las [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The difference between the least expensive receiver (that would be
considered by the industry definition - if there is such a thing)
"HiFi" and the most expensive individual components is insignificant
when compared to speakers.
Well, that may be a bit of an
Don Capps wrote:
A. This is a common argument forwarded by the subjectivist camp in audio
jounalism. So...in other words...we can't trust our OWN ears and therefore
must trust those of a magazine reviewer or an audio salon salesman to tell
us which sounds better, no? Is there no
las wrote:
In my humble opinion, if you can make electronics that can keep the distortion
as low (unfortunately this becomes very hard with analog tubes, tape, vinyl,
etc.), the frequency response as wide, the signal to noise ratio as good and the
dynamic range as wide, analog would sound
