Archimago wrote:
> This I'm sure was done on purpose. $7000 monoblocks are timeless :-).
Timeless that is until the next "revolutionary", "game changing",
"ultimate", "Mark II", front cover monoblock amp comes along. Besides a
2007 monoblock is, well, so 2007. Remember in 2016 $7,000 barely
Julf wrote:
> No idea.
>
>
>
> I agree. Would not be that hard to have a date on it...
This I'm sure was done on purpose. $7000 monoblocks are timeless :-).
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective'
audiophile blog.
Archimago wrote:
> Nice. :-).
>
> Now here's a question. What year was that article? I hate it when a
> website has no date on the article to orient oneself with...
Following this reference:
Archimago wrote:
> What year was that article?
No idea.
> I hate it when a website has no date on the article to orient oneself
> with...
I agree. Would not be that hard to have a date on it...
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high
Hmm they apearently makes a mix of recording equipment and high end ?
http://www.nagraaudio.com/ and are not a part of the parent company any
more ,but still owned by the family
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J
Julf wrote:
> 'Nagra PSA (Pyramid Stereo Amplifier)'
> (http://www.tonepublications.com/review/nagra-psa-amplifier/)
Yea but this is about design , they don't claim pyramid powers . Nagra
has some tube stuff too.
But I wonder what happened , Nagra did respected proffesional tape
recorders ?
Julf wrote:
> 'Nagra PSA (Pyramid Stereo Amplifier)'
> (http://www.tonepublications.com/review/nagra-psa-amplifier/)
Nice. :-).
Now here's a question. What year was that article? I hate it when a
website has no date on the article to orient oneself with...
Archimago's Musings:
Greg Erskine wrote:
> When I was a kid there were pyramids you could buy to keep your razor
> blades sharp. What happened to pyramid power?
>
> Has this advanced technology been used in audio?
'Nagra PSA (Pyramid Stereo Amplifier)'
(http://www.tonepublications.com/review/nagra-psa-amplifier/)
ralphpnj wrote:
> And don't forget to pick up the Sonic Air Molecule Aligner and Purifier
> - this device continuously filters the air in one's home thereby
> ensuring that the Wi-Fi signal is transmitted as smoothly as possible
> and with minimal losses. The device also aligns the air molecules
Julf wrote:
> At some point I will start selling audiophile-grade routers and start an
> audiophile-grade Internet Service Provider.
And don't forget to pick up the Sonic Air Molecule Aligner and Purifier
- this device continuously filters the air in one's home thereby
ensuring that the Wi-Fi
Mnyb wrote:
> Can you get discount at audioquest I want thier cat 6 cable from Tidals
> servers to my home , now they start to stream MQA :P
Sure, no problem, I am sure they do give a discount once you buy more
than 10 miles of cable. :)
"To try to judge the real from the false will always
Julf wrote:
> At some point I will start selling audiophile-grade routers and start an
> audiophile-grade Internet Service Provider.
Can you get discount at audioquest I want thier cat 6 cable from Tidals
servers to my home , now they start to stream MQA :P
arnyk wrote:
> Agreed. Unfortuntely this has opened the inner sanctum of network wiring
> and management hardware to the golden ears, and they have already
> trashed it up with golden network cables and magical IP-related
> hardware.
At some point I will start selling audiophile-grade routers
Julf wrote:
> Indeed. I guess the latest step is going all IP/network instead of
> "traditional" audio connection standards.
Agreed. Unfortuntely this has opened the inner sanctum of network wiring
and management hardware to the golden ears, and they have already
trashed it up with golden
arnyk wrote:
> With the exception of some tiny niches that are pandering to the
> audiophile world, pro audio has been as digital as conveniently possible
> for years if not decades.
Indeed. I guess the latest step is going all IP/network instead of
"traditional" audio connection standards.
Julf wrote:
> And the pro audio world has pretty much solved these issues - which is,
> I guess, why audiophiles hate pro audio. Of course pro audio are going
> all-digital (can you say AES67?).
With the exception of some tiny niches that are pandering to the
audiophile world, pro audio has
ralphpnj wrote:
> Not only all digital but all PCM digital. No DSD.
Of course - as DSD is useless in the studio. It has to be converted to
PCM to be processed or mixed, and then back to DSD if that is the way
you want to store/issue it.
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be
Wombat wrote:
> Didn't Rey bypass the compressor in the millenium flacon with an
> Audioquest cable?
No believe that they were Nordost, all that Viking imagery works better
in a battle.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz
ralphpnj wrote:
> Who knows maybe in the Star Wars universe digital cable really do make a
> difference!
Didn't Rey bypass the compressor in the millenium flacon with an
Audioquest cable?
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made
philippe_44 wrote:
> Be careful, if you start to throw Star Wars, into the mix, we are
> entering into a very serious topic now, for real :)
>
> EVERY audio gear sounds better after having watched the proper episode
> of the serie
Who knows maybe in the Star Wars universe digital cable really
ralphpnj wrote:
> Measurements are to a Stereophile equipment review as science is to a
> Star Wars movie.
Be careful, if you start to throw Star Wars, into the mix, we are
entering into a very serious topic now, for real :)
EVERY audio gear sounds better after having watched the proper
Julf wrote:
> And the pro audio world has pretty much solved these issues - which is,
> I guess, why audiophiles hate pro audio. Of course pro audio are going
> all-digital (can you say AES67?).
Yes its noteven consitent wiothin the same brand save a test once with a
pre amp power amp combo
Julf wrote:
> And the pro audio world has pretty much solved these issues - which is,
> I guess, why audiophiles hate pro audio. Of course pro audio are going
> all-digital (can you say AES67?).
Not only all digital but all PCM digital. No DSD.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power
ralphpnj wrote:
> And all of these are fairly well understood electrical properties not
> magic and not voodoo, as they are often portrayed in the audiophile
> press.
And the pro audio world has pretty much solved these issues - which is,
I guess, why audiophiles hate pro audio. Of course pro
Mnyb wrote:
> And you stll sometimes needs to match components due to varying output
> levels and gain between products ? A stadRdised output level and
> baseline gain would do so much , sometimes your just amplifing input
> noise
Mnyb wrote:
> O i forgot to mention impedance
And all of these
O i forgot to mention impedance
Main hifi: Touch + CIA PS +MeridianG68J MeridianHD621 MeridianG98DH 2 x
MeridianDSP5200 MeridianDSP5200HC 2 xMeridianDSP3100 +Rel Stadium 3
sub.
Bedroom/Office: Boom
Kitchen: Touch + powered
arnyk wrote:
> The reason being that such a high proportion of audio gear has inaudible
> distortion, and that producing gear with really good measured
> performance is relatively easy. The common exception is part of just
> about every system, and its the transducers and the environment that
ralphpnj wrote:
> Silly me! I forgot that measurements, at least in the world of high end
> audio, are a double edged sword:
>
> Super expensive equipment "sounds" great but measures poorly -
> measurements prove nothing!
>
> Inexpensive equipment measures good but not great - measurements
Julf wrote:
> No, it could well happen - only to "prove" that measurements don't tell
> the whole story.
Silly me! I forgot that measurements, at least in the world of high end
audio, are a double edged sword:
Super expensive equipment "sounds" great but measures poorly -
measurements prove
ralphpnj wrote:
> As we all know the above will NEVER EVER happen.
No, it could well happen - only to "prove" that measurements don't tell
the whole story.
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid
ralphpnj wrote:
> So let's try and come up with potential ways that measurements might be
> useful.
>
> Here's one:
>
> Take a baseline set of measurement for a power amp using a standard
> receptacle, standard (stock) power cord and no power conditioner.
>
> Next take a set measurements with
So let's try and come up with potential ways that measurements might be
useful.
Here's one:
Take a baseline set of measurement for a power amp using a standard
receptacle, standard (stock) power cord and no power conditioner.
Next take a set measurements with the same power amp using:
1) an
But they are actually in most cases technically correct measurements .
The real fun starts when they try to explain away really badly measuring
products that they like :) while avoiding the topic of human hearings
is not actually that good or you migth prefer this kind of distortion
etc
Measurements are to a Stereophile equipment review as science is to a
Star Wars movie.
Given some lip service but otherwise completely ignored.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm:
pablolie wrote:
> i am subscribed to Stereophile, and enjoy it. it is in no way my "bible"
> in all things audio (not publication is, ever), but the pictures are
> beautifully taken and the writing is good. of course there is a lot of
> stuff that makes me raise an eyebrow and disagree, but hey,
pablolie wrote:
> the writing is good.
As far as fiction goes, yes. :)
"To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this
fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt
edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953
i am subscribed to Stereophile, and enjoy it. it is in no way my "bible"
in all things audio (not publication is, ever), but the pictures are
beautifully taken and the writing is good. of course there is a lot of
stuff that makes me raise an eyebrow and disagree, but hey, i take this
hobby with
ralphpnj wrote:
> And so we get people like John Atkinson and Robert Harley, two
> writers/editors with little technical expertise or training, posing as
> experts. A sad state of affairs.
I have very little use for or much to say about Harley, but Atkinson
claims a degree in physics from a
arnyk wrote:
> The real problem is that many things in audio are difficult or
> impossible to truly DBT, Examples are things like loudspeakers and room
> acoustics. Not everything is a simple signal processor or a perceptual
> encoder.
>
> In one case an AES paper was cited as DBT-substantiated
Archimago wrote:
> I agree Arny. While I enjoy reading the HA stuff, it's not much fun
> posting when the "TOS#8 Bridgade" rolls around and deposits responses
> like this:
> 20178
>
> Granted it might be warranted but without opportunity to discuss, that's
> just not much fun for a hobby
ralphpnj wrote:
> But MQA doesn't do DSD so which one is obsolete?
-Clearly DSD is obsolete.- Didn't you hear? MQA is *-*revolutionary*-*
baby!
In either case, neither Metronome or April Wine... er... April Music
handles the awesomeness! :mad:
Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A
Archimago wrote:
> Fair enough Mnyb :-). At least the digital portion measures better than
> the Metronome. Alas, it cannot play DSD whereas the Metronome apparently
> can. Thus it's still clearly obsolete :rolleyes:.
But MQA doesn't do DSD so which one is obsolete?
Living Rm:
Mnyb wrote:
> That thing is not totaly senseless it's is actually a onebox solution
> with a class D Amps , digital inputs USB it can play from USB sticks etc
> and analog inputs.fm tuner and headphone amp . It lacks built in network
> streamer I would want that in such a product.
> Well the
Archimago wrote:
> Right... And let's do it again for April 2016!
>
> 20177
>
> Art Dudley found it "easy to use and very attractive". Well, it better
> be easy to use for olde tech. But "attractive"? To each his own but it
> reminds me of my uncle's early top loading VHS player (I think it
Wombat wrote:
> Quoting GUTB is not exactly a counter HA example ;)
> He is only unloading posts about his believe system without any further
> attempt to discuss anything when asked.
Right :-). Just an example of the kind of terse responses I've seen that
I imagine could turn off otherwise
Archimago wrote:
> I agree Arny. While I enjoy reading the HA stuff, it's not much fun
> posting when the "TOS#8 Bridgade" rolls around and deposits responses
> like this:
> 20178
>
> Granted it might be warranted but without opportunity to discuss, that's
> just not much fun for a hobby
Quoting GUTB is not exactly a counter HA example ;)
He is only unloading posts about his believe system without any further
attempt to discuss anything when asked.
Transporter (modded) -> RG142 -> Avantgarde Acoustic based 500VA
monoblocks -> Sommer SPK240 -> self-made speakers
arnyk wrote:
> Dream on! HA has its own anti-scientific axe to grind, just like Head
> Fi, and the DIY forums. In the case of HA the axe is a kind of
> ultra-science or the idea that if some theory or principle hasn't
> happened to have been covered with a DBT, it is therefore assumed to be
>
ralphpnj wrote:
> The facts:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/25/business/media/music-sales-remain-steady-but-lucrative-cd-sales-decline.html?_r=0
>
> Stereophile's response:
>
> Let's put some almost dead tech on the cover!
Right... And let's do it again for April 2016!
20177
Art Dudley
The facts:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/25/business/media/music-sales-remain-steady-but-lucrative-cd-sales-decline.html?_r=0
Stereophile's response:
Let's put some almost dead tech on the cover!
+---+
|Filename:
cliveb wrote:
> The only forum where proper scientific discussion happens and moderators
> keep the crazies in check seems to be Hydrogen Audio. Even there, the
> occasional flame war erupts (eg. the recent "More misinformation" thread
> - quite why the moderators let that one run for so long
Julf wrote:
> While the hipsters have already moved on from vinyl to cassette tape.
> :)
>
>
> I think "high end audio" lost the war quite a while ago. All that
> remains is the audio fragment of the generic "high end" (as in "luxury",
> or "mine is more expensive than yours") market. Just
Julf wrote:
> Just waiting for cables by Dior, designed by Porsche, and Ferrari-badged
> record players.
Merchandising of luxury brands is getting silly. I was in Avoriaz a
couple of weeks ago and saw a guy whose skis had Ferrari prancing horse
emblems on them!
Transporter -> ATC SCM100A
ralphpnj wrote:
> So what is going on now is that there are individuals who post all kinds
> audiophile garbage on many of the threads in the Sound Science section
> and completely derail any discussion of audio science. By "audiophile
> garbage" I am referring to the statements like "not
ralphpnj wrote:
> Meanwhile bluetooth speakers are still selling like crazy and lossy
> streaming is becoming the preferred way to listen to music.
While the hipsters have already moved on from vinyl to cassette tape.
:)
> High end audio may be winning some battles but they are clearly losing
Archimago wrote:
> Speaking of paranoia. It looks like Lavorgna is getting more vigilant
> with any comment that disagrees with his ridiculous posts that basically
> demonstrate his lack of understanding and over-reaching thoughts. What a
> convoluted mass of ideas made to justify bizarre
RonM wrote:
> Paranoia.
Speaking of paranoia. It looks like Lavorgna is getting more vigilant
with any comment that disagrees with his ridiculous posts that basically
demonstrate his lack of understanding and over-reaching thoughts. (For
example his recent article on Sonification - good job
pablolie wrote:
> is there a reason why it looks like the Stereophile forums?
They are all part of the same corporate combine.
arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365
View this thread:
pablolie wrote:
> is there a reason why it looks like the Stereophile forums?
Audiostream is one of several Stereophile's specialty audio "sister"
sites and all the sites are linked - same user ID, log in, etc. The only
"sister" site with even a slight bit of independence is "Inner
Fidelity",
If a lone man says something in a forest where his wife can't hear him,
is he still wrong ?
A camel is a racehorse designed by a committee.
Wirrunna's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3225
View
is there a reason why it looks like the Stereophile forums?
...pablo
Server: Virtual Machine (on VMware Player) running Ubuntu 12.04 + LMS
7.7.5
System: SB Touch --optical->- Benchmark DAC2HGC --AnalysisPlus Oval
Copper XLR->- NAD M22 Power Amp --AnalysisPlus Black Mesh Oval->- Totem
Element
mlsstl wrote:
> They can also hear everything you've never said...
Until I read the previous pages of posts, I thought that was a reference
to the audiophile press and their response to inferred criticism!
LMS on a dedicated server (FitPC3)
Transporter (Ethernet) - main listening, Onkyo
mlsstl wrote:
> They can also hear everything you've never said...
Both sighted and double blind! With 100% accuracy for both.
Living Rm: Transporter-SimAudio pre/power amps-Vandersteen 3A Sign. &
sub
Home Theater: Touch-Marantz HTR-Energy Veritas 2.1 & Linn sub
Computer Rm: Touch-Headroom
They can also hear everything you've never said...
mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=105254
cliveb wrote:
> Women need very acute hearing so that they are able to hear everything
> their husbands might mutter under their breath and file it away for
> future use against them (sometimes years later).
I'm pretty sure part of the marriage ceremony reads "Anything you say
can and will be
cliveb wrote:
> Women need very acute hearing so that they are able to hear everything
> their husbands might mutter under their breath and file it away for
> future use against them (sometimes years later).
And men have the advantage of having and developing that brain/hearing
tool called "the
w3wilkes wrote:
> The disgusting thing about age related hearing loss is it seems to
> discriminate between males and females. My wife and I are both mid 60's
> and I have to wear hearing aids to get any kind of high frequency like
> cymbals, crickets at night, etc., mids and lows are fine. My
ralphpnj wrote:
> I don't know the exact stats for age related hearing loss but it would
> be very hard to believe that a man in his mid-60s, such as Atkinson,
> does not have some degree of age related hearing loss.
The disgusting thing about age related hearing loss is it seems to
arnyk wrote:
> The obvious conclusion is age discrimination. As people grow older, they
> may learn how to become more sensitive listeners. They may also learn
> better than to believe everything they read.
>
> How many subjectivists disparage John Atkinson's reviews - he's pushing
> 70, you
ralphpnj wrote:
> So the web site Audiostream, a "spin off"/sub web site of the main
> Stereophile web site puts up a couple of posts showing that the majority
> of the site's readers support the site's brand of subjective evaluation
> of audio equipment. Wow what a big surprise! Perhaps a web
servies wrote:
> Looking at the profile images I see some pretty old folks who probably
> can't even hear beyond 13 kHz...
> I know enough to come to a certain conclusion...
The obvious conclusion is age discrimination. As people grow older, they
may learn how to become more sensitive
ralphpnj wrote:
> Is that a tube transmitter?
Well sort of. It's a Traveling Wave Tube amplifier. This is a
specialized long life microwave tube that may still be used
occasionally.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling-wave_tube
bonze wrote:
> Whatever floats your boat - but you don't really need to share all the
> same.
definitely a dead sheep.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's Profile:
SBGK wrote:
> I feel like I've been savaged by a dead sheep or is it nuzzled by an old
> boar, both apply.
Whatever floats your boat - but you don't really need to share all the
same.
LMS Version: 7.9
TranquilPC T2-WHS-A3 - WHS 2011
2x Touch, 3x SB3
bonze wrote:
> Here it's known as the "SBGK defence" ;)
I feel like I've been savaged by a dead sheep or is it nuzzled by an old
boar, both apply.
Touch optimisations http://touchsgotrythm.blogspot.co.uk/
SBGK's
andy_c wrote:
> It seems somehow appropriate to link to that favorite old usenet song,
> "'*_The_Lurkers_Support_Me_in_Email_*'
> (http://www.jowaltonbooks.com/poetry/whimsy/the-lurkers-support-me-in-email/)",
> sung to the tune of "My Bonny Lies Over the Ocean".
Here it's known as the "SBGK
It seems somehow appropriate to link to that favorite old usenet song,
"'*_The_Lurkers_Support_Me_in_Email_*'
(http://www.jowaltonbooks.com/poetry/whimsy/the-lurkers-support-me-in-email/)",
sung to the tune of "My Bonny Lies Over the Ocean".
So the web site Audiostream, a "spin off"/sub web site of the main
Stereophile web site puts up a couple of posts showing that the majority
of the site's readers support the site's brand of subjective evaluation
of audio equipment. Wow what a big surprise! Perhaps a web site devoted
to autoerotic
mlsstl wrote:
> I think the fundamental irony is that subjectivists refuse to admit the
> psychological influence of their own subjectivity!
I guess "subjectivist" isn't really an accurate label - "solipsist",
"egotist" or "egocentric" might be better.
"To try to judge the real from the
I think the fundamental irony is that subjectivists refuse to admit the
psychological influence of their own subjectivity!
mlsstl's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9598
View this thread:
SuperQ wrote:
> Baffling.
>
> The opinion that there are still unsolved cases of where the difference
> people hear can't be measured blows my mind.
>
> We can tune in the 23W transmitter from the Voyager probes that are 5.8
> billion miles away, but nope, audio is unsolved.
>
> It's like
SuperQ wrote:
> Baffling.
>
> The opinion that there are still unsolved cases of where the difference
> people hear can't be measured blows my mind.
>
> We can tune in the 23W transmitter from the Voyager probes that are 5.8
> billion miles away, but nope, audio is unsolved.
>
> It's like
Baffling.
The opinion that there are still unsolved cases of where the difference
people hear can't be measured blows my mind.
We can tune in the 23W transmitter from the Voyager probes that are 5.8
billion miles away, but nope, audio is unsolved.
It's like they're willfully ignorant of things
Ladies and gentlemen I do believe that our voices of reason are having
an impact and have prompted the following two posts on the Audiostream
web site:
http://www.audiostream.com/content/silent-majority#31HoU8w6GYKjiFpM.97
84 matches
Mail list logo
