- If you think tube rolling is something you do on a hill with large
diameter sewer pipeyou might be an audio redneck.
--
steveinaz
- transport: squeezebox touch/channel island audio ps
- dac: benchmark dac/pre
- linestage: placette passive
- power amplifier: parasound hca-1500a
-
If your bedroom system is a Bose Wave - you are one hell of an
audiophile redneck.
--
ralphpnj
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels - Snatch - The Transporter -
Transporter 2 (oops) - Touch
'Last.fm' (http://www.last.fm/user/jazzfann/)
ralphpnj;687653 Wrote:
mcr you are by far the best troll on the entire internet. I'm just glad
you choose this forum to do your trolling on. You made my day!
You know what, I think he has a secret soft spot for us too. Certainly
I do. I find more politeness, knowledge and thoughtfulness here
maggior;687656 Wrote:
- If your new DAC sits on top of your old broken DAC, you may be a
redneck.
(attributed to Jeff Foxworthy's similar comment regarding a new TV
sitting on top of a broken console TV).
magiccarpetride;687703 Wrote:
- If your new Shakti Stone sits on top of your old
magiccarpetride;687633 Wrote:
My bad. To correct the error of my ways, I will here indicate the proper
attribution for all the points I've reposted:
mcr you are by far the best troll on the entire internet. I'm just glad
you choose this forum to do your trolling on. You made my day!
- If your new DAC sits on top of your old broken DAC, you may be a
redneck.
(attributed to Jeff Foxworthy's similar comment regarding a new TV
sitting on top of a broken console TV).
--
maggior
Rich
-
Setup: 2 SB3s, 4 Booms, 1 Duet, 1 Receiver, 1 Touch, iPeng on iPod
Touch,
maggior;687656 Wrote:
- If your new DAC sits on top of your old broken DAC, you may be a
redneck.
(attributed to Jeff Foxworthy's similar comment regarding a new TV
sitting on top of a broken console TV).
When I was young (a long time ago) everybody had large black and white
console TVs,
maggior;687656 Wrote:
- If your new DAC sits on top of your old broken DAC, you may be a
redneck.
- If your new Shakti Stone sits on top of your old broken Shakti Stone,
you may be a redneck.
--
magiccarpetride
andy_c;686968 Wrote:
By the way, the OP claims his '*professional background is in scientific
research*'
(http://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=generaln=592550;).
LOL!
He's also posted the same thread at '*Audio Asylum*'
Phil Leigh;686486 Wrote:
My timer is up (only 30 mins)
Yes jitter exists - and it seems according to MOST research and
certainly my experience FWIW you need a hell of a lot of it in order to
hear it!
But Phil, audiophiles can hear everything, they hear bats
communicating at night, they can
probedb;686617 Wrote:
But Phil, audiophiles can hear everything, they hear bats
communicating at night, they can hear the RF interference caused by a
super nova in another galaxy, they can hear the movement of tectonic
plates in the earths crust, they can hear.oh what it must be like
to
probedb;686617 Wrote:
But Phil, audiophiles can hear everything, they hear bats
communicating at night, they can hear the RF interference caused by a
super nova in another galaxy, they can hear the movement of tectonic
plates in the earths crust, they can hear.oh what it must be like
to
pski;686668 Wrote:
Not to mention the other obvious benefits they possess: The ability to
remember tube part numbers up to ten characters and their associated
sound as well as well as their damnable ability to make patterned white
bread toast on their amplifiers without have to miss a single
- If you've ever setup a graphic equalizer to make a cool design, with
no regard to sound---you might be an audio redneck.
- If your subwoofer doubles as your coffee tableyou might be an
audio redneck.
- If the tops of your Cerwin Vegas have ever been covered in saran
wrap, in preparartion
steveinaz;686771 Wrote:
- If you've ever setup a graphic equalizer to make a cool design, with
no regard to sound---you might be an audio redneck.
- If your subwoofer doubles as your coffee tableyou might be an
audio redneck.
- If the tops of your Cerwin Vegas have ever been covered
Phil Leigh;686269 Wrote:
Whatever it is you are hearing, it is neither measurable nor
understandable using conventional science.
Dear Phil.
Bold statement.
Did you become the speaker of the conventional science community!?!?
;)
My view:
I'm sure that every difference you can hear can
Soundcheck, listen blind and then I'll listen to you.
Darren
--
darrenyeats
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/richpub/listmania/byauthor/A3H57URKQB8AQO/ref=cm_pdp_content_listmania/203-7606506-5721503.
SB Touch
darrenyeats's
soundcheck;686419 Wrote:
Dear Phil.
Bold statement.
Did you become the speaker of the conventional science community!?!?
;)
My view:
I'm sure that every difference you can hear can be measured.
...
I agree with pretty much everything you say here, Klaus. When you say
Phil Leigh;686421 Wrote:
I agree with pretty much everything you say here, Klaus. When you say
I'm sure that every difference you can hear can be measured. I
agree... so if it can't be measured... maybe that's because it isn't
really there to be heard? You have to allow for that
soundcheck;686432 Wrote:
If YOU can't hear a difference, it doesn't mean it's not there.
Has anybody disputed this? I think not.
But have a look at this slightly modified statement (I moved some NOT
gates around):
kcehcdnuos Wrote:
If YOU can hear a difference, it doesn't mean it's there.
soundcheck;686432 Wrote:
Look Phil.
I think you're kind of smart guy.
But you seem to have a problem to get the message out of my posting.
I'm not refering to my work btw. I couldn't care less.
Above post is kept generic. Though it pretty much shows the reason why
I wouldn't
Reading through this thread and several other threads here in the
Audiophiles section I've noticed similar pattern running through these
threads.
On one side there are the people who claim to hear differences in the
sound of their system as a result of all kinds of tweaks. These
differences
I have read the links that Klaus posted earlier. They are all about the
problems faced by equipment designers trying to establish exactly which
measurable parameters really affect the reproduction quality - and how
to measure them and which measurement values are better or worse.
This is all fine
ralphpnj;686442 Wrote:
On one side there are the people who claim to hear differences in the
sound of their system as a result of all kinds of tweaks. These
differences range from slight improvements to oh my god major
improvements.
On the other side are the people who claim that these
Worthy tweaks:
1. Read and follow the speaker maker's instructions on placement. Very
few decent speakers are designed to sound correct jammed into corners
or close to a back or side wall. If the speakers don't have
instructions, get better speakers. If you are forced to place speakers
based-on
Soulkeeper;686458 Wrote:
In many circumstances well and good, but when one of those sides is
patently wrong (e.g. fiddling with my LMS box lifts a veil from the
blacker blacks, it's night and day, and it's definitely not in my head,
because as we all know TCP/IP is not bit perfect, and it
It seems that I am somewhat misunderstood or, more correctly, quoted out
of context. So I'll try to rephrase and see if that helps.
My statement I would like to land somewhere in the middle of these two
belief systems was followed by Namely that these tweaks might make a
difference but, at best,
ralphpnj;686482 Wrote:
It seems that I am somewhat misunderstood or, more correctly, quoted out
of context. So I'll try to rephrase and see if that helps.
My statement I would like to land somewhere in the middle of these two
belief systems was followed by Namely that these tweaks might
Perhaps a basic book on how computers work would also be helpful? At
least something to help get through the fact nothing ... No amount of
tinkering... You can do to the operating system and the hardware it is
running on can ever change the data content of the IP packets being
sent from an LMS
Phil Leigh;686255 Wrote:
Perhaps a basic book on how computers work would also be helpful? At
least something to help get through the fact nothing ... No amount of
tinkering... You can do to the operating system and the hardware it is
running on can ever change the data content of the IP
I don't know what a audiophile redneck is, but I appreciate being in the
company of so many world experts in audiophile digital theory that have
decided, like me, to splash out on the only bit perfect digital stramer
in the universe and only £200, bargain.
--
SBGK
SBGK;686263 Wrote:
what is your theory of why people hear differences when running
Fidelizer ? Is it just me and Soundcheck and the Fidelizer developer
that can hear an improvement ?
The other two haven't posted here directly about this IIRC.
As to why YOU hear things sounding differently...
SBGK;686264 Wrote:
I don't know what a audiophile redneck is, but I appreciate being in the
company of so many world experts in audiophile digital theory that have
decided, like me, to splash out on the only bit perfect digital stramer
in the universe and only £200, bargain.
It's not the
Phil Leigh;686269 Wrote:
The other two haven't posted here directly about this IIRC.
As to why YOU hear things sounding differently... I have no idea.
Whatever it is you are hearing, it is neither measurable nor
understandable using conventional science.
Phil,
If you won't try it then
SBGK;686292 Wrote:
Phil,
If you won't try it then would you accept an invitation to come to hear
it at my house next time you're in Gloucestershire. There is most
definately an improvement in the sound with Fidelizer and the Windows 7
tweaks, in my system at least.
Hey - I never said I
SBGK;686292 Wrote:
Phil,
If you won't try it then would you accept an invitation to come to hear
it at my house next time you're in Gloucestershire. There is most
definately an improvement in the sound with Fidelizer and the Windows 7
tweaks, in my head at least.
I had to fix your
Jeff Flowerday;686305 Wrote:
I had to fix your statement for you...
PS) The Fidelizer developer most likely doesn't run LMS and
squeezeboxen. So it's just you and soundcheck on this one.
There is probably some effect using Fidelizer if you actually listen to
audio with your computer .
I
Archimago;686240 Wrote:
LOL, I don't know whether you're trying to be funny or offensive. I
like the following though:
So what does this make you? I see you've started a few threads here
knowing full well the tendency towards objectivism with many of the
posters here.
Tough crowd.
Phil Leigh;686301 Wrote:
Hey - I never said I wouldn't try it... later...
OK so now I've tried it... At the audiophile setting...
Couldn't hear any difference to be honest.
Only did a quick a/b...
I suppose I could break out ADM and test it, but that will have to
wait.
--
Phil Leigh
You
magiccarpetride;686336 Wrote:
Tough crowd. One wonders -- due to what peculiar set of circumstances
did we end up with such humourless group of people on this forum? Why
is everyone so somber, solemn, and hell bent on impersonating a school
principal here?
So no one wants to play the
Phil Leigh;686339 Wrote:
OK so now I've tried it... At the audiophile setting...
Couldn't hear any difference to be honest.
Only did a quick a/b...
I suppose I could break out ADM and test it, but that will have to
wait.
Curiouser and curiouser! Cried Alice
Phil, my system is so highly
SBGK;686367 Wrote:
Curiouser and curiouser! Cried Alice
Phil, my system is so highly resolving that I can tell if
Squeezeserver.exe is on priority idle or real time, same if it is on
dedicated cores or shared cores. Maybe my brain reacts adversely to
hearing music which does not sound
SBGK;686367 Wrote:
Curiouser and curiouser! Cried Alice
Phil, my system is so highly resolving that I can tell if
Squeezeserver.exe is on priority idle or real time, same if it is on
dedicated cores or shared cores. Maybe my brain reacts adversely to
hearing music which does not sound
Phil Leigh;686369 Wrote:
What exactly is this system of yours? - sounds interesting.
As an aside, how do you know what correct sounds like?... Were you
there when it was recorded?
Well, I know what I like, that's all that matters to me.
Just tried the Ingus DRC (never heard of it before
SBGK;686389 Wrote:
Well, I know what I like, that's all that matters to me.
Just tried the Ingus DRC (never heard of it before seeing your
signature), pretty poor on my system, massive drop in resolution.
system is laptop with optimised Win 7, linear ps, ethernet, SBT +
fidelity level
SBGK;686367 Wrote:
Curiouser and curiouser! Cried Alice
Phil, my system is so highly resolving that I can tell if
Squeezeserver.exe is on priority idle or real time, same if it is on
dedicated cores or shared cores. Maybe my brain reacts adversely to
hearing music which does not sound
SBGK;686389 Wrote:
Just tried the Ingus DRC (never heard of it before seeing your
signature), pretty poor on my system, massive drop in resolution.
You mean Inguz? What microphone did you use?
--
SuperQ
SuperQ's
A definition of a being a redneck is possessing glorious absence of
sophistication.
Aesthetic concerns seem to be topping the list of things that remain
inscrutable for the audiophile rednecks. They only seem capable of
listening to music if they happen to be holding an SPL meter in their
hands,
Calm down, dude. You are begging for more insults. :-)
--
vett93
Main system:
Source: Transporter, modded by ModWright:
http://www.modwright.com/modifications/transporter-truth-mods.php
Preamp: Dude from Tube Research Labs:
http://www.tuberesearchlabs.com/products/dude.html
Amp: NP100
If there is something better(lower distortion, flatter freq response,
good off axis response) then it WILL show in the measurements.
the problem is.. nobody knows how to listen, or knows even the basics
of sound reproduction, much less DIGITAL AUDIO.
MCR.
Read.
LOL, I don't know whether you're trying to be funny or offensive. I
like the following though:
magiccarpetride;686176 Wrote:
A definition of a being a redneck is possessing glorious absence of
sophistication.
BLAH BLAH BLAH
- you frequent audiophile forums looking for people to attack,
51 matches
Mail list logo
