Vinyl doesn't have an infinite resolution, but it is certainly far greater than a CDs. No need for a double blind experiment to prove my point. If you have access to an SACD player, go and buy a properly produced hybrid disc that plays in both an SACD player, and a standard CD player, and you'll hear in seconds the difference the extra resolution affords.
And yes, some newly produced audiophile discs are pressed to both vinyl and CD and are initially recorded in far greater resolution that the vinyl can take advantage of. I'll be happy to participate in said experiment to prove my point, as long as Mr. Hrivniak is included in the test group as well. APO On Aug 31, 2010, at 11:52 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Evidence doesn't work that way. If you make a claim, you have to support it. > You don't support a negative argument. Therefore, until you can show me a > double blind study which shows someone to be able to tell the difference in > controlled conditions, I will default with 'no one'. > > It's just like the teapot argument. I purport that there is no teapot > orbiting the sun between Earth and Mars. It's impossible to scan every cubic > centimeter of space, but until someone can actually produce evidence of one > existing you must default with the conclusion that there isn't one there. > > Might doesn't equal concrete reality. > > I've done a bit more reading about the claim that people can tell the > difference between Vinyl and a CD - but no one has actually been able to do > this in a controlled experiment. Thus, it remains almost a religious type > argument based on perception. > > Back to making claims and supporting them, my claim is that the ear is not > able to perceive the difference between a digital recording and a vinyl > recording if one takes out all of the hisses and pops from a Vinyl record. > Vinyl doesn't have an infinite resolution and is not completely analog. > Additionally, the recording, unless it was done before about 1960 or so, was > probably recorded digitally and altered digitally multiple times and had > passed through several different types of formats before it was transferred > to vinyl. In fact, I purport that the 'differences' you are hearing have > nothing to do with the actual recording and are caused by the needle running > across the vinyl or making contact with it. > > If you really want to be an audiophile, the only real 'direct' recording that > was ever mass produced was a wax cylinder because they weren't copied as far > as I'm aware. They were direct recordings of live performances without any > vacuum tubes or transistors to get in the way. Of course, the quality isn't > and never was that great to begin with. > > Again, you made the claim that you can tell a difference - and so you have to > back it up. > > -William > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Aleks Ozolins <[email protected]> > To: The Horn List <[email protected]> > Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2010 11:36 pm > Subject: Re: [Hornlist] survey: digital download vs CD release > > > > On Aug 31, 2010, at 11:22 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >> >> Then show me a double blind test that actually showed anyone could actually >> do > it. To date, I've never seen anyone that can do it under controlled > conditions. > > When you make a blanket statement like "no one can tell the difference," you > have the burden of proof in the double blind study rather than the infinitely > more realistic assertion that "some people can absolutely tell the > difference." > Joe Schmo can't tell the difference between cheap and expensive vodka, but > with > 5 minutes of appreciation training, that situation changes. By the same > token, > most people don't listen to enough live music, or pay enough attention to > what > they are hearing to understand the difference between a decent recording, and > an > excellent one. >> >> Also, if your grandmother is deaf, then how could she possibly hear it? > > It was my grandfather... he's not only deaf, but dead. If you don't get it I > can't help you.. > >> >> When people say that they can tell the difference, they are not listening to > the actual recording. They are either listening to the whir of the motor in > the > CD player, a pop or hiss on the record, or the contact between the needle and > the record. When you remove those from the experiment nobody can tell the > difference. > > On decent equipment, these variables are eliminated. The differences manifest > in > soundstage presentation, smoothness of high frequency delivery, and many > other > variables that many people can detect without knowing the technical names for > them. > > Aleks Ozolins > _______________________________________________ > post: [email protected] > unsubscribe or set options at > https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/valkhorn%40aol.com > > > _______________________________________________ > post: [email protected] > unsubscribe or set options at > https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/aleks%40aleksozolins.com _______________________________________________ post: [email protected] unsubscribe or set options at https://pegasus.memphis.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
