Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Article: Why We Need Audiophiles (Read 500752 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #675 –
Quote from: krabapple on
Quote from: botface on
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
One other factor. Some of the books I've read about hearing perception suggest that our memory for actual sound is on the order of 5-20 seconds. After that, all we remember about the music are abstractions like the tune, the beat, the words, etc.

Could this be the crux of the matter? Listening to music is an emotional experience. Listening for differences in a short extract is not. Differences evident in one "mode" may not be evident in the other



But I don't have the same emotional experience every time I listen to the same recording, on the same playback system.  Do you?


Not at all.

One of my theories is that the high end value system puts "hearing differences" on the top rung. It seems like they have interated to a world where everthing sounds different. Cases in point would be SET amps that sound different every time you hook up a different speaker, even if you were listening to the signal at the amp's speaker terminals with headphones. Then we have these long term listening tests where it is almost impossible to actually listen to the identical same music, and if you did the listening sessions would be so far apart in time that you could not remember squat about what the previous session actually sounded like.

Quote
If not, it suggests that differentiating sounds by the 'emotional experience' it evokes, is not going to be reliable.


To say the least, and with a bullet!

Quote
And too, one is free to do an ABX using long 'samples'.  It's been done.


The TTL-based hardware ABX comparator had a battery backup for the DRAM memory to facilitate exactly long term ABX tests.

Quote
In fact, fort the JAs of the world, I *recommend* that they first fully satisfy themselves that they have differentiated the 'emotional experience' between A and B, by whatever means they like -- including living with the gear, as JA did during his Damascene episode --  before they try ABX.


IOW, familiarize themselves with the system like they couldn't have done at the early 1990s AES ABX tests.

Quote
As for 'what to do' if that ABX showed that there was, in fact, no likely *audible* difference, JA seems to believe this would have no effect on his feelings toward the gear he grew to dislike.  Maybe , maybe not.  At least he would know it was not the sound of the gear, that was the problem.  AND REPORT THAT....right?


Well.... ;-)

BTW, Got your irony suit on?  JA has been emailing me all day, lately telling me that I need immediate help from a mental health professional.  My first reaction was that it was funny, but I'm beginning to get worried about the man. Prior to today the number of emails I've gotten from him in the past decade or more could be counted on one hand.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #676 –
Quote from: andy_c on
Sorry for the OT, but I looked on the Stereophile site for news of this Colorado audiophile event but couldn't find anything.  Did I just miss it, or is it yet to be announced?


Sorry for the tardy response. See http://www.stereophile.com/news/music_matters_in_may/.

As I said before, if there any HA subscribers who attend one these evenings, I'd be happy to continue this conversation in "meat space." All I request is that you identify yourself by your HA screen name so I know with whom I am talking.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #677 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Got your irony suit on?  JA has been emailing me all day, lately telling me that I need immediate help from a mental health professional.  My first reaction was that it was funny, but I'm beginning to get worried about the man. Prior to today the number of emails I've gotten from him in the past decade or more could be counted on one hand.


Please give it a rest, Mr. Krueger. I haven't been "emailing you all day." I did respond relatively politely to a couple of mails you sent me is all. I know you stated earlier that you enjoy "playing to the peanut gallery" (your words, not mine), but it seems that you are wasting HA bandwidth to no good end by trolling me in this manner. :-(

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #678 –
We sympathize with both of you. Anyone here would be a little agitated the night before we'd marry.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #679 –
Quote from: Dracaena on
He is right though. There are a few rather nasty bits in this thread.


I agree.  So?  It hardly invalidates the whole thread, which contains lots of *informative* bits.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #680 –
My God!

What is happening here? Are we now starting to behave really childish? I thought the peak was reached some time before but now it really gets mean and disrespectful. If this thread ends by throwing lies at each other just to prove a personal point (or vendetta for that matter) we retard to the middle ages. What does this prove? Guys, get a life.

Personally, I prefer to be on the side of Mr. John Atkinson. So far he appeared to be a really nice and charming person. He stayed polite and calm when others already were heated up. If that is a character feat of subjectivists I certainly stay with them - if only for that particuar reason. Though I don´t think that this is true. Because I believe in reasonable people, arguing and discussing friendly.

Regarding Mr. Fremer he is obviously a not so calm person. In his posts he displays a lot of anger. In that matter he is not so different than most of you: he furiously defends his positons. And as one person said before all of this comes down to belief. I´m not looking into a discussion, I´m looking into a religious war, each side missionaring the opposite side. Coming from Germany I truly believe in the Age of Enligtenment and its outcome. Following this thread my hopes in a better future are shattered! We apparantly substituted the bible for AUDIO. And I almost thought that this was over in western civilizations...

Am I a subjectivist? I don´t know. I considered myself a mixture of objectivist & subjectivist. Now I´m not so sure anymore.

Do I believe in DBT? Yes and No. If I would be forced to make a DBT with music I don´t know (e.g. Rock, Pop, Rap) I most certainly would fail. I couldn´t find a difference between 192 kBit/s & 320 kBit/s. But how could I? The reason is easy: the music and its sound is not known to me. I´m not even interested in it. How could I then find differences?
When it comes to orchestral music I certainly would be able (and I´m able) to hear differnces. I did post some DBT here before, together with audio samples to show that differences existed between certain methods of upsampling 44.1 kHz material to 96 kHz. I wanted to prove that one can actually recreates 60-70% of the original 96 kHz sound and that it can be heard with a DBT. Guess what? I offered everything but no one bothered to do a DBT. I didn´t even expect this because it was a measurable & sonically observable test. It proves just one things: if something isn´t according to the agenda of objectionists you´ll simply ignore it. But since many of you advertise that music coded in a lossy codec is not different to the original wave-file it came from I hardly doubt now that there is any interest in testing anything higher than 44.1. I guess you would say that one can´t hear frequencies over 20 kHz anyway. Well there goes the whole shebang... so much for that.

DBT are therefore flawed (WARNING: opinion) in my mind. With music I know I´m able to pass them, with music or musical styles not known to me I fail. For a true and working DBT you´ll need IMO experience. Most of the time you have to know what you are looking for.

Subjectivist Warning: Now for some really wonderful, mad and subjective claims. If this is a TOS violation so be it. What comes now isn´t even worse to things that have been stated here before. I do a lot of upsampling for my personal listening pleasure. When upsampling I keep aliasing "artifacts" on purpose. Most of you would call them artifacts while in fact they are "imaging" products (at least with iZotope RX Advanced). At the same time I don´t want to waste space so I tend to use lossy codecs. I´ve tried every codec there is. AAC, OGG, WMA-Prof and WavPack lossy are able to use 24/96 as input. You can read the results here at TheSoundtrackZone (WARNING: highly subjective). I decided in favor of WavPack lossy - and I picked it by ear, only be ear. I guess this makes me a subjetivist - you can now start the usual bashing. As a sidenote you may want to read the other stuff at The Hifi Wonderland, I guess you´d find it pretty hilarious and entertaining.

On the whole, I find this thread pretty pointless right now. We (including me) are people who discuss matters that won´t interest 99% of the world population. They are happy with their iTunes stuff, their MP3, their iPod. That´s the normal way of things. For us it is different: we are geeks, true nerds. I would go so far as to describe some of us as basement dwellers. We all need to get a life. For that I have my boyfriend... oh, did I mention that I´m gay? All this personal message writing about marriages somewhere in the states really is stupid. I feel strongly offended by that... well actually not so strongly. At least I can think of some of you as childish and by that keep my own arrogance.

No hard feelings...
marlene-d.blogspot.com

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #681 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
Do I believe in DBT? Yes and No. If I would be forced to make a DBT with music I don´t know (e.g. Rock, Pop, Rap) I most certainly would fail. I couldn´t find a difference between 192 kBit/s & 320 kBit/s. But how could I? The reason is easy: the music and its sound is not known to me. I´m not even interested in it. How could I then find differences?

I think you are missing the whole point of DBT. Someone who can't or thinks he can't hear a difference is NEVER asked to take a DBT. That would be pointless.

Only when someone claims to be able to hear a difference, and members have some doubt, are they asked to back up the claim with DBT.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #682 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
Are we now starting to behave really childish? I thought the peak was reached some time before but now it really gets mean and disrespectful.

Starting? In my assessment, the childish behavior started at around page three and came near to its peak on page seven. I attribute most of the nastiness to what I perceive to be nothing more than age-related mental decrepitude.

I suppose senility just isn't as gentle to some as it is to others

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #683 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
DBT are therefore flawed (WARNING: opinion) in my mind. With music I know I´m able to pass them, with music or musical styles not known to me I fail. For a true and working DBT you´ll need IMO experience. Most of the time you have to know what you are looking for.


A quick point of clarification.  DBT's (in the form of ABX) are NOT pass fail.

They provide statistically significant evidence that a difference could be detected, or nothing.  An ABX test that doesn't provide a statistically interesting result does not automatically prove the inverse of the hypothesis.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #684 –
Quote from: Frumious B on
Quote from: spoon on
Quote
It seems ironic to me that the online community had to cobble together their own limited resources to get the updated truth of codec quality since then, and that the print magazines continue to ignore these results.


Exactly, 1 billion iTunes tracks have been sold, so it is not like these files are rare - they are in wide circulation, a new format-medium and to have a blanket statement that all lossy codecs should be disregarded does not do justice to that % of the population.


I think it's harmful in three different ways:  1.  It is, as you pointed out above, incredibly dismissive and patronizing towards a huge swath of music lovers who have embraced this technology and are getting a lot of joy from it.  2.  It does a huge disservice to some who might benefit from a lossy library who are now either poisoned against the idea by Stereophile's editorial stance or who might go ahead and do it, but who screw themselves over in the process out of ignorance like the reader that Atkinson mentioned who ripped everything to 128kbps and ditched the CDs.  3.  It hurts software guys like you and the people who work on actually developing and improving the lossy codecs.  I hope you guys are doing all right because your software kicks ass and I've got 1,700 plus CDs worth of lossless and lossy to prove it.  However, my sense of justice and fair play bristle at the notion that guys who sell those insanely expensive cables that might not be superior to a coat hanger are benefiting mightily from exposure in these magazines while guys who make and sell a product that is actually useful for a fair price get shut out.


I swear on my Jon Anderson signed Japanese mini-LP of Tales From Topographic Oceans that I'm not usually the type to reply to my own posts.  However, I had a thought at work today that ties into what I posted earlier.  It seems to me that an unintended consequence of the above is that so called "high end" audio and, by extension, the publications that cover it have put themselves into a suicidal death spiral.  Their market demographics are almost exclusively baby boomers and older.  They are seemingly doing nothing but flinging poo at the listening choices of just about everyone under forty and they are not reaching out to the younger set by covering audio products, formats and issues that matter to them.  Do they think that the next generation are going to magically start subscribing to these magazines and buying from their advertisers and save them from the fate of "high end" buggy whip manufacturers?  Unless there is a whole lot of outreach and whole lot of change, I very much doubt it.



Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #685 –
Quote from: Frumious B on
I swear on my Jon Anderson signed Japanese mini-LP of Tales From Topographic Oceans that I'm not usually the type to reply to my own posts.  However, I had a thought at work today that ties into what I posted earlier.  It seems to me that an unintended consequence of the above is that so called "high end" audio and, by extension, the publications that cover it have put themselves into a suicidal death spiral.  Their market demographics are almost exclusively baby boomers and older.  They are seemingly doing nothing but flinging poo at the listening choices of just about everyone under forty and they are not reaching out to the younger set by covering audio products, formats and issues that matter to them.  Do they think that the next generation are going to magically start subscribing to these magazines and buying from their advertisers and save them from the fate of "high end" buggy whip manufacturers?  Unless there is a whole lot of outreach and whole lot of change, I very much doubt it.


It is arguable that in the beginning, these magazines got their start by making people feel bad about the equipment they were listening to.

Perhaps, they are hoping that history will repeat itself. ;-)

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #686 –
Quote from: pdq on
I think you are missing the whole point of DBT. Someone who can't or thinks he can't hear a difference is NEVER asked to take a DBT. That would be pointless.

Only when someone claims to be able to hear a difference, and members have some doubt, are they asked to back up the claim with DBT.
No, I do not miss the whole point of DBT. I know it quite well for that matter. And if I wouldn´t, I could look into foobar2000 or Wikipedia, couldn´t I?

And in my experience members of this site always "have some doubt". But then... this is only my experience. And I´m cynical so that won´t matter.
marlene-d.blogspot.com

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #687 –
Quote from: Stereoeditor on
Quote from: rpp3po on
Well, Mr. Atkinson, I wouldn't deny that. Most of us know already anyway...  Here's the original text from the email, that you have sent this morning:

Quote
Subject: My sweetheart!

Dear Arny,

I am excited as hell that tomorrow we finally go that step together. I will only have 4 close friends attending our wedding ceremony and still hope that you decide against bringing your whole pack. The planner just gave me a call, everything is setup and fine. Meet you tomorrow in San Francisco!

Love, 1000 kisses,

John



Has Hydrogen Audio turned into Bizarro World? You and I might have major disagreements over audio matters, "Rpp3po," but why would you encourage Mr. Krueger in this manner? I shouldn't have to say that I did not write the text you quote as being by me.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Ha!

One thing I've noticed about people who believe in pseudoscience, is the inability to grasp sarcasm. I guess that's one of the fundamentals that led to Poe's Law.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #688 –
Quote from: Tahnru on
A quick point of clarification.  DBT's (in the form of ABX) are NOT pass fail.

They provide statistically significant evidence that a difference could be detected, or nothing.  An ABX test that doesn't provide a statistically interesting result does not automatically prove the inverse of the hypothesis.
Correct, of course.
marlene-d.blogspot.com

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #689 –
Quote from: Stereoeditor on
Sorry for the tardy response. See http://www.stereophile.com/news/music_matters_in_may/.

As I said before, if there any HA subscribers who attend one these evenings, I'd be happy to continue this conversation in "meat space." All I request is that you identify yourself by your HA screen name so I know with whom I am talking.


Thanks for the info John.  I'm not really an HA regular, as you can see by my low post count.

To others-
I don't know if any HA regulars are going to attend this event but I'm thinking about it.  If no HA regulars will be attending and there's any questions you want me to ask John or any of the other presenters, I'd be willing to pose them at the presentation and report his responses back.  My background is EE design engineering and also software development, but I don't have domain knowledge in the codec area, either lossless or lossy.  I did understand the earlier argument about lack of dither in the lossy codec John used to produce his graphs showing high distortion.  However, not knowing the details of codec implementations, I would not have been able to identify that as the cause of the problem.  I'm familiar with the sampling theorem and the basic theory of DSP, but not the nitty-gritty implementation details.

Anyway, it's just an offer.  No biggie either way.
 

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #690 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
Personally, I prefer to be on the side of Mr. John Atkinson. So far he appeared to be a really nice and charming person. He stayed polite and calm when others already were heated up. If that is a character feat of subjectivists I certainly stay with them - if only for that particuar reason. Though I don´t think that this is true. Because I believe in reasonable people, arguing and discussing friendly.

So whoever is nicest must be telling the truth and being intellectually honest? Reality doesn't work that way. It doesn't care how nice we are. It is there to be discovered, not invented by nice people. You know what, I think the previous pope was probably a nice guy. Should I start believing in transubstantiation and 2000-year-old resurrections and virgin births?

By the way, this is a very common mistake that people who aren't familiar with science and how it works make. Even more so, pseudoscientific people tend to get VERY offended at the first criticism of their ideas and see it as personal attacks (religious people doubly so). You see people siding with the "nice" ones and condemning the "rude" ones in atheist blogs all the time.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #691 –
Quote from: andy o on
Quote from: Cavaille on
Personally, I prefer to be on the side of Mr. John Atkinson. So far he appeared to be a really nice and charming person. He stayed polite and calm when others already were heated up. If that is a character feat of subjectivists I certainly stay with them - if only for that particuar reason. Though I don´t think that this is true. Because I believe in reasonable people, arguing and discussing friendly.

So whoever is nicest must be telling the truth and being intellectually honest? Reality doesn't work that way. It doesn't care how nice we are. It is there to be discovered, not invented by nice people. You know what, I think the previous pope was probably a nice guy. Should I start believing in transubstantiation and 2000-year-old resurrections and virgin births?
Read more closely. I wrote "Though I don´t think that this is true" - afterwards came what I truly believe in. And Mr. Atkinson represents some parts of it. You imply a black & white thinking. Well, Reality doesn´t work that way because it truly is "shades of grey" though people love to embrace their prejudices.
marlene-d.blogspot.com

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #692 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
Quote from: andy o on
Quote from: Cavaille on
Personally, I prefer to be on the side of Mr. John Atkinson. So far he appeared to be a really nice and charming person. He stayed polite and calm when others already were heated up. If that is a character feat of subjectivists I certainly stay with them - if only for that particuar reason. Though I don´t think that this is true. Because I believe in reasonable people, arguing and discussing friendly.

So whoever is nicest must be telling the truth and being intellectually honest? Reality doesn't work that way. It doesn't care how nice we are. It is there to be discovered, not invented by nice people. You know what, I think the previous pope was probably a nice guy. Should I start believing in transubstantiation and 2000-year-old resurrections and virgin births?
Read more closely. I wrote "Though I don´t think that this is true" - afterwards came what I truly believe in. And Mr. Atkinson represents some parts of it. You imply a black & white thinking. Well, Reality doesn´t work that way because it truly is "shades of grey" though people love to embrace their prejudices.

That phrase doesn't make much sense in the context of your paragraph, so I didn't pay much attention to it. But now the question is raised. So you still stay "on the side" of pseudoscience even when you don't believe it? How intellectually honest (and sorry to keep repeating that phrase, but it can't be said enough times) is that?

Also, you seem to be making another mistake that most people just coming to discussions about science vs. pseudoscience make. You're assuming right off the bat that those are two equivalent points of view. Do you think creationism and evolution must be treated as equal theories too?

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #693 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
My God!
...


If I have offended any gay pride, it was not my intention. I don't care about the sexual orientation of forum members. And my parody wasn't directed at any form of 'gayish' traits but at a form of defiant mutual exposure.

If you're interested in Hi Rez vs. Redbook comparisons there was a thread not too long ago that you can contribute to. Same for any codec/bitrate comparisons with your preferred music, where you are welcome to present your results. Any problematic samples that can be ABXed positively are a valuable contribution. Such has always helped to further improve lossy encoding. Several developers of the best available AAC codecs regularly hang around here (Nero's quite often, Apple's betimes).

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #694 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
DBT are therefore flawed (WARNING: opinion) in my mind. With music I know I´m able to pass them, with music or musical styles not known to me I fail. For a true and working DBT you´ll need IMO experience. Most of the time you have to know what you are looking for.

Of course you're allowed to have opinions

But the way you put it DBT is NOT flawed. It seems that you use the following logic: "I fail a test because the music style is not known to me, while others pass the test easily because they are familiar with the type of music. So DBT is flawed".

Of course you have to know what you're looking for, that's the whole point. If you fail a test (for example when testing a certain codec) because you are not familiar with the type of signal, that means the codec is transparent for you on that particular type of signal. You can only generalize the results if you repeat the test with many test persons.

For testing of codecs at high bitrates people will even need to train themselves to get familiar with the artifacts. Does that mean DBT is flawed? No way.

And by the way, in sighted tests you will also have to know what to look (no pun intended) for, right?

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #695 –
Quote from: andy o on
pseudoscientific people tend to get VERY offended at the first criticism of their ideas and see it as personal attacks (religious people doubly so).


At the risk of it being assumed I am labeling myself as "pseudoscientific," it should be noted that I haven't responded angrily in this thread to criticisms of my writings and statements. What has annoyed me are the personal remarks made about my behavior, my income, my status, my education, my ethics, etc, none of which have anything to do with my opinions on audio.

I have been lurking on Hydrogen Audio for a while as a "guest", so I had certainly expected criticisms of my writings on this forum - how could I not? But I have tried hard to address the argument, not the arguer, in this thread, respecting ToS #2. But what I had not expected was the puerile nastiness of some of the posters. And now you're blaming _me_ for the lowering of tone, "andy o"?

Don't get me wrong. As a public figure, I have a professional thick skin. And as someone whose publicly expressed opinions are protected in the US by the First Amendment, I certainly support the rights of others to express their opinions, no matter how strong. But the barrage of personal comments? I had expected better of Hydrogen Audio.

Okay, normal service can now be resumed.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #696 –
Quote from: Cavaille on
I truly believe in the Age of Enligtenment and its outcome.


The Age of Enlightenment's outcome has never been any form of positive knowledge about the world. Neither about a fundamental senselessness of religious conflict nor anything else. The one epochal outcome, that is still a lively, successful, and central element of our society since that time, is the realization of continuous, progressive criticism (in its original meaning) of anything we accept as true.

So citing the Age of Enlightenment and at the same time insisting to be allowed to take a believe for a fact is not the best way to go.

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #697 –
Quote from: andy o on
That phrase doesn't make much sense in the context of your paragraph, so I didn't pay much attention to it. But now the question is raised. So you still stay "on the side" of pseudoscience even when you don't believe it? How intellectually honest (and sorry to keep repeating that phrase, but it can't be said enough times) is that?

Also, you seem to be making another mistake that most people just coming to discussions about science vs. pseudoscience make. You're assuming right off the bat that those are two equivalent points of view. Do you think creationism and evolution must be treated as equal theories too?
I obviously chose the side which appeared to be the most calm. Is that intellectually dishonest? I merely exchanged an awful position (B & W thinking) to one that is less worse (calmness). Am I therefore a traitor to my own intellect?

Here in this thread science vs. pseudoscience occupy two sides: left & right. I´m not assuming, I´m observing. As proof just read it again. You´ll find that there aren´t any shades of grey.
marlene-d.blogspot.com

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #698 –
Quote from: rpp3po on
If I have offended any gay pride, it was not my intention. I don't care about the sexual orientation of forum members. And my parody wasn't directed at any form of 'gayish' traits but at a form of defiant mutual exposure.

If you're interested in Hi Rez vs. Redbook comparisons there was a thread not too long ago that you can contribute to. Same for any codec/bitrate comparisons with your preferred music, where you are welcome to present your results. Any problematic samples that can be ABXed positively are a valuable contribution. Such has always helped to further improve lossy encoding. Several developers of the best available AAC codecs regularly hang around here (Nero's quite often, Apple's betimes).
Oh, don´t feel bad. I thought I was making clear that I answered cynically to a very sarcastic post. I´m sorry if I was that unclear. May I say, that I like your post very much? Short, reasonable, polite, calm. Wonderful post (I´m serious). And thank you for the invitation. In fact, it was the friendliest invitation I´ve read here so far.

Quote from: rpp3po on
Quote from: Cavaille on
I truly believe in the Age of Enligtenment and its outcome.


The Age of Enlightenment's outcome has never been any form of positive knowledge about the world. Neither about a fundamental senselessness of religious conflict nor anything else. The one epochal outcome, that is still a lively, successful, and central element of our society since that time, is the realization of continuous, progressive criticism (in its original meaning) of anything we accept as true.

So citing the Age of Enlightenment and at the same time insisting to be allowed to take a believe for a fact is contradictory.
I try to make it more transparent: One of the outcomes of The Age of Enlightenment was removing religion from the laws of a country. It effectively rendered the church (and for a big part religion itself) pointless. Here in this thread it appears to me, that this "enlightment" did not happen at all, but that christian religion (or the believe in God) was exchanged to matters of Audio, science. I wasn´t trying to say that one particular side is better than the other, I only wanted to say that we are not "enlightened" yet. Furthermore, I specifically called myself belonging to one of the two groups here in this thread. By doing so I wanted to make clear that I have not evolved either.

Critizism is wonderful, I appreciate that. But if it turns into the hateful war we can read here I despise it. I was trying to make clear that this discussion long ago turned away from being senseful critizism. Anyway, I was just giving an example. Maybe comparing Audio to christian religion wasn´t so clever at all. I could have started with Islam - but that would have been even worse on my part.
marlene-d.blogspot.com

Article: Why We Need Audiophiles

Reply #699 –
Quote from: andy_c on
Quote from: Stereoeditor on
Sorry for the tardy response. See http://www.stereophile.com/news/music_matters_in_may/.

As I said before, if there any HA subscribers who attend one [of] these evenings, I'd be happy to continue this conversation in "meat space." All I request is that you identify yourself by your HA screen name so I know with whom I am talking.


I don't know if any HA regulars are going to attend this event but I'm thinking about it.  If no HA regulars will be attending and there's any questions you want me to ask John or any of the other presenters, I'd be willing to pose them at the presentation and report his responses back.


If you make it, I'll answer your questions to the best of my ability. (No snickers from Mr. Krueger's "peanut gallery," please.)

Quote
I did understand the earlier argument about lack of dither in the lossy codec John used to produce his graphs showing high distortion.


I realize I didn't address an earlier question on this. As I said in the article, the codecs used were the Fraunhofer, as implemented in Adobe Audition, or AAC in iTunes/Quicktime. All the spectral analyses were performed on the digital data using a PrismSound DScope, there was no conversion back to analog. If I remember correctly - my lab notes are in the office and I am at home - I played back all the files (other than the FLACs) using iTunes on a Mac TiBook to route the decoded PCM to the AES/EBU output of a Metric Halo MIO2882, which in turn fed the AES/EBU input of the DScope. If my memory is faulty, I will post a correction.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile