Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 83
  1. #51
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    The problem with getting that from either retail downloading site is bandwidth and storage. You need the bandwidth so you can quickly download the huge file before the entire system times out. Storage would be a huge problem, as you would have to cut 3/4 of your low rez stuff just to store a quarter of this high resolution stuff. The economical feasibility of that does not work out for either the consumer, or the retailer.
    Yet...

    Someday it will get here. With affordable drives already topping 3 TB and memory prices dropping, it's all just a matter of time. Come on progress!
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  2. #52
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    Yet...

    Someday it will get here. With affordable drives already topping 3 TB and memory prices dropping, it's all just a matter of time. Come on progress!
    Its got a long way to go though. You have talked about advances on one side of the wall, but bandwidth and storage on the other side of the wall has light years to go. First, DXD files are huge, even when downcoverted to 24/192khz. That means less songs per server, which makes storing them FAR more expensive than the typical itunes song. Hence higher prices, of which the public has shown little tolerance for with digital files.

    In order for high resolution audio to be downloaded as quickly as a typical Itunes song, you are going to need internet speeds far in excess to what we currently have. The internet speeds in our country are going down, not up, and that does not point to a pipeline big enough to make these files sizes economically feasible to support. If you start to see dust ups like the Comcast versus Level 3 happening, then it will take much longer for us to get there.

    On the consumer side, yes drive sizes have increased and prices have dropped in terms of storage, and processing power has increased. But we have huge hurdles before we even get to this point.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  3. #53
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Its got a long way to go though. You have talked about advances on one side of the wall, but bandwidth and storage on the other side of the wall has light years to go. First, DXD files are huge, even when downcoverted to 24/192khz. That means less songs per server, which makes storing them FAR more expensive than the typical itunes song. Hence higher prices, of which the public has shown little tolerance for with digital files.

    In order for high resolution audio to be downloaded as quickly as a typical Itunes song, you are going to need internet speeds far in excess to what we currently have. The internet speeds in our country are going down, not up, and that does not point to a pipeline big enough to make these files sizes economically feasible to support. If you start to see dust ups like the Comcast versus Level 3 happening, then it will take much longer for us to get there.

    On the consumer side, yes drive sizes have increased and prices have dropped in terms of storage, and processing power has increased. But we have huge hurdles before we even get to this point.
    I agree about the bandwidth. It will be awhile before downloads can hit that quality. How about disk formats? Can a BR support those numbers? If not, how close can it get us? Then download from the disk onto a home based server.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  4. #54
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    Awwww man! Some of us are on a diet you know.
    I heard about your "diet"...something dies YOU EAT IT(die-eat, get it?).
    Ahhem.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  5. #55
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    I heard about your "diet"...something dies YOU EAT IT(die-eat, get it?).
    Ahhem.
    Sounds like The Roadkill Cafe. You kill it, we grill it.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  6. #56
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    I agree about the bandwidth. It will be awhile before downloads can hit that quality. How about disk formats? Can a BR support those numbers? If not, how close can it get us? Then download from the disk onto a home based server.
    BR discs get you the 24/192khz over 5 channels. I cannot remember where I read it, but one reviewer compared a download of a concert, to the Bluray disc of the same concert. Same bit rate(24bit), and same sample rate(192khz). He clearly stated the BR disc sounded better than the download. I suspect that his DAC's(Wolfson coming out of his Pioneer) and the Sharc(from his streaming media player) are not of the same quality.

    You can rip a Bluray disc to a server, but that server would have to be BD+, BD watermark, and HDCP compliant, are you are not going to have much success at playing it back.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  7. #57
    Suspended atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oaktown!
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    As soon as you post all of the double blind tests where you could tell the difference
    between one of those systems and a receiver with decent speakers.
    They did one of these tests a few ago, and threw in a 400 dollar plastic PIONEER
    receiver with a bunch of megabuck amps. THE Pioneer was picked by several
    so called "audiophiles".

    So what you are telling me is that you haven't bothered to listen to any high end analog set ups and your opinion about analog and CD is based on a lack of experience and data.

    This really calls into question any opinion you might have on anything since you are willing to form an opinion on something you have never heard.

    I would appreciated if from here on you choose your words wisely when commenting on the forum. We don't need opinions from you on subjects you are ill informed on.

  8. #58
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by atomicAdam
    So what you are telling me is that you haven't bothered to listen to any high end analog set ups and your opinion about analog and CD is based on a lack of experience and data.
    As is his opinion on 3D, performance related video devices, and a myriad of other things we talk about here. Always the anecdotal or completely uniformed opinion, or something so outdated and behind the times, that it is no longer applicable.

    This really calls into question any opinion you might have on anything since you are willing to form an opinion on something you have never heard.
    You can add or "seen" as well.

    I would appreciated if you from here on you choose your words wisely when commenting on the forum. We don't need opinions from you on subjects you are ill informed on.
    I have asked him to do the same about 3D in the past. Good luck on this one, Pixel seems to want to do his own thing, even if it is completely unhelpful to the site overall.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  9. #59
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    BR discs get you the 24/192khz over 5 channels. I cannot remember where I read it, but one reviewer compared a download of a concert, to the Bluray disc of the same concert. Same bit rate(24bit), and same sample rate(192khz). He clearly stated the BR disc sounded better than the download. I suspect that his DAC's(Wolfson coming out of his Pioneer) and the Sharc(from his streaming media player) are not of the same quality.

    You can rip a Bluray disc to a server, but that server would have to be BD+, BD watermark, and HDCP compliant, are you are not going to have much success at playing it back.
    Although it’s not 32bit 352.8khz sample rate, BR sure seems like it’s pretty good at 24/192khz over 5 channels. Could that be increased for people only interested in 2 channel, or is 24/192 the speed limit?

    Are there BR servers available yet? In the works? At least though of? The masses like convenient. Me2.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  10. #60
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    Although it’s not 32bit 352.8khz sample rate, BR sure seems like it’s pretty good at 24/192khz over 5 channels. Could that be increased for people only interested in 2 channel, or is 24/192 the speed limit?
    24/192khz is the speed limit, and for a good reason. Beyond that, the ear hears no improvement. Let's face it, the sonic difference between 24/96khz and 24/192khz is identifiable upon very close scrutiny, but very slight at best. At 24bit depth, you already have far more dynamic range than any analog recording and playback device. At 192 thousand samples a second you are already mimicking analog's continuous capture capabilities, supposedly analog's trump card on digital.

    DXD is really a recording format, not a playback format(even though I can play it back in its native form on my system). 32/352.8khz is really beyond what is needed on any consumer format. It was designed to give plenty of bit overhead for post production purposes, so we could record the audio at 24/176 or 24/192khz, and still have enough bits for equalization, level changes, and editing in post production. So if you record at 32/352.8, edit, equalize and level at the same bit and sample rate, when you downconvert the results to 24/192khz, it is perceptively lossless to the ears. Everything is done beyond the capabilities of the human ear, unlike anything in audio we have heard before it. Everything from microphones, mixing desks and DAW's, and editing software operates at resolutions beyond what we can hear, and that is the beauty of DXD, and 24/192khz audio. Any damage done to the recording from downconverting from 32 to 24bits, would still be beyond the resolving capabilities of our ears(and equipment). We have never had that auditory advantage in audio production(and reproduction) in its history.

    Are there BR servers available yet? In the works? At least though of? The masses like convenient. Me2.
    Yes there are. But they are all priced in the stratosphere, which is why they are not really being talked about anywhere. The masses cannot afford this kind of convenience unfortunately.
    Last edited by Sir Terrence the Terrible; 12-09-2010 at 04:04 PM.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  11. #61
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    24/192khz is the speed limit, and for a good reason. Beyond that, the ear hears no improvement. Let's face it, the sonic difference between 24/96khz and 24/192khz is identifiable upon very close scrutiny, but very slight at best. At 24bit depth, you already have far more dynamic range than any analog recording and playback device. At 192 thousand samples a second you are already mimicking analog's continuous capture capabilities, supposedly analog's trump card on digital.

    DXD is really a recording format, not a playback format(even though I can play it back in its native form on my system). 32/352.8khz is really beyond what any what is needed on any consumer format. It was designed to give plenty of bit overhead for post production purposes, so we could record the audio at 24/176 or 24/192khz, and still have enough bits for equalization, level changes, and editing in post production. So if you record at 32/352.8, edit, equalize and level at the same bit and sample rate, when you downconvert the results to 24/192khz, it is perceptively lossless to the ears. Everything is done beyond the capabilities of the human ear, unlike anything in audio we have heard before it. Everything from microphones, mixing desks and DAW's, and editing software operates at resolutions beyond what we can hear, and that is the beauty of DXD, and 24/192khz audio. Any damage done to the recording from downconverting from 32 to 24bits, would still be beyond the resolving capabilities of our ears(and equipment). We have never had that auditory advantage in audio production(and reproduction) in its history.



    Yes there are. But they are all priced in the stratosphere, which is why they are not really being talked about anywhere. The masses cannot afford this kind of convenience unfortunately.
    That's good to know that I won't be missing anything at 24/192, since that is the current capability of both my DACs....

  12. #62
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    That's good to know that I won't be missing anything at 24/192, since that is the current capability of both my DACs....
    That takes care of the DAC's, but you still have upstream and downstream of the audio chain to worry about. Is the processing at 24/192khz, or just the conversion? Is my signal path(both upstream and downstream) quiet enough to take advantage of the lower noise levels of the recording? Can my amps pass anything above 20khz, or does it become unstable when trying? Can the speakers reproduce signals above 20khz? Is my room quiet enough to resolve the smallest details of a 24bit recording?

    These are all areas that must be addressed before one can really talk about having 24/192khz performance capabilities with their systems.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  13. #63
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    That takes care of the DAC's, but you still have upstream and downstream of the audio chain to worry about. Is the processing at 24/192khz, or just the conversion? Is my signal path(both upstream and downstream) quiet enough to take advantage of the lower noise levels of the recording? Can my amps pass anything above 20khz, or does it become unstable when trying? Can the speakers reproduce signals above 20khz? Is my room quiet enough to resolve the smallest details of a 24bit recording?

    These are all areas that must be addressed before one can really talk about having 24/192khz performance capabilities with their systems.
    All good points but I'm only referring to the DACs... Processing and not just conversion... Anyway it will be awhile before enough music I like will be available in 24/192, giving me more than enough time to address the rest of the system...

  14. #64
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    24/192khz is the speed limit, and for a good reason. Beyond that, the ear hears no improvement. Let's face it, the sonic difference between 24/96khz and 24/192khz is identifiable upon very close scrutiny, but very slight at best. At 24bit depth, you already have far more dynamic range than any analog recording and playback device. At 192 thousand samples a second you are already mimicking analog's continuous capture capabilities, supposedly analog's trump card on digital.

    DXD is really a recording format, not a playback format(even though I can play it back in its native form on my system). 32/352.8khz is really beyond what is needed on any consumer format. It was designed to give plenty of bit overhead for post production purposes, so we could record the audio at 24/176 or 24/192khz, and still have enough bits for equalization, level changes, and editing in post production. So if you record at 32/352.8, edit, equalize and level at the same bit and sample rate, when you downconvert the results to 24/192khz, it is perceptively lossless to the ears. Everything is done beyond the capabilities of the human ear, unlike anything in audio we have heard before it. Everything from microphones, mixing desks and DAW's, and editing software operates at resolutions beyond what we can hear, and that is the beauty of DXD, and 24/192khz audio. Any damage done to the recording from downconverting from 32 to 24bits, would still be beyond the resolving capabilities of our ears(and equipment). We have never had that auditory advantage in audio production(and reproduction) in its history.
    All great news. Not only have we reached this point, but it’s also available to consumers. Now we just need the masses to embrace it. Thanks!


    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Yes there are. But they are all priced in the stratosphere, which is why they are not really being talked about anywhere. The masses cannot afford this kind of convenience unfortunately.
    Yet? I hope you just left the “yet” off at the end by mistake. If it doesn’t become affordable, then the masses will never embrace it. They like to have their 30,000 songs at their fingertips.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  15. #65
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    All great news. Not only have we reached this point, but it’s also available to consumers. Now we just need the masses to embrace it. Thanks!
    Yeah G, so go out and get that classical music BR TODAY!!!




    Yet? I hope you just left the “yet” off at the end by mistake. If it doesn’t become affordable, then the masses will never embrace it. They like to have their 30,000 songs at their fingertips.
    Nope, I left it off on purpose. Every BR server I have seen is expensive, and each model they have released after the first has gotten more expensive each time. These guys are not even trying to create a BR server that the masses can afford, which is why it is not being talked about anywhere.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  16. #66
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Yeah G, so go out and get that classical music BR TODAY!!!






    Nope, I left it off on purpose. Every BR server I have seen is expensive, and each model they have released after the first has gotten more expensive each time. These guys are not even trying to create a BR server that the masses can afford, which is why it is not being talked about anywhere.
    That sucks hairy wrinkled ones.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  17. #67
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by atomicAdam
    So what you are telling me is that you haven't bothered to listen to any high end analog set ups and your opinion about analog and CD is based on a lack of experience and data.

    This really calls into question any opinion you might have on anything since you are willing to form an opinion on something you have never heard.

    I would appreciated if from here on you choose your words wisely when commenting on the forum. We don't need opinions from you on subjects you are ill informed on.
    IT HAS BEEN A FEW YEARS, for one thing I was out of this "hobby" for awhile.
    And "lack" of experience and "data". What have you been smoking? I lived in a non
    digital world for about 25 years, I stood in a local department store when the first players
    were uncrated and displayed. And my mouth dropped when I first heard a CD player.
    This was the great devide, the day the world changed.
    My "opinion" is the same as everybody else in the world, save a few so called "audiophiles" who are doing their best to undo the digital revolution.
    THEY ARENT HAVING MUCH SUCCESS.
    A friend showed me his IPHONE the other night, I plugged it into my 400 dollar YAMAHA
    desktop audio system, and it sounded pretty good.
    My "opinion" about analog and CD? Well, ones dead and the others dying.
    I constantly hear so called "audiophiles" expound on why a 1934 SET tube antique
    is "better" than a modern solid state amp, well, heres a clue, ace.
    NOBODY CARES. They are too busy downloading cheap MP3 garbage off the net,
    and playing it on their Drea phones.
    The battle is not between analog and digital, that battle has been lost a long time ago,
    the battle is to increase bit rates, use of lossless codecs, to educate young people
    about what decently offered music sounds like.
    But the audiophile sector is not doing that, they are trying to undo the digital revolution,
    trying to convince peeps who know better that their scratchy old records are better than
    pristine digital recordings, failing to notice that few are paying attention.
    And we are going to lose a generation who are too busy Dwnloading cheap low bit
    music to their MP3 players, cell phones, and laptops.
    YOU WANT to educate them about "quality" sound? Well, how can you when your
    version of "quality" is a turntable playing a scratchy vinyl record through a SET
    AMP from the 1939 worlds fair?
    Oh, and for the "record" I HAVE HAD THREE YEARS of electronics training, have been
    into audio since about the age of twelve, and turned 54 Sunday.
    Yamaha, Adcom, Panasonic, Sony, HARMON, Technics, these are just a few of the CD players I have owned(I HAVE OWNED DOZENS).
    I had a YAMAHA "stereo receiver with GENESIS speakers and a Pioneer "snakearm"
    turntable , and later a NAD deck, before a lot on this board were born.
    I HAVE RECORDS from the early 1970's that I BOUGHT,
    You think I don't know that much about this stuff when you are operating from the flawed
    premise that a 100,000 dollar system is a great deal different from a 10,000
    system, when the difference is actually slight, the extra cash going to gain a few tenths
    of a few percent over the cheaper system.
    And you don't even understand what I am saying, that a slight improvement is what you're paying for. And heres' another shocker, ace, if that 100,000 "system is comprised
    of a tube amp and one of those ridiculous 5,000 record players, it will probably sound
    worse than the 10,000 system if that system has modern electronics and a decent CD player. This is what your precious "specs" say anyway.
    But haven't you heard? "audiophiles" don't care about "specs", they care about what they
    "imagine" they are hearing in their little irrelevant world.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  18. #68
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    I constantly hear so called "audiophiles" expound on why a 1934 SET tube antique
    is "better" than a modern solid state amp, well, heres a clue, ace.
    NOBODY CARES. They are too busy downloading cheap MP3 garbage off the net,
    and playing it on their Drea phones.
    The battle is not between analog and digital, that battle has been lost a long time ago,
    the battle is to increase bit rates, use of lossless codecs, to educate young people
    about what decently offered music sounds like.
    But the audiophile sector is not doing that, they are trying to undo the digital revolution,
    trying to convince peeps who know better that their scratchy old records are better than
    pristine digital recordings, failing to notice that few are paying attention.
    And we are going to lose a generation who are too busy Dwnloading cheap low bit
    music to their MP3 players, cell phones, and laptops.
    YOU WANT to educate them about "quality" sound? Well, how can you when your
    version of "quality" is a turntable playing a scratchy vinyl record through a SET
    AMP from the 1939 worlds fair?
    Wow... I actually really agree with Pix here... Even though I have no issue with someone preferring the sound of analog and tubes... I do feel that it is a joke to attempt to convert younger generations to "high quality" sound by talking about turntables and tubes...

    Analog is dead for all but the enthusiasts... so the approach should be to show the iPod gen (technically my generation or maybe I'm the gen just before them) that higher resolution/higher quality digital systems are available...

    Sadly, audiophiles are so divided that we are more often objects of ridicule rather than educators about sound... Instead of pushing High resolution downloads we splinter off supporting turntables, reel to reel, CDs, SACDs and now BluRay Audio... Here's a hint: unlike movies where a physical disc is still practical (to a degree), the masses don't need or want a new disc based format for music... That would be counter to the way most persons listen to music (iPods, phones, laptops) and hence a joke...

  19. #69
    Suspended atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oaktown!
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
    IT HAS BEEN A FEW YEARS, for one thing I was out of this "hobby" for awhile.
    And "lack" of experience and "data". What have you been smoking? I lived in a non
    digital world for about 25 years, I stood in a local department store when the first players
    were uncrated and displayed. And my mouth dropped when I first heard a CD player.
    This was the great devide, the day the world changed.
    My "opinion" is the same as everybody else in the world, save a few so called "audiophiles" who are doing their best to undo the digital revolution.
    THEY ARENT HAVING MUCH SUCCESS.
    A friend showed me his IPHONE the other night, I plugged it into my 400 dollar YAMAHA
    desktop audio system, and it sounded pretty good.
    My "opinion" about analog and CD? Well, ones dead and the others dying.
    I constantly hear so called "audiophiles" expound on why a 1934 SET tube antique
    is "better" than a modern solid state amp, well, heres a clue, ace.
    NOBODY CARES. They are too busy downloading cheap MP3 garbage off the net,
    and playing it on their Drea phones.
    The battle is not between analog and digital, that battle has been lost a long time ago,
    the battle is to increase bit rates, use of lossless codecs, to educate young people
    about what decently offered music sounds like.
    But the audiophile sector is not doing that, they are trying to undo the digital revolution,
    trying to convince peeps who know better that their scratchy old records are better than
    pristine digital recordings, failing to notice that few are paying attention.
    And we are going to lose a generation who are too busy Dwnloading cheap low bit
    music to their MP3 players, cell phones, and laptops.
    YOU WANT to educate them about "quality" sound? Well, how can you when your
    version of "quality" is a turntable playing a scratchy vinyl record through a SET
    AMP from the 1939 worlds fair?
    Oh, and for the "record" I HAVE HAD THREE YEARS of electronics training, have been
    into audio since about the age of twelve, and turned 54 Sunday.
    Yamaha, Adcom, Panasonic, Sony, HARMON, Technics, these are just a few of the CD players I have owned(I HAVE OWNED DOZENS).
    I had a YAMAHA "stereo receiver with GENESIS speakers and a Pioneer "snakearm"
    turntable , and later a NAD deck, before a lot on this board were born.
    I HAVE RECORDS from the early 1970's that I BOUGHT,
    You think I don't know that much about this stuff when you are operating from the flawed
    premise that a 100,000 dollar system is a great deal different from a 10,000
    system, when the difference is actually slight, the extra cash going to gain a few tenths
    of a few percent over the cheaper system.
    And you don't even understand what I am saying, that a slight improvement is what you're paying for. And heres' another shocker, ace, if that 100,000 "system is comprised
    of a tube amp and one of those ridiculous 5,000 record players, it will probably sound
    worse than the 10,000 system if that system has modern electronics and a decent CD player. This is what your precious "specs" say anyway.
    But haven't you heard? "audiophiles" don't care about "specs", they care about what they
    "imagine" they are hearing in their little irrelevant world.
    Hey - Stay on topic here buddy. No where did I ever talk about which format was winning and what is the wave of the future. I obviously called you out on your unsubstantiated views and what do you do, you switch the topic. Sounds like I'm right about your lack of experience and knowledge.

    So, once again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Now, about the topic you've changed the subject to, I agree with you almost 100% - but that isn't what I asked you about earlier.

    So, again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Just answer the question Pix.

  20. #70
    Ajani
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by atomicAdam
    Hey - Stay on topic here buddy. No where did I ever talk about which format was winning and what is the wave of the future. I obviously called you out on your unsubstantiated views and what do you do, you switch the topic. Sounds like I'm right about your lack of experience and knowledge.

    So, once again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Now, about the topic you've changed the subject to, I agree with you almost 100% - but that isn't what I asked you about earlier.

    So, again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Just answer the question Pix.
    Let's not be so harsh Adam... If we actually require members to have a reasonable basis for their opinions, rather than just bashing products they've never even listened to, then what kind of forum would we have?

    The last time I challenged a forum member on having unsubstantiated views, he started stalking me around the forum and calling me names... And I thought I left kindergarten well over 2 decades ago
    Last edited by Ajani; 12-10-2010 at 05:04 PM.

  21. #71
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by atomicAdam
    Hey - Stay on topic here buddy. No where did I ever talk about which format was winning and what is the wave of the future. I obviously called you out on your unsubstantiated views and what do you do, you switch the topic. Sounds like I'm right about your lack of experience and knowledge.

    So, once again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Now, about the topic you've changed the subject to, I agree with you almost 100% - but that isn't what I asked you about earlier.

    So, again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Just answer the question Pix.
    I guess this is a point where we will never agree.
    I know where you're going with this, and I AM NOT GOING TO FALL FOR IT.
    Not my first time to the rodeo.
    What you are trying to get me to say is that I have heard few or none "analog"
    systems costing 100 grand, and then you're going to cart out some 100 grand system
    'that you claim is superior because of all of the money poured into it.
    WHAT YOUR ERROR IS is that you think you can actually pour money into a certain type
    of system and it will sound great because of it. Big problem with that(its called putting lipstick on a pig).
    MAINLY that no matter how much crystal meth you pump into a racing horse,
    it will never outrace even the most underpowered of cars.
    And no matter how many nines you engineer a tube amp and record player to,
    they will NEVER outperform even a modestly built Solid state amp and digital source.
    I used to work at an airport, and on all but the cheapest planes, turboprops and jets
    are replacing (or have replaced) piston engines, main reason being that they are better on all counts.
    Sometimes something is so inherently inferior and obsolete that you cant make it
    a contender no matter how much you pour into it. AND even if you could, that would be irrelevant to anybody outside of a lab. Very few can or will pay for such a system.
    THATS WHY PEOPLE drive cars instead of fly helicopters to work.
    I have heard plenty of tube gear at various audio stores here and there , but none of it
    beat even modestly priced solid state gear, and it wouldn't matter if it cost 10 grand or a 100 grand, its still wouldn't be able to overcome fundamental shortcomings of the form factor.
    HOW MANY "tube" sets do you see at modern electronics stores? RIGHT.
    And there is a reason for that. Tubes produce gobs of distortion, call it that "warm"
    tube sound all you want, its still not accurate. TUBES die early, but what has that to do with the sound? Well, while they are dying their performance changes, even with new ones their performance changes with their temperature, age, YOU NAME IT.
    And the heat they produce is bad for anything in the unit.
    I used to work on some old tube units, back when I went through electronics.
    PEOPLE DIDN'T PINE for the latest "tube" amp, mostly they couldn't wait to get rid of one
    for a new solid state amp. THE TUBE fad is something that started picking up in the eighties in earnest. ONE good thing about it, The Soviet bloc has a place to unload
    their obsolete junk.
    But again you are not paying attention, doesn't matter how many analog systems
    I have heard, no matter what the cost, ten grand, one hundred grand, one million dollars,
    you can't pump money into something that is basically obsolete and make it superior
    to something that is inherently more advanced. And even if you could, what would be the point? Why waste the money? Might as well be trying to turn a PIPER cub into a
    lunar lander.
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  22. #72
    Phila combat zone JoeE SP9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,710
    Quote Originally Posted by atomicAdam
    Hey - Stay on topic here buddy. No where did I ever talk about which format was winning and what is the wave of the future. I obviously called you out on your unsubstantiated views and what do you do, you switch the topic. Sounds like I'm right about your lack of experience and knowledge.

    So, once again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Now, about the topic you've changed the subject to, I agree with you almost 100% - but that isn't what I asked you about earlier.

    So, again, I ask you, how many $100,000.00+ analog systems have you heard?

    Just answer the question Pix.
    C'mon aa. You're wasting time and words. The "fount of all audio knowledge" never answers a question like that.

    He doesn't need to listen to anything. He knows it all.
    ARC SP9 MKIII, VPI HW19, Rega RB300
    Marcof PPA1, Shure, Sumiko, Ortofon carts, Yamaha DVD-S1800
    Behringer UCA222, Emotiva XDA-2, HiFimeDIY
    Accuphase T101, Teac V-7010, Nak ZX-7. LX-5, Behringer DSP1124P
    Front: Magnepan 1.7, DBX 223SX, 2 modified Dynaco MK3's, 2, 12" DIY TL subs (Pass El-Pipe-O) 2 bridged Crown XLS-402
    Rear/HT: Emotiva UMC200, Acoustat Model 1/SPW-1, Behringer CX2310, 2 Adcom GFA-545

  23. #73
    Forum Regular pixelthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    tuscaloosa
    Posts
    5,528

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
    C'mon aa. You're wasting time and words. The "fount of all audio knowledge" never answers a question like that.

    He doesn't need to listen to anything. He knows it all.
    The "fount" of all knowledge has been around the block a few times.
    You want to waste coin on an obsolete system that can't outperform a 200 dollar Sherwood
    stereo receiver, go ahead, knock yourself out. ITS a free country.
    YOU WANT two SET monoblocks , about ten watts each, hooked up to a 5,000
    record player, go ahead. ENJOY your audible distortion, trying to find replacement tubes,
    having the adventure that is ownership of an obsolete piece of gear.
    HARLEY or BMW motorcycle? Your choice, really.
    Just remember, you can't deny reality. Commies made the same circuital arguments
    when trying to explain away their idiotic system. It still fell apart.
    And your tube system, weather 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 , will still stink on ice compared to solid state. No way around it.
    LG 42", integra 6.9, B&W 602s2, CC6 center, dm305rears, b&w
    sub asw2500
    Panny DVDA player
    sharp Aquos BLU player
    pronto remote, technics antique direct drive TT
    Samsung SACD/DVDA player
    emotiva upa-2 two channel amp

  24. #74
    Suspended atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oaktown!
    Posts
    1,774
    Well Pix,

    All I can say is that I'm pretty disappointed in you as a member on this forum. I guess it is good to have you around as entertainment value but otherwise your willingness to jump to conclusions without hearing a system first makes your opinion on audio mute.

    If you had answered yes I was just going to say, OK, well, you gave it a shot and you like this other thing better. Who am I to say what you should or shouldn't like. But since you weren't even able to answer my question, and you assumed I was going to take you to a Rodeo, you never got the chance to let me say that.

    Now if you had answered no, I would have encouraged you to go and give a $100,000.00+ vinyl system a listen, and a $100,000.00+ digital system a listen.

    But since you didn't answer the question, and tried to switch the topic when I called you out, and you assumed I was going to take you to a Rodeo, I'm going to be watching your post for your unsubstantiated flame bating and I will act upon such post in a fashion that may end up with your banishment from the forums.

    Now for me, at that price point and above, the source starts to become mute for me. I've heard, because I actually like to hear something before forming an opinion, unlike you, tube, analog, vinyl and tape, CD, computer, solid state, systems at that price point and above and they all sound fantastic. Sure there are certain qualities of one system I may like above another, but their ability to reproduce analog vs digital source material is often quite equal.

  25. #75
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Rodeo? There's a rodeo in town? Can I join you two?


    Sorry. I just couldn't stop myself. I'm a baaaaaaad poster.
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •