- 6,650 Posts. Joined 10/2010
- Location: Nauticus
- Select All Posts By This User
From Muppetface's signature:
"I'd say details rate pretty high on most head-fier's lists of most important attributes. Along with soundstage, frequency response, and being a prat."---Radio_Head
I didn't take it myself. I don't even let my doctor give me one. My last checkup he asked me if I wanted to test my hearing I said "What?" He said Would you like your hearing tested I said "what?" He said would like your "what?" I grabbed some Viagra instead.
Out of the many funny conversations I've come across on Head-Fi, I particularly enjoyed this short thread: Best headphones for Sigur Ros + dancing around with?
^ Wow, that's pretty much the portable forum's spitting image. Good to see there's consistency in Head-Fi.
I think this one is worth quoting too:
The majority of the LCD-2 / LCD-3 threads I've seen however devolve into unproductive arguments over production variation, Audez'e conspiracy theories, schill-fueled marriage proposals to inanimate objects, perpetuation and escalation of misinformation (last claim for the LCD-3's supposed burn-in time was 700 hours), FOTM amp and DAC friendship bracelet making, endless opportunities for the 'elect' to call peons out for not having 'good enough' gear, and just a general amalgamation of our hobby's worst tendencies and characteristics all rolled up into a continuously looping, slow motion trainwreck of a thread that's fascinating to watch from a macabre standpoint, but ultimately soul-harming.
I read this about Futuresonics universal earphones with a custom made tip -
... The difference is particularly apparent in the bass range, where the FS sound feels warmer and rolls into your ear as opposed to the crisp and at times almost clinical sound of digital drivers.
I understood what he meant because of previous knowledge (acquired on Head-Fi, BTW). I didn't always know what a BA driver was, and other readers of this article may not either. By your logic, rather than do some research, journalists could invent words for everything; it wouldn't matter, since people who already know what they're talking about would understand anyway.
No, "digital" cannot mean that. If you invent your own meanings for words, you cannot communicate. Your definition doesn't even fit the use of the word in this article, since the journalist was talking about drivers, not sound. Digital drivers don't exist (unless, maybe, we choose to call thus the drivers used by computers to connect to peripherals). Digital sound exists, but has nothing to do with your very personal definition.
Look, I'd rather call a cat a cat, but if you want to call it a dog or a chipmunk, that's your choice. As for me, I've wasted enough time already, so feel free to conclude this discussion in whatever way you see fit.