Anyone read this guys thoughts?

[Snufkin]

Click here
And then click on "myths"

Interesting to note that he doesn't mention that while it's true that many IC based amps sound "more accurate" not everyone likes that kind of sound..

 

[DesBen]

Those are typical sound-engineer comments. There was a great article somewhere (Stereophile?) on the subject. "If you can't measure it, you can't hear it".

For example, most people can't hear tones above 20KHz. So they limited CD to 22KHz. Engineers would tell you going above that is useless, because you can't hear it. However, studies have shown that the presence of higher-frequencies does affect the way we hear music, even tho we can't hear a pure tone at those frequencies.

And it the end, it comes down to this I think: what sound do you enjoy, not which is the more accurate.

 

[cajunchrist]

The posts that most anger me come from elec. engineering students that stumble on an interconnect discussion thread and proceed to whip us with a few semester's knowledge of physics (OBVIOUSLY, according to physics, there is no difference between interconnects). None of their opinions come from actual listening.

To them I say, stick an occiliscope up your ass, and then up your mom's ass. Do you measure any difference? No? Then obviously, you and your mom are the same person. Your test proves it.

 

[Snufkin]

lol
that's a scary analogy, with extra anal.

It's definately interesting to note the fact that while measurements and specs are quoted, how everything ends up sounding is not mentioned at all.

It's hard explaining to some people that accurate isn't always the most enjoyable.

 

[MacDEF]

r3mix.net has LONG been known as a site where you might find some good tips for improving your MP3 ripping, but that's about it. The rest of the site is basically a load of bull.

 

[Flasken]

double post

 

[Flasken]

Snufkin,

If you want to link directly to that site instead, you can simply go to the site and copy the url of the site. NOT the url in that box in the top of the browser. YOu have to right-click the site, choose properties and copy the url from there. This is because the site is divided into sections and the one containing the links is always the same and that is the url shown in the browser.

Kri.

 

[Snufkin]

Flasken; click on this link and tell me where it takes you

http://users.belgacom.net/gc247244/myths.htm

 

[Nick Dangerous]

What a load o' bull.

Tube amps sound better than solid state, vinyl sounds better than CD's... and... and... oh fuggedaboutit. I don't have time to disprove someone's faulty logic when there are tons of VINYL and TUBE projects to build.

 

[cajunchrist]

I cut my ambient teeth on Musical Starstreams...

 

[Tuberoller]

My brother is an EE and he was the toughest convert ever.This guy just didn't understand how my Dad and I thought that tubes and vinyl sounded better than solid-sate and digital.He had all the data that proves that digital was way more accurate than analog.He had to open his mind and listen.He know owns a full tube audio system that features a VERY expensive analog front end.The irony.

 

[redshifter]

this guy obviously has an axe to grind. like others have mentioned he bases his opinions on specs rather than real world experience. maybe he should become a stereo salesman.

i read somewhere that ultra high frequencies, like harmonics, that are supposedly out of the range of human hearing can influence the sound by "beating on" the soundwaves we can hear. anyone else heard of this phenomenon?

a point i like to bring up to "spec-heads" is we really don't understand everything about sonics, and how the human brain decodes sounds. for example, the violin has been around for over 500 years, and science is still unable to explain 100% how it creates the sound it does.

 

[cajunchrist]

I wrote Tim Spencer (author of the FAQ) and asked him about his qualifications. In his email, he explains what he meant by the FAQ. Here is his email in its entirety:

Back 2 years ago when I wrote the 'Myths', I was working in a studio, but competition is fierce, money was getting too low to stay. So, I'm working in a computer tech job. Pays more. I still feel those myths apply to this day regarding the audio industry for both the software and hardware side.

I'm glad you took the time to read the 'myths' section. I don't regret writing it. My hope is that one day a hardware manufacturer like Sony will introduce a "THX" standard for music. Like the Lucasfilm approach in the 'THX' standard for home theater, in music, the monitoring of the mixing, editing, and mastering at the studio should be done with a system that is built around the same theme as your home music system that they sell as well.

For a better idea. The reason I selected Sony is because they not only own a consumer electronics company, but they also own a music recording company. This would be the way to introduce a revolution in music fidelity. Design a single professional speaker system for both surround and 2-channel audio. Make this same speaker system design available for the public. You go to the store and buy the Sony music CD and you buy the Sony speaker system, then you go home and play the music. You should hear a very approximate rendition of what the artists, recording engineer, and mastering engineer intended for you to hear.

This solution would blow away any current recording/playback combo available to the public. For the first time, a company can catagorically guarentee that this speaker system "will bring you closer to being in the studio with the artist". No other brand of esoteric audiophile junk can truly claim that, because their equipment isn't used in the studio.

If you want a quality pair of music speakers that are indeed widely used in studios, try Westlake Audio. They are a bit on the expensive side, but should do better than most. Try to find a set of studio monitors if you can.

Timothy

You be the judge.

 

[Snufkin]

The thing I don't like is the way he writes his opinion as fact.
Although the facts that he presents are in fact true, they are open to interpretation.

eg: The Beyer DT831s are better than the 770pros.

Take that statement at face value and you'd think that everyone will prefer the sound of the 831s to the 770s.. but if I put it into context and say that while the 831s are technically better from a purist point of view, they're not everyones cup of tea because they tend to be a little too accurate at times.

Sure, IC amps can be more accurate than tube amps.. but that doesn't mean that everyone will prefer the way an IC amp sounds.

 

[skippy]

Quote:

i read somewhere that ultra high frequencies, like harmonics, that are supposedly out of the range of human hearing can influence the sound by "beating on" the soundwaves we can hear. anyone else heard of this phenomenon?

when two waves interact, you get the difference and sum of the frequency of the waves. this phenomenon is used to create 'binaural beats.' also technology like HSS produces 2 ultrasonic signals with special transducers (one constant, the other variable). when the 2 waves interact, it produces sound within the audible range.

though i wonder, how many convential speakers are really designed to produce ultrasonic signals accurately. my guess is none.