[atx]

Quote:

So would it sound better if it were given to you or if you paid $100,000? If sound quality is because of low price, then don't buy anything, and it'll sound best. If it's because of high price, then buy stax

It would sound better if I got it for free. If I didn't buy anything, then there would be no sound and the question of quality is moot.

I understand your argument on absolutism v.s. relativism. My point in all this is that human beings are tempered in their perception. If you're telling me that you perceive sound quality absolutely irrespective of price or any other factors, then you belong to an elite class of loonies who would spend thousands of dollars on a pretzel in the shape of Jay Leno's chin. I'm telling you that I'm not one of these people.

These people do exist, and in the audiophile world, the proportion is probably greater since, afterall, you don't make $150 audio cables for the average, sane, rational consumer.

"What? thousands of people are dying in Africa? Sorry, I just spent my last $150 on a cable. Try next week."

 

[MikeB06]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx These people do exist, and in the audiophile world, the proportion is probably greater since, afterall, you don't make $150 audio cables for the average, sane, rational consumer. "What? thousands of people are dying in Africa? Sorry, I just spent my last $150 on a cable. Try next week."

It sounds like this isn't the website for you then... maybe you should just ditch audio and invest all your expendable income on charity, because after all, we all should feel guilty for actually using our money to buy things for ourselves

.

Not to say charity is bad, of course...this is just the wrong place to question people's sanity for spending money on audio equipment, because we are all insane

.

 

[grawk]

I'm saying sound quality isn't a factor of price. Value is a factor of sound quality and price, but the price has no bearing on what the sound quality itself is. As the price never goes into my ears when I'm listening. I personally don't have a goal of "perfect sound at any price", but rather value matters to me. But once I've made my purchase, it's pointless to worry about what the price becomes afterward. You can't change the past, you can't make decisions based on information you don't have. If you're gonna wait til next week to see what's better, then next week are you going to have to do the same? it is like with computers. Decide when you want to have the equipment by, find the best fit for your budget by that time, then buy. After that, stop worrying about it, because it's too late.

 

[atx]

Quote:

It sounds like this isn't the website for you then... maybe you should just ditch audio and invest all your expendable income on charity, because after all, we all should feel guilty for actually using our money to buy things for ourselves

I didn't say you should feel guilty. I'm just explaining my point of view because the discussion went that way. If you feel guilty after reading what I said, then what can I say...

Quote:

I'm saying sound quality isn't a factor of price. Value is a factor of sound quality and price, but the price has no bearing on what the sound quality itself is. As the price never goes into my ears when I'm listening.

In an isolated context, what you're saying is absolutely true. Practically, however, sound quality by itself has little or no meaning, because everyone assigns a value internally to what they hear. Sound quality itself has a value, for example:

Which has a higher quality sound? A headphone with low bass and high treble, or a headphone with high bass and low treble?

The term 'sound quality' already includes a value factor, and so it depends on the person hearing it. Some people say that Koss PortaPros have a great sound, while others say it's boomy and muddy. It has a great sound to those people who want boomy, powerful bass, but not for people who listen to classicals and don't appreciate sloppy presentation.

If you ask me, Koss PortaPros have great sound, because it's hard to find anything better at that price. But you say, "that's value! not sound quality," and I say, "value is always attached to sound quality, whether that value is measured in terms of the frequency spectrum (muddy bass), or in terms of price."

So, if I say, "this headphone sounds good because its cheap" and you say, "this headphone sounds good because it has boomy bass." Who's to say that my valuation of this sound quality is not valid? Some other guy may say, "this headphone sounds bad because it has boomy bass," so where will your valuation be? Does the headphone sound good or bad?

In a nutshell, sound quality necessarily involve a valuation at some point to the listener, and therefore is always subjective. It depends on what's most important to the listener. For some, it's bass. For others, it's clarity. For me, it's money.

 

[mavis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx In a nutshell, sound quality necessarily involve a valuation at some point to the listener, and therefore is always subjective. It depends on what's most important to the listener. For some, it's bass. For others, it's clarity. For me, it's money.

Maybe you should add that to your sig so people know where you're coming from when you comment about products.

 

[eastside504]

the city Zoo: dont feed the animal
SuperMarco thread: dont feed the troll

Back to the topic of the thread, has anyone compare the new V3 to V2/V1 yet? How is the battery life of the new version?

 

[atx]

Quote:

Maybe you should add that to your sig so people know where you're coming from when you comment about products.

Money is always a factor in the valuation of sound quality. Look at SR71 v.s. Supermacro. Some would say, "I'd spend an extra $50 and get the SR71 instead." The extra $50 is a valuation of the SR71's sound--- i.e. the difference in sound quality between the supermacro and sr71 is worth $50.

There's a thread on someone who bought a DAC1 for $1500 and didn't notice any big difference in sound quality. He says it isn't worth the money. Again, that's sound quality as a function of price.

Clearly, with the DAC1, it sounds better, but not $1500 better.

Now, if money isn't a factor in the valuation of sound quality, he would keep the DAC1 and be happy with it even if it costs him $10k. But this is almost never the case, unless, like I said earlier, you're in the looney class of people.

 

[mavis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eastside504 the city Zoo: dont feed the animal SuperMarco thread: dont feed the troll Back to the topic of the thread, has anyone compare the new V3 to V2/V1 yet? How is the battery life of the new version?

Maybe he's just trying to get his post count up.

Anyway, in a week or so I should have my v2 and my v3 SMs here, so I'll be able to compare all three versions soon! I'm heading back to the States for a short vacation, but I'll leave the two new SMs burning in while I'm gone - I'll try to post a review soon ...

 

[atx]

Quote:

Maybe he's just trying to get his post count up.

No, I just don't like people telling me that my view of what sounds good and what doesn't is invalid. There wouldn't be any trolls if everyone here were tolerant and open-minded of other people's opinion, but screw the bigots and snobs. I don't care what they think anyway.

 

[mavis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atx No, I just don't like people telling me that my view of what sounds good and what doesn't is invalid. There wouldn't be any trolls if everyone here were tolerant and open-minded of other people's opinion, but screw the bigots and snobs. I don't care what they think anyway.

Obviously you do, otherwise you would've stopped arguing your point in this thread days ago ...

 

[atx]

Quote:

Obviously you do, otherwise you would've stopped arguing your point in this thread days ago ...

What I care about is a minority voice being oppressed and being called a troll just because I'm opinionated. This is a typical reaction from closed-minded bigots, just like feminine activists who shout you down just because they don't agree with your point of view.

I don't care about the bigots themselves, but I do care about those who are watching-- i.e. the silent majority-- who may be intimidated to speak something just to avoid the hassle of being argued and become the object in lets-ignore-the-troll game. How childish. The real trolls are the ignorant.

 

[Darwin022]

Back on topic.... Theoretically, Xin got the 4 layer boards today

Lets see if he gets some done tomorrow or Monday

 

[eastside504]

atx,
Your point was made a few pages ago. Your "sound quality" equation include price. Most people hear disagree with your equation and use "value". It is you who keep pounding YOUR equation while the rest are trying to tell you that it is our "value" that we use to make a judgement. In one of your post, you state that it is moot to continue to discuss if we dont agree with your equation. We are trying to tell you that we use a different equation and if you would listen to us ( i mean in term of telling you that we use "value" and not in term of you changing your view or your equation) then you will see why we consider sound quality to be constant.
This thread has gone from discussion of the supermacro to about what equation you or we use to judge price on sound. If its possible i like to get back to the orginal topic of the supermacro - its changes and differences (or lack of) in sound and battery life and comparison to the sr-71 or other portables in this price range.

 

[atx]

Quote:

It is you who keep pounding YOUR equation while the rest are trying to tell you that it is our "value" that we use to make a judgement.....We are trying to tell you that we use a different equation and if you would listen to us ( ... ) then you will see why we consider sound quality to be constant.

L-O-L ! I said, the de-valuation of the supermacro v1 effectively makes the sound worse, because you've paid more than its currently worth. That's all.

Then someone said, "explain to me how the release of v3 makes my v1 sound worse." and so I did. But people keep challenging my statement as if I'm dumb, stupid, or both, and in the course of doing so, started calling me a troll.

Name-calling doesn't bother me, but invalidating my views does. If you keep "pounding" me with your views, then I will "pound" you with mine.

Who is pounding whom? It's hard to see when you're the troll.

 

[noname]

Why won't this issue die?

Quote:

Originally Posted by eastside504 If its possible i like to get back to the orginal topic of the supermacro - its changes and differences (or lack of) in sound and battery life and comparison to the sr-71 or other portables in this price range.

I agree.