- Joined
- Jan 15, 2022
- Messages
- 1,116
- Likes
- 1,400
The first four words are sufficient. I existed before the internet, it was much the same then, just slower transmission.Welcome to the world of social networking via the internet.
The first four words are sufficient. I existed before the internet, it was much the same then, just slower transmission.Welcome to the world of social networking via the internet.
I would like to note that this apologia for overpriced, underperforming, wannabe bespoke "High-End" gear precedes a review by the same scribe, gushing praise for a gratuitously spendy audiodisc player that doesn't have the decency to have a UPS digital in, which would probably set them back in less than $10 of materials, if they knew what they were doing. JA's measurements tell the real story, a bit of a botch job on multiple levels.
CH Precision D1.5 SACD/CD player/transport
There's a school of thought that maintains that among all hi-fi components, the D/A converter is easiest to perfect or come close to perfecting. Just make sure that every sample is converted accurately, that there's little rolloff in the audioband, that aliased images are suppressed almost...www.stereophile.com
Actually, I think that the new component provides a new hit of dopamine, and after it wears off, another purchase is needed for that next hit. It's not the "perceived improvement" so much as the excitement of bringing something novel into the environment that keeps these kinds of "equipophiles" going.My read of that quote is that the placebo effect of high cost, newness, etc. wears off, leaving the reviewer with the real sound. He then needs another hit of the placebo with something new to think it is exciting again.
The D&D's will sound better, but a system build around Magico A3's and a boatload of McIntosh electronics won't exactly sound terrible either. Just not as good, and more expensive, and obviously with more clutter. But some hobbyists will get off on that. They're gonna prefer all those glowing front panels and big towers. Their money, their preferences, their choice. So be it.We need to lay off these guys. They are entirely conscious of what they are doing. Peak cynicism. They are selling wares and if they don't push a bit more on the marketing/propaganda, the sector that sustains them will disappear ( not that it won't .. regardless).
Let's look quietly at the High Fidelity landscape for a few mins:
DAC are commodities,: My favorite exemple is the Apple dongle at $9.00 being virtually undistinguishable, even superior to a $15,000 DAC "audiophile DAC
Commodity-level availability of ultra-high-performance (power, THD, IM, effciiency, etc) Class D amplifer modules. Now it is no longer an issue to design a high performance amp.. Rather of knowing how to properly assemble, readily available modules in readily available cases... For marketing, you may need to address S'Phile and its competition.. .
Transducers could have been an area of specialization.. alas, there again , routinely , $300 monitors do challenge High End audiophile darlings... and the buzz is on: people seem to know about it. And the assault is not only from the usual or pro shops , it's coming from ... gasp... .eek.. the Lifestyle sector, I have heard so many Sonos-based system that would wipe the floor with many expensive audiophile shrines.. Seriously asking the question: For those who have heard the famous LS 3/5A.. Would a pair of these so-beloved speakers, in the same well treated room, sound better than a pair of Sonos 5? .. damn even a Sonos ARC Soundbar?
....
To conclude. Which systems is, in your opinions, likely to sound better:
This:
or
that...
?
Peace.
You seem to be mistaking informed criticism for hostility. When measurements reveal that someone is spreading misinformation, pointing that out is essential in a reasonable society. It is not hate. When I am shown to be incorrect, I am not being attacked, I am being provided the opportunity to understand and to perform better, which ultimately leads to a more satisfying experience.Jim Austin's 'thoughts on reviewing' reads like an olive branch extended to the scientific community or baybe some of the less committed members on this forum. The seething hostility on this site towards anything 'hi end' is confusing to me in its origin and just seems like another dumping ground for people to hang around and spread hate. Hate is in vogue in america today and everything is fair game. hifi is harmless enough that if hate burned itself out this would be as good a place as any, unfortunately, after the hate burns thru this site it will just find another to destroy.
I don't care how much anybody spends to get enjoyment in their life, ask yourself why do you? Some lessons cost more than others but they're still lessons learned and if you think hifi is bad just look at the markup of anything.
Nothing to disagree with there. I think hifi has been my carrot at the end of the stick, doesn't matter what it tastes like cause i'm never going to eat it anyhow, it only has to make me want to put on my boots and go to work. so help me out here?You seem to be mistaking informed criticism for hostility. When measurements reveal that someone is spreading misinformation, pointing that out is essential in a reasonable society. It is not hate. When I am shown to be incorrect, I am not being attacked, I am being provided the opportunity to understand and to perform better, which ultimately leads to a more satisfying experience.
Pointing out the facts and challenging those who insist on repeating manifestly incorrect notions is not 'spreading hate'. There's something else that's very much in vogue in America today: absurd theories and blatant untruths, and these will continue to fester unless challenged at every opportunity. If someone wants to spend $46k on a CD player, then that's fine, I'm sure it looks very pretty sitting on their shelf. But if they want to pretend that this purchase has granted them a musical experience beyond that accessible to others then they should expect to find their claims shot down.Jim Austin's 'thoughts on reviewing' reads like an olive branch extended to the scientific community or baybe some of the less committed members on this forum. The seething hostility on this site towards anything 'hi end' is confusing to me in its origin and just seems like another dumping ground for people to hang around and spread hate. Hate is in vogue in america today and everything is fair game. hifi is harmless enough that if hate burned itself out this would be as good a place as any, unfortunately, after the hate burns thru this site it will just find another to destroy.
I don't care how much anybody spends to get enjoyment in their life, ask yourself why do you? Some lessons cost more than others but they're still lessons learned and if you think hifi is bad just look at the markup of anything.
So did Clark Johnsen. Plus the fact he got it from Harvard.That, and that he always mentions his physics degree like it's a 'Get out of jail free' card.
Welcome to the end of civilization as we know it.Welcome to the world of social networking via the internet.
Mechanical watch makers will not make claims that their watches are more accurate than quartz. The buyers know the timekeeping is less accurate but that is not why they purchase a Rolex. In the audio world, the R2R DAC makers and interconnect cable makers make claims or audible improvement when it is just not so, that is the difference from wristwatches. High end speakers and components are beautiful furniture, but the claims of sonic improvement when manufacturers cannot admit that you are buying furniture that is audibly indifferent or has flaws need to be scrutinized.Are we going to start a wristwatch site next to complain how much fancy wrist watches cost?
I often see that comparison but you know that those watch people and websites will NEVER claim the Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Tourbillon Ceramic Black, at a cool $485,000.oo,, to be more accurate than a $99.oo Casio G-shock.. Never... We tend to see the opposite on those High End Audio fora:You made a very valid point. Are we going to start a wristwatch site next to complain how much fancy wrist watches cost? You're right there with me except you see a difference between watches and components encased in 1/2" aluminum boxes. There's many posts regarding the necessity for dbt to test the validity of audible differences, but buyers of these products may want them on display because otherwise it's just another squak box from china. Maybe I'm suggesting someone successful enough to buy a product like this would know why they're buying it. I'm out for now, ttyl
is common fare. Looking at the Frequency Response of the $46,000 contraption, we notice, and it was measured by JA, that is is down 10 dB at 17 KHz ... that's poor performance and likely to be audible by some. Meanwhile the Topping remains flat like the Earth (according to Kyrie Irving) from 0 to 20 khz...has better THD, IMD, SINAD, Signal to Noise Ratio, linearity... it surpasses the CH-precision in every measurable way. It begs the question: why does the CH-Precision DS-1, cost so much, if it doesn't sound any better than a $11.oo Apple dongle and actually may sound worse for the few people who can hear past 14 KHz... ???While the Topping D-90 is good for its price.. we know it won't be as good as the CH-Precision DS-1 at $46,000...
Buying audio components as jewelry, furniture, examples of excellent ID is totally legitimate. If someone purchases one of those $35k cables because they love how beautiful it is, fine. If they claim it changes (purportedly for the better) audio signals without presenting data, not so much. The first claim (beauty) is a matter of opinion, the second is a claim of fact and MUST be supported to not be a falsehood.You made a very valid point. Are we going to start a wristwatch site next to complain how much fancy wrist watches cost? You're right there with me except you see a difference between watches and components encased in 1/2" aluminum boxes. There's many posts regarding the necessity for dbt to test the validity of audible differences, but buyers of these products may want them on display because otherwise it's just another squak box from china. Maybe I'm suggesting someone successful enough to buy a product like this would know why they're buying it. I'm out for now, ttyl
Third option: They buy an outrageously expensive component, or even one that is markedly beyond their budget, because they have been convinced by narcissists that it is the only route to true audio nirvana.Buying audio components as jewelry, furniture, examples of excellent ID is totally legitimate. If someone purchases one of those $35k cables because they love how beautiful it is, fine. If they claim it changes (purportedly for the better) audio signals without presenting data, not so much. The first claim (beauty) is a matter of opinion, the second is a claim of fact and MUST be supported to not be a falsehood.
Nah... it's a complete wardrobe...Emperor's New Clothes
An article by Jim Austin about reviewing. While I understand the inference that hifi is all about enjoying music, I can't quite follow the logic from (talking abut measurements) "But what you learn from such research reveals little of interest about any individual in the group" to the subjective conclusion that "a belief that what's true for the critic will be true for others". What happened to individual preference in that leap?