New "Science": FLAC vs. WAV

[ceedee]

please allow Mikey some credit

I'm sure he does have great info for those into vinyl, and a lot of people like his writing style--but certainly he has zero credibility when it comes to digital audio.

It is funny to me how people who are so convinced about their ability to hear these small differences often neglect the much larger things in an audio system, such as the room. I did have a laugh seeing the room that houses Fremer's $350,000 stereo:

But at least he has the obligatory 'garden hose' power cords and cable risers!

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

I'm sure he does have great info for those into vinyl, and a lot of people like his writing style--but certainly he has zero credibility when it comes to digital audio.

It is funny to me how people who are so convinced about their ability to hear these small differences often neglect the much larger things in an audio system, such as the room. I did have a laugh seeing the room that houses Fremer's $350,000 stereo:

But at least he has the obligatory 'garden hose' power cords and cable risers!

Ah, but what you are not understanding is how carefully calibrated all those albums and players and gear are to totally eliminate all room distortions by absorption and reflection. It might look a bit haphazard, but he is way ahead of the rest of us in sonic perfection. That is why he understands the truth, which is vinyl is waay better than anything else. If only our rooms were as good, we would agree.

Actually, he looks like he is having a very good time. And, though I disagree with him on most everything, he deserves it. He has helped build the vinyl mystique and ridden it up on the winds of good fortune. He is a great writer, though, even if not a word he says it at all consistent with or useful to me in my own audio endeavors.

 

[Sal1950]

I'm sure he does have great info for those into vinyl, and a lot of people like his writing style--but certainly he has zero credibility when it comes to digital audio.

I got to agree there ceedee.
His ridiculous anti-digital positions and his support for the whole craziness of all things tweaky, has done more to discredit the audiophile community in general than just about any other single person I could name. Along with making the term "audiophool" credible, his spreading of the delusional bible has thrown huge roadblocks in the path of Audio Science and real SOTA progress.
IMO he's part and parcel of the snakeoil money machine, making huge profits for the deceivers and himself I'm sure. I can find no reason to extend any credibility to the man. This has nothing to do with the fact that he enjoys listening to vinyl, that's his opinion and preference, which he his well entitled to, just like all of us.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Imagine an audio world in which the buyers capable of spending 5, 6 figures on systems demanded fidelity instead of tone, innovation instead of bejeweled nostalgia. Imagine if the driving criteria of the "high-end" market was the best possible reproduction of the recording, instead of a re-defining distortions as closer to a fictitious "original event." Envision a high-end market that utterly rejects tweaky voodoo in favor of quantified gains in performance. Picture what the best and the brightest would be building for such a market. Or exit imagination and look at the reality; look at the pro audio market, where components have progressively gotten smaller, lighter, cleaner, quieter, more accurate and more powerful...as prices dropped.

He may not be without his charms, but guys like Mikey have done irreparable damage to the progress of consumer audio reproduction.

Tim

 

[Purité Audio]

Have we decided who has won yet?
Is Mikey holding Elvis Costello' s ' my aim is true'?
Keith

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Have we decided who has won yet?
Is Mikey holding Elvis Costello' s ' my aim is true'?
Keith

Yes. His taste in music is fine.

Tim

 

[Sal1950]

Yes. His taste in music is fine.

Tim

But his Mama needs to tell him to clean up the "noise" in his room.

Imagine a high end world where the term "High Fidelity" still meant something.

 

[krabapple]

I'm sure he does have great info for those into vinyl, and a lot of people like his writing style--but certainly he has zero credibility when it comes to digital audio.

It is funny to me how people who are so convinced about their ability to hear these small differences often neglect the much larger things in an audio system, such as the room. I did have a laugh seeing the room that houses Fremer's $350,000 stereo:

But at least he has the obligatory 'garden hose' power cords and cable risers!

I bet all those walls of 'vinyls' serve as carefully designed diffusors.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

 

[fas42]

Or exit imagination and look at the reality; look at the pro audio market, where components have progressively gotten smaller, lighter, cleaner, quieter, more accurate and more powerful...as prices dropped.

Tim, when I find a combo of pro gear that actually makes me enjoy listening to the music, rather that grit my teeth and stoically tolerate the barrage of "sound" that I'm being subject to, I might start to think you're on to something - but, unfortunately, that moment has not yet arrived, for me ...

 

[Cosmik]

Tim, when I find a combo of pro gear that actually makes me enjoy listening to the music, rather that grit my teeth and stoically tolerate the barrage of "sound" that I'm being subject to, I might start to think you're on to something - but, unfortunately, that moment has not yet arrived, for me ...

Isn't it pro gear that's used to make the very recordings we listen to?

 

[fas42]

Isn't it pro gear that's used to make the very recordings we listen to?

Yes, that makes the recording, which is not the issue. It's pro gear being used for playback, where the problems arise. I will say that on a couple of occasions I have hear sound reinforcement being done impressively well, as in, I could not imagine how it could be improved upon - but that doesn't make up for the nearly universal poor quality of "pro" reproduction otherwise.

Obviously, pro gear is about getting SPLs out into the space - but they don't seem to worry that much about the quality of those SPLs ...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Yes, that makes the recording, which is not the issue. It's pro gear being used for playback, where the problems arise. I will say that on a couple of occasions I have hear sound reinforcement being done impressively well, as in, I could not imagine how it could be improved upon - but that doesn't make up for the nearly universal poor quality of "pro" reproduction otherwise.

Obviously, pro gear is about getting SPLs out into the space - but they don't seem to worry that much about the quality of those SPLs ...

It is if you're talking about PA systems. "they don't seem to care much about the quality of those SPLs" is a stunningly uninformed statement, but it's also not the point. The pro audio I was talking about is pro recording equipment. DACs in a single box for a few grand or less that hold their own with any audiophile product at any price, amplifiers built to run for hours on end, stay cool doing it, deliver stunningly accurate performance, and do it at a fraction of the cost of audiophile jewel boxes, midfield and mastering monitors that out-perform, by every objective metric, many grotesquely expensive audiophile speakers. That's where most of the progress is being made. And a lot more of it could be made in "high-end" consumer audio if the guys with the money to spend weren't listening to guys like Mikey.

Tim

 

[Sal1950]

That's where most of the progress is being made. And a lot more of it could be made in "high-end" consumer audio if the guys with the money to spend weren't listening to guys like Mikey.
Tim

And Frank
AMEN to that Tim, well said thank you.

 

[fas42]

It is if you're talking about PA systems. "they don't seem to care much about the quality of those SPLs is a stunningly uninformed statement, but it's also not the point. The pro audio I was talking about is pro recording equipment. DACs in a single box for a few grand or less that hold their own with any audiophile product at any price, amplifiers built to run for hours on end, stay cool doing it, deliver stunningly accurate performance, and do it at a fraction of the cost of audiophile jewel boxes, midfield and mastering monitors that out-perform, by every objective metric, many grotesquely expensive audiophile speakers. That's where most of the progress is being made. And a lot more of it could be made in "high-end" consumer audio if the guys with the money to spend weren't listening to guys like Mikey.

Tim

I'm confused, Tim. In one sentence you say "pro recording" equipment, and in the next you talk of DACs and amplifiers, which is reproduction gear. Yes, it might be used mainly in the rooms of recording studios, but if it is of excellent quality then it should be just as competent in a home listening environment - it should easily show up "high end consumer audio". In that regard, it is interesting that some of those "professionals" who are supposedly aiming for the highest quality in their recordings spurn the "pro" gear, and use ambitious consumer components ...

SPLs shouldn't ultimately be a problem when quality is also the goal - I have heard this being done at a fully competent level, several times; which means, why isn't this always the case?

The main failure of pro gear, IME, is that it does a poor job of recovering low level detail, for various reasons; the standard parameters may be fine in the measuring, but the level of distortion of "inner detail" is too great.

I agree Mike Fremer doesn't want to get it ... he posted a video supposedly showing the vinyl replay being superior to a digital playback - yes, they were obviously different, but a tiny bit of analysis of the waveform showed dramatically different EQ'ng for the two cuts; I mentioned this to him, but got no response.

 

[fas42]

And Frank
AMEN to that Tim, well said thank you.

Sal, I'm in a strange place, in the audio world, ... I see the positives of both points of view, I'm one of those weirdos who doesn't have to see things in Black ... or White, and nothing in between. Everybody has got a hold of part of the elephant, and everybody is certain their version of the animal is correct - for various reasons, I'm able to stand back and see the big picture just a bit better than that ...

 

[Sal1950]

I'm able to stand back and see the big picture just a bit better than that ...

Of course, That is always your retort.
You are the only one who understands audio, and know the mistakes all the rest of us are making, To boot you have the most golden of golden ears and ultra resolution gear to hear the things that others can't.
Just getting a little weary of hearing you puke that same old BS post after post.
Your not "all that" even if in your delusional world you believe so.

 

[fas42]

Of course, That is always your retort.
You are the only one who understands audio, and know the mistakes all the rest of us are making, To boot you have the most golden of golden ears and ultra resolution gear to hear the things that others can't.
Just getting a little weary of hearing you puke that same old BS post after post.
Your not "all that" even if in your delusional world you believe so.

The interesting thing to keep an eye out for are the individuals who have managed, through one means or another, to achieve a higher level of replay - and know it, . No-one understands the full picture, if I did I would be making a fortune, spitting out brilliant stuff for everyone to buy, at good prices - what I try to do, softly, softly, is to point out the value of looking beyond standard stereotypes of thinking, about what's important. Getting convincing sound is extremely satisfying, within the means of everyone really - but most people keep looking in wrong directions, because of their previous experiences - if you are not interested in such a goal, you can just ignore me, of course ... .

 

[RayDunzl]

The interesting thing to keep an eye out for are the individuals who have managed, through one means or another, to achieve a higher level of replay - and know it

Here's a few...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I'm confused, Tim. In one sentence you say "pro recording" equipment, and in the next you talk of DACs and amplifiers, which is reproduction gear. Yes, it might be used mainly in the rooms of recording studios, but if it is of excellent quality then it should be just as competent in a home listening environment - it should easily show up "high end consumer audio". In that regard, it is interesting that some of those "professionals" who are supposedly aiming for the highest quality in their recordings spurn the "pro" gear, and use ambitious consumer components ...

The main failure of pro gear, IME, is that it does a poor job of recovering low level detail, for various reasons; the standard parameters may be fine in the measuring, but the level of distortion of "inner detail" is too great.

I agree Mike Fremer doesn't want to get it ... he posted a video supposedly showing the vinyl replay being superior to a digital playback - yes, they were obviously different, but a tiny bit of analysis of the waveform showed dramatically different EQ'ng for the two cuts; I mentioned this to him, but got no response.

Yes. You are.

Tim

 

[Cosmik]

DACs in a single box for a few grand or less that hold their own with any audiophile product at any price

Tim, I think even you are influenced by audiophile mythology. I am confident that a DAC indistinguishable from audiophile products can be built for a few dollars, not grand. The key to this is of course that because it is all on one chip, with inherently matched sub-elements all close together and at a common temperature, an integrated circuit can achieve performance levels way in excess of any 'discrete' contraption and can be mass produced for a few cents.

Audiophile DACs take the approach of either gilding a DAC chip bought for $1 - $20 with a uselessly excessive power supply and exotic box, or they create a monster comprising several DAC chips linked together or a 'discrete' circuit, both of which suffer from nonlinearity that gets worse as the temperature varies, telling us that "at this level of sonic performance, measurements do not tell the whole story" or some such.

Really, the DAC is one of those counter-intuitive gizmos that costs very little to produce, but outstrips the performance of the biggest, heaviest, most expensive audio equipment that existed before 'digital'. There is still a desire to believe that the same price/performance ratio exists, but in reality this has gone. In the pro world, extra cost could be justified for making it physically robust, but I think that this should be in the hundreds, not thousands of dollars.