Archimago wrote: > LOL... Don't think I *can* even convert to being a subjectivist if I > wanted to at this point :rolleyes:. > > For one thing, I honestly find it remarkably -boring -writing about the > subjective experience of what one hears. The reason being that when > writing that stuff, one recognizes that the words are just describing an > ephemeral internal experience that can (and should) be different for > each person based on life history. This is also why I typically just > briefly glance over subjective reviews these days. I can appreciate > album recommendations and general discussions about the gear and why it > might be great... > > -But do I really care about the quality of the supposedly perceived > subjective change- when some golden-eared guru replaced cables or > switched a $5000 DAC when we know these experiences are prone to bias? > Not really. Some devices that are more difficult to characterize might > be worth a read - like speakers. > > Too many people describe too many subjective experiences already in this > world (like every month of -TAS -and -Stereophile-). I really can't see > how any more will actually educate, add knowledge, or change the hobby > in any positive direction... > > As for this: > -"Anyhow, I'm not sure demo gear comes to anyone for free for real."- -- > drmatt > > No. Nothing is really for free. The price is that of a review of sorts > and at least an endorsement, right? > > As for Chord, I have heard some great sounds from these at the local > audio show and showroom. The most interesting thing about these DACs I > think is how they've taken the opposite direction from MQA. Instead of > weak, poorly antialiasing digital filters of something like 32 to 64 > taps with MQA, they implement very long "brick wall" type filters with > tens of thousands of taps. If time domain performance were about impulse > responses, this is like giving the finger to Bob Stuart and MQA's > typical presentation material ;).
Hi Archimago! I agree wholeheartedly with the points that you make. It is certainly the case that loudspeakers are still (despite massive advances in materials available for driver construction since I first started my audio quest for nirvana some 45 years ago) the weakest link in the chain, & the most appropriate choice for an individual listener will be governed by the size (& shape) of their listening room, the particular combination of compromises used by the various manufacturers (who usually have some kind of "house" sound throughout their range) that meshes best with the musical ear of the listener, & also on the type of music that is to be reproduced. If you predominantly listen to string quartets, you will have an easier time finding loudspeakers that you like than you will if you have more catholic tastes (like me, & I suspect, the majority of the members of this forum). I am not particularly bothered which "genre" a musical performance is (often relatively arbitrarily) assigned to, I am interested in whether it is an emotionally engaging musical performance. I like listening in the dark with no distractions, in the (probably delusory!) belief that this helps my analogue brain focus on the sound without any other sensory distractions. I do have to observe certain safety protocols when indulging myself like this since my 18 year old black cat *-still-* hasn't twigged that, unlike her, I cannot see in the dark (or for that matter that my eyes are located much further away from my feet than in her configuration... ). This is slightly dangerous for me, but potentially disastrous for her. I have a powerful flashlight to hand! :D The almost total inadequacy of any commonly quoted objective measurements of loudspeaker performance for the purpose of assisting one's selection of a loudspeaker that suits you is apparent. Arnyk sent me the link (on another thread) for a recently published paper by 3 Danish academic researchers who were attempting to make headway with this issue by inventing new objective measures which actually do correlate to the sound produced. It was a tough read - I think it took me 3 run-throughs fully to fathom their chosen methodology & ultimately I was less than impressed with the amount of progress which they had actually made by the end. However, if anyone would like to have a headache this weekend, I'll go off & find it so that you can judge for yourself! Throwaway remarks like needing a "specially experienced listening panel" & the need for the experiment to be conducted by "experts" gave me cause for concern that the scientific method (which requires the results of experiments to be readily repeatable) was not being closely followed despite the undoubted qualifications of the authors... Have a great weekend all! I'm off to a Richard Thompson concert this evening - I attended one of the early concerts in his current tour & he was so good that I got tickets to see him again before he retreats back to the US which has been his home for the last 30 years. I'm really looking forward to it! Dave :cool: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Golden Earring's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=66646 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=108132 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
