Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
jh901 wrote: What does this mean? Digital source is inherently accurate means that the source file will (in the SB environment,) be delivered exactly. Arguments can be made about the various codecs used to convert one format to another but natively supported formats are presented to the player without error. bfl banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
Daverz wrote: I do pay attention to things like measurements, but ultimately long-term listening enjoyment is all that matters (within my budget). Great attitude. Let's not forget ease of use. Having all your music available wherever you are is a modern marvel that is not a free option in the fruit universe. bfl banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
TheLastMan wrote: Is high fidelity important to you when listening to music? Or do you simply want equipment that makes the music more enjoyable to listen to? I do pay attention to things like measurements, but ultimately long-term listening enjoyment is all that matters (within my budget). Daverz's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32335 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
banned for life wrote: For the rest, a digital source is inherently accurate What does this mean? jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
lachy.au wrote: Long time reader, first time poster. I'm a sound engineer from Australia, living and working in Hong Kong. Recently I've been working with a lot of hifi companies regarding a loudspeaker tuning system and have learnt a lot about audiophiles and the crazy gear available for their systems. ... Another point, pro studios don't use 100% silver cables, DACs vary in quality, sound is recorded at 44.1 or maybe 48 (most of the time). So audiophiles hear more than the engineers who recorded and mixed the tracks? I know about upsampling but really the quality of audio we listen to can only be as food as it was recorded. ... Welcome to the forum! Glad to have someone in the industry commenting. I think you make an excellent point about how many recordings are still done in 44/48kHz... Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
TheLastMan wrote: My take on this is: 1. Hi-fi from different brands usually sounds different in all sorts of ways from other brands - but as the gear gets more expensive / more accurate the differences become smaller. 2. True high fidelity, as the name suggests, reproduces music warts and all and should sound fantastic with a great recording and appalling with a bad one. Good hi-fi can only be tested for its fidelity if it is played at realistic levels (i.e. loud), in a reasonably large room that is acoustically well damped. It should be full spectrum - reproducing both the highest and lowest notes we can perceive without undue emphasis in one area of the frequency spectrum. 3. Hi-fi can only really be tested objectively when reproducing acoustic music and compared with *real instruments*. An acoustic folk band or string quartet is bloody loud if you are standing within 10 feet of it - which is where the microphones used for the recording will have been placed. If the hi-fi passes that test with a high score then it will also reproduce electric / synthetic music in the way that the composer intended too. You cannot tell what the composer intended with synthetic music knocked up on an Apple Mac, so it is impossible to objectively test using it. So in order to get objectively high fidelity reproduction you will need a very good source, very powerful and accurate amplification and large (for the bass) and un-coloured loudspeakers. Get those factors right and you are halfway there, but to get even that far you will need a LOT of money. Oh, and you will also need a house with a listening room large enough! The room is usually the most expensive part of any hi-fi. 1. Expensive is not always more accurate. Band equipment is often as good as high-priced components, especially when it comes to amps and pre-amps. 2. You describe flat and accurate response. Again price is not a factor. More important are speaker response and room dynamics. 3. This is an argument for accurate dynamic response. Acoustic music just does not fit here. It's the mix. Also large (for the bass) is inaccurate if you refer to driver size. Speakers with small drivers can produce superior bass. This is a balancing act with driver properties, cabinet design, and porting. For the rest, a digital source is inherently accurate, powerful amplification is better whether or not it is accurate, and even un-coloured loudspeakers are entirely dependent on their environment. bfl banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
aubuti wrote: I don't think anyone has made that hyperbolic conclusion except you. I think any of us would agree that some components or systems sound better than others, and that some have a sound that we prefer even if one doesn't claim it is better. The conclusion from the first link in the OP and much of the subsequent comments is that some reported differences are based not at all on the actual sound, but on other information, such as the brand, model, or price tag of the components in question. This is not breaking news, but it still astounds me how many people will not consider that these non-auditory factors may play a role in their auditory perceptions. +1 bfl banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
Long time reader, first time poster. I'm a sound engineer from Australia, living and working in Hong Kong. Recently I've been working with a lot of hifi companies regarding a loudspeaker tuning system and have learnt a lot about audiophiles and the crazy gear available for their systems. Fair enough, some of these components and cables do make a difference to the reproduced sound. But, sound is subjective! Who can determine if the sound is better? There are too many factors that can affect sound reproduction. Another point, pro studios don't use 100% silver cables, DACs vary in quality, sound is recorded at 44.1 or maybe 48 (most of the time). So audiophiles hear more than the engineers who recorded and mixed the tracks? I know about upsampling but really the quality of audio we listen to can only be as food as it was recorded. I'm not having a go at audiophiles either. It is a hobby, and a great one! If I had more money I too would like to buy and try different pieces of gear as I simply love music and listening to great systems. There's no point arguing about DACs, speakers,cables or whatever - you don't hear what I hear - sound is subjective. Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio Z715e using Tapatalk 2 lachy.au's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56745 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
You serious Clark? The conclusion you guys are making seems to be that all gear sounds the same. You really believe that? Let's take DACs, for example. I'm assuming that by DAC that we are referring to the conversion to analog (chips and related design), power supply, analog stage design, master clock design, etc. If they all sound the same, then I guess jitter is a myth. I'd also have to conclude that you believe that power supply designs have little or no bearing on sound quality. Additionally, the design of the analog output stage must be meaningless too. Oh, and all chips and the related implementation...pffftdoesn't matter. It's all the same. Why is that people without an investment in hi-end gear seem to always know so much!? I mean, if you've never upgraded over the course of years and actually heard MAJOR improvements in the areas of dynamic range, soundstage size (width/depth/height), resolution (particularly intimate detail), transient speed, etc, then how do you know so much and why are you so desperate to prove that anyone willing and able to spend more than yourselves is simply a vain fool. I wonder, isn't there a better way to show off than having an expensive pre-amp or a wristwatch? Geez, it couldn't simply be that hi-end gear actually is pretty amazing when all the pieces are in place (speaker position, acoustic treatment, great gear well matched, etc)? Nah, couldn't possibly be. jh901's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=18175 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
jh901 wrote: The conclusion you guys are making seems to be that all gear sounds the same. You really believe that? I don't think anybody is suggesting that. The main point is that hi-fi does not always sound good or nice, and that good/nice audio is not always hi-fi. The price of the gear has little to do with how enjoyable or exciting it is to listen to, but it has a lot to do with how high fidelity it is. My take on this is: 1. Hi-fi from different brands usually sounds different in all sorts of ways from other brands - but as the gear gets more expensive / more accurate the differences become smaller. 2. True high fidelity, as the name suggests, reproduces music warts and all and should sound fantastic with a great recording and appalling with a bad one. Good hi-fi can only be tested for its fidelity if it is played at realistic levels (i.e. loud), in a reasonably large room that is acoustically well damped. It should be full spectrum - reproducing both the highest and lowest notes we can perceive without undue emphasis in one area of the frequency spectrum. 3. Hi-fi can only really be tested objectively when reproducing acoustic music and compared with *real instruments*. An acoustic folk band or string quartet is bloody loud if you are standing within 10 feet of it - which is where the microphones used for the recording will have been placed. If the hi-fi passes that test with a high score then it will also reproduce electric / synthetic music in the way that the composer intended too. You cannot tell what the composer intended with synthetic music knocked up on an Apple Mac, so it is impossible to objectively test using it. So in order to get objectively high fidelity reproduction you will need a very good source, very powerful and accurate amplification and large (for the bass) and un-coloured loudspeakers. Get those factors right and you are halfway there, but to get even that far you will need a LOT of money. Oh, and you will also need a house with a listening room large enough! The room is usually the most expensive part of any hi-fi. Now, can you get an acceptably pleasant and enjoyable sound from a cheaper / smaller system? Of course! And it may also make a reasonable stab at tonal, timbral and rhythmic accuracy. But it is unlikely to reproduce music with enough scale to be truly high fidelity. I suspect that there is now a lot less difference between expensive and cheaper musical sources than when LP was the main medium. A recent blind test of several DACs in a UK magazine (Hi-fi Choice) highlighted how the sound of each DAC was not well correlated to its price, and how one stood out head and shoulders above the others, despite being inexpensive (it was the Rega DAC if you must know). The same magazine also blind tested the Touch against a number of expensive streamers costing around £1,000 and (even with its internal DAC) the Touch easily matched them sonically - so it came out on top in value for money terms by a mile. TheLastMan's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=16021 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
jh901 wrote: The conclusion you guys are making seems to be that all gear sounds the same. You really believe that? I don't think anyone has made that hyperbolic conclusion except you. I think any of us would agree that some components or systems sound better than others, and that some have a sound that we prefer even if one doesn't claim it is better. The conclusion from the first link in the OP and much of the subsequent comments is that some reported differences are based not at all on the actual sound, but on other information, such as the brand, model, or price tag of the components in question. This is not breaking news, but it still astounds me how many people will not consider that these non-auditory factors may play a role in their auditory perceptions. aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
JJZolx wrote: They wouldn't sell their Rolexes when they discover that a Timex works just as well. Most high end audio gear is electronic jewelry. Especially for a certain age-group. I'd be willing to bet that at least a few of the testers now question the value of their gear. It often takes a slap in the face like that to wake someone up. Rolex are expensive mechanical watches. They require expensive maintenance that often cost thousands of dollars. I have a vastly superior time piece from Seiko that only requires a new battery and a careful setting. bfl banned for life's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=56269 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
Archimago wrote: For me, I have a DAC/headphone amp because the MacBook Pro's audio out is inadequate to drive my HD800. Also, the Mac's audio output is audibly more noisy thus not good enough of a match with the Sennheiser when I listen thru the computer. I have a TP because I can afford it and it looks cool :-). Sure, I do believe the TP's output is measurably better than the $200 job with the oscilloscope, but I haven't reliably been able to hear it... That was, of course, my point -- I'm not sure that very many people could actually hear the difference between the TP or Touch internal DAC and an external of pretty much any quality. This might possibly also be true for the Receiver. R. RonM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17029 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
TheOctavist wrote: http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths/1410 Can you tell the difference between $2 and $50 shampoo in a DBT? Oh, yes :) I recommend Paul Mitchell michael123's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=23745 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
SBGK wrote: I would be more persuaded by this torchured logic if the main proponents immediately saw the error of their ways and sold off their multi thousand $ dacs etc Perhaps they don't sell off their expensive equipment because in so doing they would have nothing to gain and plenty to lose. For example, the average price for used audio equipment (that does not have a MacIntosh nameplate) is somewhere between 40% to 70% of the original retail price. 40% would be for much older or less well reviewed equipment and 70% would be for newer or very well reviewed equipment. Add to this less than optimal return on investment the cost of replacing the sold equipment with less expensive new (or used) equipment, which is hopefully the sonic equal of the old equipment, and selling the equipment makes little financial sense. Sure one could turn a profit by replacing some very expensive equipment since the selling price of the used equipment might be much higher than the retail price of the replacement equipment but add in the hassle of that buying and selling and what's the point. I find that I am now much less of kool-aid drinking audiophile but that in no way invalidates how nice my system sounds, a system which includes some very expensive cables and wires which I now know really aren't worth the money. But replacing these cables isn't going to make my system sound better so again, why bother? As for amps, DACs, speakers, etc. I don't know what the correct answer would be since it would be more a matter of just how much money can be gained by swapping out the equipment and whether the extra money is worth the hassle. However my attitude going forward has always been to keep the more expensive stuff but to look for less expensive, more bang for the buck equipment whenever I need to buy some new equipment. ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
SBGK wrote: I would be more persuaded by this torchured logic if the main proponents immediately saw the error of their ways and sold off their multi thousand $ dacs etc They wouldn't sell their Rolexes when they discover that a Timex works just as well. Most high end audio gear is electronic jewelry. Especially for a certain age-group. I'd be willing to bet that at least a few of the testers now question the value of their gear. It often takes a slap in the face like that to wake someone up. JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
SBGK wrote: I would be more persuaded by this torchured logic if the main proponents immediately saw the error of their ways and sold off their multi thousand $ dacs etc xx Personally I know of 3 audiophile friends give up on expensive cables and convert everything over to excellent Mogami or Belden cables over the last couple years (we're talking Nordost and Synergistics) after doing tests for themselves. As for DAC's, I've done A-B shootouts between China-made $200 DAC's with those costing thousands with friends (easy to do) and have never heard a significant difference. Each time, the folks owing the expensive stuff saying something to the effect of I could live with that! I believe the majority of audiophiles are economically well-to-do folks willing to spend thousands of $$$'s on the hobby. IMO most of it is just pride of ownership rather than the idea that many of us have ever conducted controlled trials of the stuff. Naturally, it does seem odd to own $20+K speakers and then show your buddy the $200 DAC. It seems unintuitive just like how sampling theory may seem unintuitive as well (in reference to another thread). However, that is exactly what my experience has been... As I type this, I'm totally happy driving my Sennheiser HD800 with the above $200 DAC/headphone amp combo and know based on experience that I'm not missing anything of significance. Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
Archimago wrote: Personally I know of 3 audiophile friends give up on expensive cables and convert everything over to excellent Mogami or Belden cables over the last couple years (we're talking Nordost and Synergistics) after doing tests for themselves. As for DAC's, I've done A-B shootouts between China-made $200 DAC's with those costing thousands with friends (easy to do) and have never heard a significant difference. Each time, the folks owing the expensive stuff saying something to the effect of I could live with that! I believe the majority of audiophiles are economically well-to-do folks willing to spend thousands of $$$'s on the hobby (nothing wrong with that IMO). However, IMO most of it is just pride of ownership rather than the idea that many of us have ever conducted controlled trials of the stuff. Naturally, it does seem odd to own $20+K speakers and then show your buddy the $200 DAC. It seems unintuitive just like how sampling theory may seem unintuitive as well (in reference to another thread). However, that is exactly what my experience has been... As I type this, I'm totally happy driving my Sennheiser HD800 with the above $200 DAC/headphone amp combo and know based on experience that I'm not missing anything of significance. So the question is why you or anyone else needs anything other than the SB device DAC (aside from the headphone amp). I suspect the Touch, and certainly the TP, is superior to the $200 China-made DAC. R. RonM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17029 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
RonM wrote: So the question is why you or anyone else needs anything other than the SB device DAC (aside from the headphone amp). I suspect the Touch, and certainly the TP, is superior to the $200 China-made DAC. R. For me, I have a DAC/headphone amp because the MacBook Pro's audio out is inadequate to drive my HD800. Also, the Mac's audio output is audibly more noisy thus not good enough of a match with the Sennheiser when I listen thru the computer. I have a TP because I can afford it and it looks cool :-). Sure, I do believe the TP's output is measurably better than the $200 job with the oscilloscope, but I haven't reliably been able to hear it... Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
SBGK wrote: I have never used blind testing because I believe humans are best suited to A/B testing Only someone with something to lose (money, pride, whatever) would have an opinion like that. SuperQ's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2139 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
TheOctavist wrote: http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths/1410 I would be more persuaded by this torchured logic if the main proponents immediately saw the error of their ways and sold off their multi thousand $ dacs etc I have never used blind testing because I believe humans are best suited to A/B testing, works for me, had my amp 12 years, speakers from 1985 etc xx SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
Re: [SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
SBGK wrote: I have never used blind testing because I believe humans are best suited to A/B testing How's that? Given that blind testing is typically A/B done by humans aubuti's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2074 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
[SlimDevices: Audiophiles] Another Nail in the Golden Eared Audiophile Coffin..
http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths/1410 TheOctavist's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52700 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=95757 ___ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
