A different way of being different? A rant.
May 21, 2011 at 9:18 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 16

drsamdc

New Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 16, 2011
Posts
37
Likes
12
I love listening to music, all kinds. So much so that I was convinced there was a holy grail, I mean just spend a month or so reading reviews about which IEM, DAP, headphone, ad nauseum and finally you just need to do some experimenting on yourself to see what you like best. Most of my stuff is either ripped from CD's or 123 bps MP3s, an occasional WAV file and most are quite nice. But different, depending on the player/ IEM combo. All my players, a Sansa Fuse, a Walkman, and a Cowon J3 deliver very nice audio. The lower priced unit is less pleasant overall than the higher priced units. The middle priced unit is as expected somewhere between in audio performance.
I have a drawer full of IEMs. My favorite are my Monster Coppers, because I like the way they sound better than the rest. That doesn't mean the others are worse, just different in delivering the goods I personally enjoy. They're.all pretty close in most respects in so far as being able to provide a pleasant and comfortable listening experience, albeit again different.The Klipsch are nice, the Turbines are nice, heck even the Jamz are nice, just different nice. The Shure's are great but they're different sounding from the others, just different, not better. Finally, what sounds best on one DAP does not necessarily follow through to the others. What I like best with The Cowan isn't what works best for me with the Sony or the Fuze. Heck, the J3 is so sweet you can run a can with a string and find acceptable listening. It makes less good better. Now start adding this and that amp`... you get the picture .
I can see that this can easily be obsessive, perhaps I need to start an audiophile  anonymous 12 step program. There's always different, but on balance the differences are marginal at best. That's my opinion, and I won't debate it, but if you are happy with what you've got or 95% happy, wait until what you've got breaks and then begin again.
 
May 22, 2011 at 5:13 PM Post #7 of 16
Wikipedia........................
A rant is a speech or text that does not present a calm argument; rather, it is typically an enthusiastic speech or talk or lecture on an idea, a person or an institution.
Rants can be based on partial fact or may be entirely factual but written in a comedic/satirical form. Rants can also be used in the defense of an individual, idea or organization. Rants of this type generally occur after the subject has been attacked by another individual or group. 
 
May 22, 2011 at 5:32 PM Post #8 of 16


Quote:
Wikipedia........................
A rant is a speech or text that does not present a calm argument; rather, it is typically an enthusiastic speech or talk or lecture on an idea, a person or an institution.
Rants can be based on partial fact or may be entirely factual but written in a comedic/satirical form. Rants can also be used in the defense of an individual, idea or organization. Rants of this type generally occur after the subject has been attacked by another individual or group. 


That definition contradicts itself.  How can something not have an argument, but at the same time defend an individual, idea, or organization?
 
 
May 22, 2011 at 6:05 PM Post #10 of 16
It says does not present a CALM argument. Just because there is no calm argument does not mean there is no argument at all.
 
Quote:
That definition contradicts itself.  How can something not have an argument, but at the same time defend an individual, idea, or organization?
 



 
 
May 22, 2011 at 8:56 PM Post #11 of 16
I think the OP needs to spend some time in Sound Science to see what a 'rant' looks like. Those guys definitely lie awake at night wondering if electronic rats are chewing through their 99.999999% oxygen-free cables.
 
May 22, 2011 at 9:27 PM Post #13 of 16
Wikipedia........................
A rant is a speech or text that does not present a calm argument; rather, it is typically an enthusiastic speech or talk or lecture on an idea, a person or an institution.
Rants can be based on partial fact or may be entirely factual but written in a comedic/satirical form. Rants can also be used in the defense of an individual, idea or organization. Rants of this type generally occur after the subject has been attacked by another individual or group. 


Dennis Miller: I don't wanna go on a RANT here but America's foreign policy makes about as much sense as Beowolf having sex with Robert Fulton at the first Battle of Antetum. I mean when a neo-conservative defenstrates it's like Raskalnakov filibuster dioxymonohydrostinate.
Peter Griffin: What the hell does RANT mean?

*le sigh*

 
May 23, 2011 at 1:49 AM Post #15 of 16
I dont know about the 'quality' part, but this is an infamous rant:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc
 
Not sure how many supporters Mr Crocker would find here for the, ahem, musical stylings of Ms Spears.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top