bluegaspode;585489 Wrote: > The people are trying to tell you that: > > Chesky red book sounds exactly the same as Chesky hi-rez . > If you reread your first post you came to the conclusion that hi-rez > generally sounds better than red book. This assumption is wrong if > Chesky red book sounds the same as Chesky hi-rez. > > All people here agree, that the Chesky master sounds better than the > Verver master (regardless of it being red book or hi-rez). > > Or to put it differently: Chesky in Red Book still sounds a lot better > than the best Verver Hi Res. > > So in the end all agree: let your ears decide. > But don't be fooled in thinking that High Definition is per se better > than red book.
I'm beginning to actually like it how double standards get applied with such emotional intensity here. So here is how things have unfolded in this thread so far: 1. I submit it to the community of fellow audiophiles that, after prolonged skepticism, I finally got to test, side-by-side, the qualitative differences between the red book and the hi-rez format. My skepticism gets defeated after hearing a number of convincingly different sounding hi rez tracks. My findings then get summarily dismissed by the majority on account of suffering from the so-called expectation bias. In other words, I was expecting to hear the differences, and by golly, I've surely heard them. So in the end, my findings are worthless. 2. Then, a fellow member named Phil does his bit, listens to both tracks side-by-side, then downsamples the hi rez track to a low rez format, and comes back with the findings that there are no differences between the two formats, none could be found. The majority applaud his findings in a fully emotional, knee-jerk fashion, with standing ovations and peppered with heartfelt thanks (who knows, maybe someone even sent him a bouquet of flowers as a reward for a job well done?) So, for some reason unclear to me, while I stand accused here of suffering from the expectation bias, this fellow Phil is somehow immune from it. No one questions his expectation bias. So yeah, he did a comparative listen to the two formats, concluded that there are no differences between them, and we just blindly take his word for it and fully believe him, knowing full well that he is not susceptible to the much dreaded expectation bias. Well, I'm calling bullshit on that. By the power of whose authority are we claiming that Phil is immune from the expectation bias (he was, after all, expecting the two formats to not sound different, as he had already exhibited a strong bias in that direction), while I am not immune from it? -- magiccarpetride ------------------------------------------------------------------------ magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82870 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
