"Les" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I do not believe Mike is confused but sounds like someone is
I am assuming you are referring to me ;-)
>...and the last direct reply to my explanation "rested my case" for
>me whether you knew it or not, LOL
How so?
>I never said ATRAC degraded anything people can hear
You never said that, but it's true (at least for some people).
>Next time you are in a hi fi shop ask for a demo and compare the same
>cd on a high end Onkyo or HK unit with high end speakers...
Most serious audio people would not consider Onkyo or HK to be "high end"
-- there is little difference in audio quality between a good JVC CD
player and a good HK CD player.
>The guys jumping on the volume issue and claiming they never listen
>to theirs "that loud..."
By the way, that wouldn't be me...
>Consumer reports and others who do honest evaluations will claim
>there is zero sound difference in CD players. I believed this for a
>long time but now realize their tests were flawed because they were
>listening to average speakers which are not capable of producing the
>differences.
Agreed. Consumer Reports is great for some things. But when it comes to
"high-end" audio, they aren't very useful. They are good for people on
very limited budgets trying to buy the "most reliable" unit out of a few
inexpensive units that are all of pretty much equal quality.
>In any case, nothing should ever be noticed on an average system
Completely true, and that's what I've been saying from the beginning ;-)
>...and only those of us willing to spend the bucks on speakers alone
>that most would flinch at for an entire home theater including a
>large screen tv would (or should) even care about such minute
>differences.
That's where I disagree. While the average consumer doesn't care, you
don't have to spend obscene amounts of money just to get a "high-end"
system that can reveal the differences.
>Anyone who thinks they can hear a difference
...or who actually can...
>would not believe anything other than what they hear anyway.
No, the issue isn't that people *think* they can hear a difference. The
issue is that there *is* an empirical difference, and some people with
some systems *can* hear the difference. If you can't, more power to you
-- you enjoy the sound more than those people ;-)
>...never mind that very expensive test equipment can't measure a lot
>of what we "think" we hear
Even the most expensive test equipment doesn't measure subtle differences
well. The human ear is more sensitive than the most expensive "equipment"
in the world.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
