Click title to read one, or click date to read all below it.
01-23-10
Wow, what an academic series of discussions which have not b ... Mrtennis
01-23-10
Learsfool, i don't think i can be as accommodating as bryon ... Cbw723
01-23-10
Cbw, the example i gave in my last post was of computer musi ... Learsfool
01-23-10
Learsfool – regarding the issue of what counts as a performa ... Bryoncunningham
01-24-10
Correction: half way through my post, i wrote: "truth i ... Bryoncunningham
01-24-10
Very informative post, bryon! i am still unclear on my orig ... Learsfool
01-24-10
in a word, yes. a subjectivist does not believe in objectiv ... Bryoncunningham
01-24-10
Very interesting, bryon, thanks very much for that very info ... Learsfool
01-24-10
Learsfool - thanks for those kind words. i'm glad we underst ... Bryoncunningham
01-25-10
Thanks for the recommendation, bryon. my uncle, who taught ... Learsfool
09-08-10
Has there ever been the assumption that a photo or painting ... Cdc
09-08-10
@ cdc, short answer, no and no. but who has ever mistaken a ... Tholt
09-22-10
Tholt, i agree that for many, the fundamental goal of stereo ... Cdc
09-23-10
cdc - you raise interesting and provocative questions, bu ... Bryoncunningham
09-24-10: Cdc
I agree with you. Just because a recording is not perfectly accurate does not mean you should throw the whole accuracy thing away. Just giving a different perspective that the best you can hope for is a perfect reproduction of the recording, not to reproduce the live event. The way most recordings I listen to sound, no need for me to go much beyond what I have now.
So some of my points are:
1) If we all want perfect accuracy, then if one stereo had perfect accuracy in all regards, we'd all own the same stereo.
2) I think a lot of hi-end audio is about making a mountain out of a molehill to justify hanging a huge price tag on it.
3) People get so hung up on comparing component A to B, trying to hear the smallest of nuances, that they lose site of the big picture of how close is ANY of it to reality.
How about big picture reasoning that, for example, you could spend $10,000 for wire, etc. on a passive system when you'd be better off spending the $10,000 to go active. Or going with a dipole speaker like Linkwitz Orions vs. a monkey coffin?
The photography analogy is relevant because they are going for the same thing as audiophiles except it is visual and so less abstract. It's a different perspective of the same concept. If we could see sound, it would be like the photography people. Maybe a whole lot less disagreements too. Are photography chat sites as debated as audio? Probably not as it's easier to understand and you can decide for yourself. But with audio, being so abstract, we need each other's help to figure the whole mess out. Makes for good socializing though.
Can Albert Porter explain the photography thing for us? I'm sure a lot of people spend big money on cameras too in the name of accuracy stuff like depth of field, sharp focus, correct colors. But why then is that okay, while an expensive stereo is crazy?
Cdc (System | Threads | Answers | This Thread)
09-24-10
thanks for the email heads up on this thread, i've been tot ... Albertporter
09-24-10
"a camera has only one eye" it hasn't always bee ... Newbee
09-24-10
Not all better tools belong to fools!!! nuance at some point ... Samhar
09-24-10
Hi guys - cdc, bryon, and albert, you made some very interes ... Learsfool
09-25-10
To pick up on something albert mentions in his post... the ... Bryoncunningham
09-25-10
Interesting comments by learsfool and bryoncunningham. ag ... Albertporter
09-25-10
I kept believing that digital didn't have it because folks l ... Muralman1
09-26-10
Muralman - i know nothing about your system, and so i cannot ... Bryoncunningham
09-26-10
Byroncunningham, i was reacting to comments made by posters ... Muralman1
09-26-10
Muralman - i agree that noise, like distortion, diminishes t ... Bryoncunningham
09-26-10
Bryoncunningham- you name two instances where i deem no conf ... Muralman1
09-26-10
Muralman - i agree that the success of room correction depen ... Bryoncunningham
09-26-10
Albert: i'll never, ever forget those incredible analog phot ... Brianw
09-26-10
Bryoncunningham - i do know what you mean. i am rather embar ... Muralman1
09-28-10
believe it or not those were from 4x5 film, the 8x10 camera ... Albertporter
09-28-10
Is 8x10 suitable for any task? can you use it for late afte ... Kijanki
09-28-10
Kijanki, the question began as a query as to how i achieve ... Albertporter
09-28-10
Albert - thank you. what about large size digital sensors - ... Kijanki
09-28-10
none of my customers so far are willing to pay enough for m ... Albertporter
09-29-10
I bought recently panasonic lumix dmc-gh1 (a decent amateur ... Kijanki
09-29-10
Mathematically speaking, it is not possible to assess a syst ... Mrtennis
09-29-10
"can't miss judge wapner." Unsound
04-05-11
I used to say "flat frequency response". while tha ... Cdc
04-05-11
Ok, no one is contradicting my assertions. here is another ... Mrtennis
04-07-11
...if an optical lens distorts the characteristics of the l ... Bryoncunningham
04-07-11
Ok bryon, i see your point. however, measuring the accuracy ... Mrtennis
04-07-11
mrtennis - i agree with you that accuracy is a "multi- ... Bryoncunningham
04-08-11
I admit that you can measure frequency response of a stereo ... Mrtennis
04-11-11
as you no doubt know, there are many other measurements rel ... Bryoncunningham
05-11-11
roysen – if you look at the posts on this thread, especiall ... Bryoncunningham
05-11-11
Bryoncunningham, when you are assessing whether component x ... Tbg
05-12-11
in light of this, i hope you will understand if i decline t ... Bryoncunningham
05-12-11
Bryoncunningham, i agree. Tbg
05-12-11
A contribution to the topic of neutrality was posted on the ... Bryoncunningham
05-12-11
Since all components are imperfect, a thorough audition will ... Mrtennis
|
|
