on Windows, Chrome, IE and Firefox reproduce my > jpegs identically - I've just tried it. I guess Firefox and Safari use > different rendering code.
Bingo! For some reason, Safari renders images much better than Firefox on the Mac. Safari's rendering engine seems more sophisticated. Phil Leigh;617085 Wrote: > Bit of a strange analogy, because there's no digital-to-analogue > conversion going on, with a digital graphics card driving an LCD panel > via a DVI connection at the native pixel level... You're right, the analogy is deeply flawed. But I brought it up anyway in order to illustrate how even in the world of pure ones and zeros, you can still end up with different results when using the identical source. Phil Leigh;617085 Wrote: > Anyway, as for the violins, it's all simply down to the fact that they > are nicely made from quality timber and have aged beautifully...rather > like my 40-year old Strat and Dove... Again, I think you hit the nail on the head. I'm angling toward that explanation myself (not necessarily dismissing the original author's contention that varnish may play a role). Phil Leigh;617085 Wrote: > However, put any of these instruments in the hands of a poor player and > they will all sound dreadful :-) Same as when you put a terribly performed, terribly recorded, terribly mastered track on even the most sophisticated audio system, all you'll hear is unbearably bad music. Sophisticated audio systems cannot salvage bad tracks same as sophisticated music instruments cannot salvage bad musicians. -- magiccarpetride ------------------------------------------------------------------------ magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=86236 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
