SACD Player Recommendation
west
would like to enjoy the full benefits of the SACD format without spending a
king' ransom. Thanks in advance.
Cordially,
west
Soundhaspriority
"west" <rest...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:8l4Hh.568$Ih.297@trnddc02...
hundred bucks. Plastic front panel, Burr-Brown DACs.
It bests my Musical Fidelity $2K 192K oversampling DAC, at 5% of the price.
Bob Morein
Dresher, PA
(215) 646-4894
Harry Lavo
I'll give you my usual recommendation....it is very hard to beat Sony's
XA2000ES pure-DSD (in direct mode) at any price under $2000...and it costs
only about 15% of that on eBay. I use one with an ARC tube preamplifier and
the sound is gorgeous. The SACD player is as transparent as any on the
market...not as smooth perhaps as some of the super-expensive gear, but very
very good. At a price under $300 you can get started and decided for
yourself whether good enough is good enough. For me it was and is.
paul packer
<now...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>It bests my Musical Fidelity $2K 192K oversampling DAC, at 5% of the price.
That must be somewhat upsetting.
Arny Krueger
news:45ed3760...@news.iprimus.com.au
Not for me. ;-)
Soundhaspriority
All of us have that instinct. Progress is unsettling. But it really is a
remark about SACD versus CD. Remember when "upsampling DAC" was the buzz
phrase? I'm saddened that progress in audio appears to be coming to an end,
caused by the lack of interest in the young.
I am going to satisfy this niche in my brain by making DVD-A recordings with
which I can experience much of the benefit of SACD.
Arny Krueger
news:87udnb0hTKSy7XDY...@giganews.com
> "paul packer" <pac...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:45ed3760...@news.iprimus.com.au...
>> On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 21:41:34 -0500, "Soundhaspriority"
>> <now...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> It bests my Musical Fidelity $2K 192K oversampling
>>> DAC, at 5% of the price.
>>
>> That must be somewhat upsetting.
> All of us have that instinct.
No, just the people who don't know digital technology and psychoacoustics
well enough.
> Progress is unsettling.
It can be, for those who find keeping up to be challenging. Personally, I
relish true technological advances. As far as that goes, I relish the
pseudo-technological advances because they provide an opportunity to clear
the newly-fouled air.
> But it really is a remark about SACD versus CD. Remember when
> "upsampling DAC" was the buzz phrase?
Upsampling DAC was also snake oil. That's in contrast to oversampling DAC
which was a true technological advance, because it vastly improved the
price/performance of DACs.
> I'm saddened that
> progress in audio appears to be coming to an end, caused
> by the lack of interest in the young.
Or alternatively, many people smartened up.
> I am going to satisfy this niche in my brain by making
> DVD-A recordings with which I can experience much of the
> benefit of SACD.
The alleged superiority of the SACD over DVD-A is just more snake oil. In
fact SACD has less dynamic range for music than either 192/24 or 96/24
DVD-A.
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
Arnii "Super Genius" Krooger tells it like it is.
> I relish the pseudo-technological advances because they provide an opportunity to clear the newly-fouled air.
Please use some Kroologic to demonstrate the meaning of that Kroo-klaim.
Otherwise a sane human being has to assume you're still locked in a futile
search for a way to de-Kroogerize yourself.
> snake oil
> snake oil
I think you can be snottier than that, Arnii. Try harder.
> Or alternatively, many people smartened up.
There it is -- the quintessence of snottiness we've come to expect from
Arnii "Big Shit" Krooger. Here's your brown star.
--
Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.
Harry Lavo
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:y86dnWYTEInsPXDY...@comcast.com...
Arny continues to extoll the merits of S/N as if a) that is all that
matters, and b) it doesn't matter where such S/N lies, in or out of the
audible spectrum.
AS to dynamics, as opposed to dynamic range.....take a look at the 3us
impulse response on the following charts....notice which one mimics the
actual impulse...both height (strength) of the impulse and lack of
pre-ripple and time-smear. Notice that this holds true even against
352kh/32bit DXD pcm processing. Notice that this holds true whether or not
we are speaking of 64fse DSD (SACD) or 128fse DSD (mastering). It is
inherent in the technology. Notice also that the inherent higher noise of
SACD (a so-called detriment) takes place well above 20khz and peaks
at -80db. Even Arny will have trouble arguing that those are audibly
significant (although that doesn't keep him from using them to belittle
SACD).
http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm
Now bear with me for a paragraph or two of comparison listening comment from
one of the earliest such descriptions I published on Usenet, from early
2003:
(quote from response to post by the late Stewart Pinkerton)
> Unfortunately, it is technically vastly inferior to DVD-A.
> >It appears, that despite its limitations, SACD seems to be taking off.
> Put that down to Sony marketing muscle.
That being said, nonetheless to my ears the SACD sounds better.
I have two SACDs with DVD-A counterparts. in the case of "3 Doors Down" the
mix is identical by admission of the mixing engineer and the only difference
is that in the workstations the output was feed into DSD files and PCM
files. The DVD-A PCM is all 24/96. This is a current recording recorded
directly into ProTools at 24/192 In the case of Swing Live, the same
microphone (a soundfield) was apparently used directly into a PCM
workstation and a DSD workstation.
In both cases, the results sound different. The difference can best be
described as follows:
* the DVD-A sounds like a "cleaner" CD..cleaner in the sense that the treble
is smoother, their is more apparent depth, and the bass seems to be a little
more dimensional than on CD.
* the SACD sounds much more like live music...in the sense that there is a
complete freedom from "mechanical" and high frequencies seem completely
natural and "float" in space very much like the real thing. In addition,
their is a greater apparent sense of dynamics and dimensionality,
particularly in the bass.
I've also had a chance to compare the SACD of Verdi's Requiem (Philadelphia
Orchestra) to a 7.5ips prerecorded tape from the '60's (fourth generation by
my estimation). They both obviously derive from the same source and sound
very much the same...with that same effortless floating quality that live
music has. The SACD is actually more transparent (as it should be if they
went back to the master tape) while the pre-recorded tape has slightly
enhanced voices, IMO a result of somewhat built up harmonic distortion from
the tape copies.
IMO opinion and in the opinion of many others, SACD sounds "more real"
despite whatever theoretical limitations it might have, versus DVD-A. At
least as implemented in reasonably priced low-end high-end front-end
equipment.
(end quote)
*THAT* is how the cleaner, more accurate transient response of DSD (SACD)
shows up even against the already excellent hi-rez 96/24 PCM and against
excellent quality pre-recorded tape Against CD's the contrast is even
greater. As I concluded later in another thread:
(quote in response to Chung)
I'm not sure what your point is here. My issues have always largely been
with the high-end of the CD standard. And secondarily with CD's tendency to
have less depth and a 'flatter' bass and lower midrange dimensionality.
SACD solves these problems wonderfully. So does DVD-A. Both assuming
equipment that allows the advantage to come through, of course.
(end quote)
Arny's POV is increasingly becoming a minority POV among audio
professionals, who increasingly embrace the idea that DSD is an audibly (but
not commercially) superior means of recording and archiving sound. It's
clean, accurate transient behavior and universality, both due to its one-bit
nature, is the reason.
Arny Krueger
news:bc-dnfQH0YIPX3DY...@comcast.com
> "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:y86dnWYTEInsPXDY...@comcast.com...
>> The alleged superiority of the SACD over DVD-A is just
>> more snake oil. In fact SACD has less dynamic range for
>> music than either 192/24 or 96/24 DVD-A.
> Arny continues to extoll the merits of S/N as if a) that
> is all that matters, and b) it doesn't matter where such
> S/N lies, in or out of the audible spectrum.
Just goes to show that Harry doesn't know the difference between dynamic
range and S/N. Pitiful.
> AS to dynamics, as opposed to dynamic range.....take a
> look at the 3us impulse response on the following
> charts....notice which one mimics the actual
> impulse...both height (strength) of the impulse and lack
> of pre-ripple and time-smear.
That's not is not about dynamics at all Harry, that is bandwidth. Thanks for
showing that you don't know the difference between performance in the
amplitude domain (dynamics) and frequency domain (bandwidth).
> Notice that this holds
> true even against 352kh/32bit DXD pcm processing. Notice
> that this holds true whether or not we are speaking of
> 64fse DSD (SACD) or 128fse DSD (mastering). It is
> inherent in the technology. Notice also that the
> inherent higher noise of SACD (a so-called detriment)
> takes place well above 20khz and peaks at -80db. Even Arny will have
> trouble arguing that those
> are audibly significant (although that doesn't keep him
> from using them to belittle SACD).
Harry, where are the results of your reliable listening tests supporting the
existance of any audible differences between any of these formats? If these
formats differ as much as you seem to claim, you should be able to readily
demonstrate the difference with your ears, and your audio system.
> http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm
Meaningless, since this is the performance of a certain commercial product,
and not necessarily representative of the inherent properties of the
respective formats.
BTW Harry's URL is wrong, the correct URL is
http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24_present.htm . Speaks to the care with which
Harry does his analysis.
<snip baseless opinions>
Bret Ludwig
identical title in DVD-A and SACD to compare them against, bith
somewhat limiting factors, I have to say that SACD seems to sound
better to me.
Arny Krueger
news:1173214374.6...@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com
In the end it has a lot to do with whether you believe the results of just
listening to two alternatives presented in as similar way as possible but
not identified, or whether you base your judgements on experiences where any
number of irrelevant factors can intrude.
Bret Ludwig
> > Based strictly on subjective listening AND with the lack
> > of the identical title in DVD-A and SACD to compare them
> > against, bith somewhat limiting factors, I have to say
> > that SACD seems to sound better to me.
>
> In the end it has a lot to do with whether you believe the results of just
> listening to two alternatives presented in as similar way as possible but
> not identified, or whether you base your judgements on experiences where any
> number of irrelevant factors can intrude.
Why I presented this opinion as tentative.
Both DVD-A and SACD clearly can sound better than standard CD and
both can sound better than vinyl. I'm not certain either can equal 15
ips 1/2" two track tape. The latter can not only be indistinguishable
from a live mic feed but can be indistinguishable for at least three
to four generations. Digital copies on the digital level are of course
perfect but if you had to go through an ADC and a DAC on each
generation could these digital media equal the best pure analog
solution?
But until the industry makes a very carefully controlled comparison
possible I'm inclined to think that while DVD-A is superior in theory,
SACD sounds better, but not radically so.
My recommendation is to buy a reasonably priced universal player. At
present none are commercially available with a good convenient volume
control and low impedance output desireable for directly driving power
amps, but a DIYer could fix that starting with any of several
reasonably priced models. While volume control can be done on the
digital level, I still prefer a good matched stepped mechanical
attenuator with a large knob on the front, with or without a motor for
remote control. Mcintosh has the MCD201, although it does not play DVD-
As, and is IMO somewhat overpriced.
MCD201
Guest Services:
Front Top Rear MCD201
SACD/CD Player
# Plays CDs, CD-R, CD-RW, SACD and MP3.
# Transport rotates CDs at 4 times normal read speed and SACD discs 2
times normal read speed to extract all the information from the disc.
# Separate Fixed and Variable Outputs.
# Balanced and Unbalanced Outputs.
The MCD201 will play your CDs, CD-R, CD-RW, SACD and MP3. Utilizing a
purpose-designed transport that spins CDs at 4 times normal read speed
and SACD discs at 2 times normal read speed gives the laser multiple
chances to extract and refocus through imperfect discs resulting in
fewer errors. The MCD201 gives new life to many previously unplayable
discs.
A unique feature is a precision analog volume control on both the
front panel and remote that allows direct connection to a power
amplifier for a CD player only system. An amplifier and speakers are
all that is needed with the MCD201! Both balanced and unbalanced
variable outputs swing up to 6 volts to effortlessly drive any power
amp directly.
http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/mcprod/shopdisplayproducts.asp?hid=1&id=19&cat=Sources&prodid=1119&product=MCD201
Bret Ludwig
> A unique feature is a precision analog volume control on both the
> front panel and remote that allows direct connection to a power
> amplifier for a CD player only system. An amplifier and speakers are
> all that is needed with the MCD201! Both balanced and unbalanced
> variable outputs swing up to 6 volts to effortlessly drive any power
I would add that I have auditioned the MCD201. Its performance with
SACDs is about the same as much (much much) less expensive universal
players, which is still very good. With CDs its performance is quite
good, better than the universal player alone, but using the Benchmark
DAC is a small improvement. However, using the cheap universal player
as a transport vis-a-vis the Mc is absolutely indistinguishable when
the outboard DAC is employed, and the pair are much cheaper than the
Mc.
Another disappointment with Mc players in the past has been that
unlike their analog products, Mc has totally ended support on earlier
optical disc players when the transport becomes unobtainable. Given
the large sums they sell for I think that's very poor support. It
would certainly be possible for Mc to update older player chassis with
a more modern transport and a controller and firmware.
Harry Lavo
>snip Arnies attempts to show off by blathering irrelevancies<
>> Notice that this holds
>> true even against 352kh/32bit DXD pcm processing. Notice
>> that this holds true whether or not we are speaking of
>> 64fse DSD (SACD) or 128fse DSD (mastering). It is
>> inherent in the technology. Notice also that the
>> inherent higher noise of SACD (a so-called detriment)
>> takes place well above 20khz and peaks at -80db. Even Arny will have
>> trouble arguing that those
>> are audibly significant (although that doesn't keep him
>> from using them to belittle SACD).
>
> Harry, where are the results of your reliable listening tests supporting
> the existance of any audible differences between any of these formats? If
> these formats differ as much as you seem to claim, you should be able to
> readily demonstrate the difference with your ears, and your audio system.
>
>> http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm
>
> Meaningless, since this is the performance of a certain commercial
> product, and not necessarily representative of the inherent properties of
> the respective formats.
First, note that Arny has snipped without attribution the very tests and
comparisons that I cited the results of...including the fact that the test
recordings were chosen especially because they were based on the identical,
uncompressed recordings in the comparative media.
>
> BTW Harry's URL is wrong, the correct URL is
> http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24_present.htm . Speaks to the care with
> which Harry does his analysis.
Actually, Arnie, the page I cited has changed and when I was referred to it
it contained the graphs on that same page, much smaller. Obviously a page
has been added to increase the size of the charts. Nonetheless, it is the
charts themselves that are important, not your blatherings in an attempt to
discredit me. I notice you have nothing to say about what lies there. But
once again, you have snipped my commentary and observations to prevent the
reader from making his own judgements. You continue to amaze me with your
blatent dishonesty and unwillingness/inability to engage in any meaningful
discussion of DSD as it emerges as a stronger and stronger pro audio
technology, simply because you might have to acknowledge that you were
premature in your dismissal of same five years ago.
> <snip baseless opinions>
paul packer
<now...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>caused by the lack of interest in the young.
Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
Harry Lavo
And in the end you continue to excuse yourself, who have never done such a
test or even the kind of careful comparisons I have outlined, but that
doesn't stop you from denigrating anybody who holds a pro-sacd point of
view. And to ignore those few engineers and other audio professionals who
have had a chance to compare DSD to a live feed, who proclaim it closer to
transparent than *any* PCM comparison they have made under similar
conditions. Here's a recent antecdotal report from a well-regarded reviewer
who has had access to this comparison:
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue30/emm.htm
dizzy
>(quote from response to post by the late Stewart Pinkerton)
Did he really die?
Sander deWaal
>>caused by the lack of interest in the young.
>Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
>shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
Far be it from me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, Paul, Ringo!), but
shouldn't that be: ..."Far be it from me..."?
;-)
--
- Maggies are an addiction for life. -
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
paul packer said:
> >caused by the lack of interest in the young.
> Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
> shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
No, but if your interpretation of Robert's bizarre locution is accurate,
it should be "among the young" or "by the young".
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
Harry Lavo said:
> > whether you base your judgements on experiences where
> > any number of irrelevant factors can intrude.
> And in the end you continue to excuse yourself, who have never done such a
> test or even the kind of careful comparisons I have outlined, but that
> doesn't stop you from denigrating anybody who holds a pro-sacd point of
> view.
The rules of the "debating trade" are fully compatible with Kroopocrisy.
Harry Lavo
"dizzy" <di...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:8nvru2lt4upqnuel2...@4ax.com...
> Harry Lavo wrote:
>
>>(quote from response to post by the late Stewart Pinkerton)
>
> Did he really die?
I was told he did, and he has not posted since. I don't know for sure.
TT
Arny you have not commented on my post "Spectral Analyses
192/24 for Arny". Doesn't it appear on your server or are
you ignoring my efforts to oblige your recent request.
Regards TT
Arny Krueger
> "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:k-Wdnd-C5bWTR3DY...@comcast.com...
>> "Bret Ludwig" <bret...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1173214374.6...@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com
>>
>>> Based strictly on subjective listening AND with the lack
>>> of the identical title in DVD-A and SACD to compare
>>> them against, bith somewhat limiting factors, I have
>>> to say that SACD seems to sound better to me.
>>
>> In the end it has a lot to do with whether you believe
>> the results of just listening to two alternatives
>> presented in as similar way as possible but not
>> identified, or whether you base your judgements on
>> experiences where any number of irrelevant factors can
>> intrude.
>
> And in the end you continue to excuse yourself, who have
> never done such a test or even the kind of careful
> comparisons I have outlined, but that doesn't stop you
> from denigrating anybody who holds a pro-sacd point of
> view.
Delusions of omnsicence noted. How do you know what I have or have not done?
> And to ignore those few engineers and other audio
> professionals who have had a chance to compare DSD to a
> live feed, who proclaim it closer to transparent than
> *any* PCM comparison they have made under similar
> conditions.
It's real simple Harry. If they've done a credible listening test, then I'll
listen to them. Heck, I've listened to them anyway, I just weighted what
they said by the effort they failed to put into their evaluations.
> Here's a recent antecdotal report from a
> well-regarded reviewer who has had access to this
> comparison:
> http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue30/emm.htm
Yup, a guy who uses the alias Dr. Sardonicus is *very* credible.
Did I miss his discussion of his experimental controls, or were there none
at all?
Harry Lavo
>snip<
>
>> http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm
>
> Meaningless, since this is the performance of a certain commercial
> product, and not necessarily representative of the inherent properties of
> the respective formats.
>
> BTW Harry's URL is wrong, the correct URL is
> http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24_present.htm . Speaks to the care with
> which Harry does his analysis.
>
> <snip baseless opinions>
I went back and doublechecked the URL I gave....it does indeed have the
graphs at the bottom of the page....Arny simply overlooked it and went to
the "Features and Benefits Page" from the menu at the top of the page I
referenced. The "Features and Benefits Page" has the same identical graphs
I referenced...either set will do.
But if Arny couldn't find the graphs on the page I referenced, then he is
the one being sloppy, not I.
RapidRonnie
> "dizzy" <d...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
Too bad it wasn't Allison. He's an even bigger jackoff.
RapidRonnie
> > A unique feature is a precision analog volume control on both the
> > front panel and remote that allows direct connection to a power
> > amplifier for a CD player only system. An amplifier and speakers are
> > all that is needed with the MCD201! Both balanced and unbalanced
> > variable outputs swing up to 6 volts to effortlessly drive any power
> > amp directly.http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/mcprod/shopdisplayproducts.asp?hid=1&id=1...
>
> I would add that I have auditioned the MCD201. Its performance with
> SACDs is about the same as much (much much) less expensive universal
> players, which is still very good. With CDs its performance is quite
> good, better than the universal player alone, but using the Benchmark
> DAC is a small improvement. However, using the cheap universal player
> as a transport vis-a-vis the Mc is absolutely indistinguishable when
> the outboard DAC is employed, and the pair are much cheaper than the
> Mc.
>
The Mc CD players are not very good sounding, but then in my opinion
neither are Mark Levinsons or Jeff Rowland's.
I still have my Gary Galo design mod Philips. I actually prefer it to
much later players, but the Benchmark DAC has a lot of appeal and I am
set to buy one. Is there any disadvantage to getting the new one with
USB as well as the traditional inputs?
> Another disappointment with Mc players in the past has been that
> unlike their analog products, Mc has totally ended support on earlier
> optical disc players when the transport becomes unobtainable. Given
> the large sums they sell for I think that's very poor support. It
> would certainly be possible for Mc to update older player chassis with
> a more modern transport and a controller and firmware.
Yes. Plus, Mc dealers are sometimes really obnoxious. Herb Mooney has
to be the worst. I understand the guy in Paramus, NJ, would give him a
good fight for the title though.
Soundhaspriority
"George M. Middius" <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net> wrote in message
news:650su2h1umes5beo3...@4ax.com...
>
>
> paul packer said:
>
>> >caused by the lack of interest in the young.
>
>> Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
>> shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
>
> No, but if your interpretation of Robert's bizarre locution is accurate,
> it should be "among the young" or "by the young".
>
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
Robert said:
> >> Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
> >> shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
> > No, but if your interpretation of Robert's bizarre locution is accurate,
> > it should be "among the young" or "by the young".
> I find myself slipping. But if no one reads my posts, why should I? :)
Are you saying mr. packer is "no one"?
Arny Krueger
>> <snip baseless opinions>
Not at all. The host web site was so slow that when I pulled up the page,
all there was at the bottom of the page was blank spaces. This persisted for
several minutes. I came back several hours later, and the pictures finally
filled in.
But at usual you're obfuscating and whining Harry.
Deal with this:
Soundhaspriority
"George M. Middius" <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net> wrote in message
>
>
> Robert said:
>
>> >> Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
>> >> shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
>
>> > No, but if your interpretation of Robert's bizarre locution is
>> > accurate,
>> > it should be "among the young" or "by the young".
>
>> I find myself slipping. But if no one reads my posts, why should I? :)
>
> Are you saying mr. packer is "no one"?
>
I must have fallen asleep! What was that again?
paul packer
@ comcast . net> wrote:
>
>
>Robert said:
>
>> >> Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
>> >> shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
>
>> > No, but if your interpretation of Robert's bizarre locution is accurate,
>> > it should be "among the young" or "by the young".
>
>> I find myself slipping. But if no one reads my posts, why should I? :)
>
>Are you saying mr. packer is "no one"?
No putting words in other people's mouths, George.
paul packer
wrote:
> You continue to amaze me with your
>blatent dishonesty and unwillingness/inability to engage in any meaningful
>discussion
Why? You've seen it all before.
paul packer
paul packer
wrote:
>pac...@iprimus.com.au (paul packer) said:
>
>
>>>caused by the lack of interest in the young.
>
>
>>Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
>>shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
>
>
>Far be it from me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, Paul, Ringo!), but
>shouldn't that be: ..."Far be it from me..."?
Er...no, it should be "Far be it for me...." Neither of us got it
right. I guess it's a draw, but at least the RAO rule that anyone
correcting someone's grammar will themselves make an error is intact.
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
paul packer said:
> >Far be it from me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, Paul, Ringo!), but
> >shouldn't that be: ..."Far be it from me..."?
> Er...no, it should be "Far be it for me...."
Wrong!
> Neither of us got it right.
Except for Sander, who did get it right.
paul packer
@ comcast . net> wrote:
>
>
>paul packer said:
>
>> >Far be it from me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, Paul, Ringo!), but
>> >shouldn't that be: ..."Far be it from me..."?
>
>> Er...no, it should be "Far be it for me...."
>
>Wrong!
Sorry, George, I have to pull you up on that. I don't know if it's a
cultural thing, but we say, "Far be it for me..." Definitely not
"from".
paul packer
<now...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>
>"George M. Middius" <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net> wrote in message
>news:pt8su254qbef47gfr...@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> Robert said:
>>
>>> >> Far be in for me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, George!), but
>>> >> shouldn't that be .."lack of interest from the young?"
>>
>>> > No, but if your interpretation of Robert's bizarre locution is
>>> > accurate,
>>> > it should be "among the young" or "by the young".
>>
>>> I find myself slipping. But if no one reads my posts, why should I? :)
>>
>> Are you saying mr. packer is "no one"?
>>
>Paul is just a dr... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Hmmm...what am I to make of that?
Arny Krueger
I'll repeat the answer that Harry deceptively removed from the flow of my
post:
The tests you cite Harry lack proper experimental controls.
>> BTW Harry's URL is wrong, the correct URL is
>> http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24_present.htm . Speaks to
>> the care with which Harry does his analysis.
> Actually, Arnie, the page I cited has changed and when I
> was referred to it it contained the graphs on that same
> page, much smaller. Obviously a page has been added to
> increase the size of the charts. Nonetheless, it is the
> charts themselves that are important, not your
> blatherings in an attempt to discredit me.
You've done enough butchering of posts on your own Harry. You whined and
blathered to obfuscate my responses.
> I notice you have nothing to say about what lies there.
That's a lie. Here's what I said:
>> Meaningless, since this is the performance of a certain
>> commercial product, and not necessarily representative
>> of the inherent properties of the respective formats.
> But once
> again, you have snipped my commentary and observations to
> prevent the reader from making his own judgements.
I'll repeat the answer that Harry deceptively removed from the flow of my
post:
The tests you cite Harry lack proper experimental controls.
> You
> continue to amaze me with your blatent dishonesty and
> unwillingness/inability to engage in any meaningful
> discussion of DSD as it emerges as a stronger and
> stronger pro audio technology,
One product does not make a market trend.
> simply because you might have to acknowledge that you were premature in
> your
> dismissal of same five years ago.
The market has spoken. SACD and DVD-A media sales have fallen dramatically.
The market found out that the emperor had no clothes.
>> <snip baseless opinions>
Arny Krueger
Perfect setup for Pinkerton to point out that the reports of his death were
exagerrated.
It takes a dupe to make this work of course, so Harry steps up...
LOL!
Harry Lavo
Well, that's funny Arny since the Meitner-generated graphs of a 4us impulse
response that were circulated by Ray Kimber at the last few audio shows
showed exactly the same thing as far as impulse response is concerned.
IIRC, you response was "may have been generated in Photoshop". LOL!!
Harry Lavo
>snip, irrelevant to following<
> Not at all. The host web site was so slow that when I pulled up the page,
> all there was at the bottom of the page was blank spaces. This persisted
> for several minutes. I came back several hours later, and the pictures
> finally filled in.
Time for a new machine, Arny. On my hardly SOTA Athlon 3800 machine, the
graphics take all of about three seconds to appear.
>snip, irrelevant to the above<
Harry Lavo
>snip, irrelevant to the following<
>
>> simply because you might have to acknowledge that you were premature in
>> your
>> dismissal of same five years ago.
>
> The market has spoken. SACD and DVD-A media sales have fallen
> dramatically. The market found out that the emperor had no clothes.
Well, Arny, it's nice to see you still haven't forgotten your old McDonalds
gambit. Still consistently used when your technical arguments don't stand
up, I see.
Harry Lavo
Come out, come out, wherever you are, Stewart! Arny (with me as dupe) has
invited you.
Arny Krueger
news:45ee0869$1...@quokka.wn.com.au
No, I just lost track of the post.
The spectral response shown is weird to say the least. I'm speaking of the
band of of noise around 29 KHz.
Arny Krueger
> "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:PuSdnQzXvPFeJXPY...@comcast.com...
>> "Harry Lavo" <hl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:jqadnUD-o_NzZnDY...@comcast.com
>
>> snip, irrelevant to the following<
>
>>
>>> simply because you might have to acknowledge that you
>>> were premature in your
>>> dismissal of same five years ago.
>>
>> The market has spoken. SACD and DVD-A media sales have
>> fallen dramatically. The market found out that the
>> emperor had no clothes.
> Well, Arny, it's nice to see you still haven't forgotten
> your old McDonalds gambit.
Wrong Harry. SACD players and media are generally positioned as higher end
products. They never ever made it into the McDonald's market. The obvious
lesson is that in this higher end market, SACD and DVD-A simply lacked legs.
It is an incontrovertable fact that there is zero evidence that the SACD and
DVD-A technologies provide even an audible diffrerence in anybody's home
system, if reasonble comparison techniques are used. If the difference were
as great as you will probably claim to your dying day, it should be pretty
easy to demonstrate.
Harry, you seem to be just as incapable of resolving differences in the
realm of marketing as you are in resolving differences in the area of
technology.
Arny Krueger
>> But at usual you're obfuscating and whining Harry.
>>
>> Deal with this:
>>
>> Meaningless, since this is the performance of a certain
>> commercial product, and not necessarily representative
>> of the inherent properties of the respective formats.
> Well, that's funny Arny since the Meitner-generated
> graphs of a 4us impulse response that were circulated by
> Ray Kimber at the last few audio shows showed exactly the
> same thing as far as impulse response is concerned. IIRC,
> you response was "may have been generated in Photoshop". LOL!!
Harry, you've been caught in yet another lie if you can't provide evidence
of this from google.
Anybody who wants to can try this reasonable google retrieval:
meitner photoshop author:arny
and watch is come up
"did not match any documents"
Arny Krueger
> Time for a new machine, Arny. On my hardly SOTA Athlon
> 3800 machine, the graphics take all of about three
> seconds to appear.
Sorry Harry, but it was about the slowness of the web site, not my desktop
machine. True this particular machine is far from SOTA - it is merely a
2800+ Athlon 64 with 1 GB of RAM. IOW, your delusions of omniscience are
again noted.
I would hardly call an Athlon 3800+ even "hardly SOTA", given that I've been
editing video on a system with 2 GB dual channel RAM, a 3800+ AM2 dual (not
single) core Athlon 64, and 1/4 terrabyte RAID array, for about 6 months.
I would think that a 5000+ dual core AM2 would be more like the current SOTA
in mainstream A64 processors.
Clyde Slick
Arny Krueger a scris:
Arny, the problem isn't your processor, or your RAM, its all of your
snot that's
stuck in your keyboard.
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
Arnii "Big Shit" Krooger is on the warpath.
> Harry
Turdy, you created an attack subthread aimed at Harry. In the past, you've
bitched several times about how horrible it is when others do the same to
you. You've even whined to Mistress Jenn for not taking your tormentors to
task. And now here you are doing the same thing to somebody who's beaten
you at the "debating trade".
Is there any depth of hypocrisy that's too low for you, Mr. Shit?
Harry Lavo
> "Harry Lavo" <hl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:JP2dnZ50wNDUVHPY...@comcast.com
>
>> Time for a new machine, Arny. On my hardly SOTA Athlon
>> 3800 machine, the graphics take all of about three
>> seconds to appear.
>
> Sorry Harry, but it was about the slowness of the web site, not my desktop
> machine. True this particular machine is far from SOTA - it is merely a
> 2800+ Athlon 64 with 1 GB of RAM. IOW, your delusions of omniscience are
> again noted.
Well, the "slowness" of the web site still allowed it to show up on my
machine in about three seconds.
> I would hardly call an Athlon 3800+ even "hardly SOTA", given that I've
> been editing video on a system with 2 GB dual channel RAM, a 3800+ AM2
> dual (not single) core Athlon 64, and 1/4 terrabyte RAID array, for about
> 6 months. I would think that a 5000+ dual core AM2 would be more like the
> current SOTA in mainstream A64 processors.
Your point in all this (other than bashing me) is..... ???
Arny Krueger
Harry, and your point with the post where you started this rukus, other than
obfuscating your inability to answer my critical questions was?????
Soundhaspriority
"paul packer" <pac...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:45ee8b26...@news.iprimus.com.au...
Ehhh? What? What's happening? Did somebody say something?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
west
>
> "west" <rest...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:8l4Hh.568$Ih.297@trnddc02...
> > What would be a good SACD player for my tube audio system in your
opinion?
> > I
> > would like to enjoy the full benefits of the SACD format without
spending
> > a
> > king' ransom. Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Cordially,
> > west
>
> I'll give you my usual recommendation....it is very hard to beat Sony's
> C pure-DSD (in direct mode) at any price under $2000...and it costs
> only about 15% of that on eBay. I use one with an ARC tube preamplifier
and
> the sound is gorgeous. The SACD player is as transparent as any on the
> market...not as smooth perhaps as some of the super-expensive gear, but
very
> very good. At a price under $300 you can get started and decided for
> yourself whether good enough is good enough. For me it was and is.
>
Thanks for remembering the original post.
west
Harry Lavo
What is it about IIRC that you don't understand, Arny? Do you think it
stands for "Instant Information that's Really Concrete?"
For your information, the info Ray passed out wasn't identied in any way
with Meitner, but it was done using his equipment. Nes ces pas?
Do you wish to assert that the photos / information did not exist? There
are probably 4000 attendees who can dispute that.
Harry Lavo
Too lame for any meaningful response. Bye, Arny (you'll have the last word
as ususal).
Harry Lavo
I always try. :-) It annoys me as a reader (as well as if I'm the poster)
when people ignore a simple request's parameters and go off on a long
pontificating rant or promotion.
Arny Krueger
>> meitner photoshop author:arny
The part where you say something you are willing to stand behind, Harry.
> Do you think it stands for "Instant Information that's
> Really Concrete?"
I think it's your cover story for lying, Harry.
> For your information, the info Ray passed out wasn't
> identied in any way with Meitner, but it was done using
> his equipment. Nes ces pas?
When you've got a story you're willing to stand behind Harry, be sure to
post it.
> Do you wish to assert that the photos / information did
> not exist? There are probably 4000 attendees who can
> dispute that.
Meitner is well-known for his unsupportable claims.
Arny Krueger
> I always try. :-)
>..to obfuscate.
> It annoys me as a reader (as well as
> if I'm the poster) when people ignore a simple request's
> parameters and go off on a long pontificating rant or
> promotion.
Unh, like you are prone to do Harry?
Harry Lavo
> "Harry Lavo" <hl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Lf2dnTGnubWRtXLY...@comcast.com
>
>> I always try. :-)
>
>>..to obfuscate.
Thanks for showing your shitiness again, Arny, by cutting and changing the
meaning of the lines above withou any indication to the reader. You are
truly a dishonest man.
Harry Lavo
You know, Arny, there is a world outside of the Internet. I said the photo
was handed out at various industry shows. Did I say it was on the internet?
Does not having it on the Internet make me a liar in Kroologic, Arny?
>
>> What is it about IIRC that you don't understand, Arny?
>
> The part where you say something you are willing to stand behind, Harry.
Meaningless blather once again, Arny.
>> Do you think it stands for "Instant Information that's
>> Really Concrete?"
>
> I think it's your cover story for lying, Harry.
Oh, and how did I lie, Arny?
>
>> For your information, the info Ray passed out wasn't
>> identied in any way with Meitner, but it was done using
>> his equipment. Nes ces pas?
>
> When you've got a story you're willing to stand behind Harry, be sure to
> post it.
I have, Arny. Too bad you are so blinded by oneupsmanship that you can't
read straight.
>
>> Do you wish to assert that the photos / information did
>> not exist? There are probably 4000 attendees who can
>> dispute that.
>
> Meitner is well-known for his unsupportable claims.
Once again, Arny....I didn't say Meitner had anything to do with it....just
that it was done using *his* box, not Digital Audio Denmark's, thus giving
the lie to your laughable claim that the superior pulse response of DSD is
"box dependent"
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
Harry Lavo said:
> It annoys me as a reader (as well as if I'm the poster)
> when people ignore a simple request's parameters and go off on a long
> pontificating rant or promotion.
Thank's Hairy for, admitting Harrye that your incompetence in the debating
trade is as mementose as your hatred of modernitty Harey.
Arny Krueger
>
> Once again, Arny....I didn't say Meitner had anything to
> do with it....just that it was done using *his* box, not
> Digital Audio Denmark's, thus giving the lie to your
> laughable claim that the superior pulse response of DSD
> is "box dependent"
Harry invents a new kind of pulse - one that is not dependent on the device
generating it.
The ultimate irony is that Harry pretends to be a subjectivist, while
obsessing on scope traces for which he can show no reliable connection to
the sound quality of music.
SACD and DVD remain numbers for the sake of numbers.
dizzy
>"dizzy" <di...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:8nvru2lt4upqnuel2...@4ax.com...
>> Harry Lavo wrote:
>>
>>>(quote from response to post by the late Stewart Pinkerton)
>>
>> Did he really die?
>
>
>I was told he did, and he has not posted since. I don't know for sure.
I sure hope not. I thought he was great - extremely knowledgable, and
not afraid to mix it up. I learned a heck of a lot from his postings
- more than from any other usenet poster.
Arny Krueger
Apparently, not enough to make you credible.
dizzy
>"Harry Lavo" <hl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:JP2dnZ50wNDUVHPY...@comcast.com
>
>> Time for a new machine, Arny. On my hardly SOTA Athlon
>> 3800 machine, the graphics take all of about three
>> seconds to appear.
>
>I would hardly call an Athlon 3800+ even "hardly SOTA",
Who cares what you would call it? He did, quite appropriately, call
it "hardly SOTA".
dizzy
>SACD and DVD remain numbers for the sake of numbers.
It's too bad that they did not or could not have come out with, like,
a 88.2kHz stereo format, 16 bits (or maybe more just for marketing's
sake) that would play transparently on existing players. And for
God's sake AGREE ON THE STANDARD.
Between the complexity and cost of proper "surround sound", and the
competing standards...
dizzy
>"dizzy" <di...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:880vu25rt3m869pdi...@4ax.com
>> Harry Lavo wrote:
>>
>>> "dizzy" <di...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:8nvru2lt4upqnuel2...@4ax.com...
>>>> Harry Lavo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (quote from response to post by the late Stewart
>>>>> Pinkerton)
>>>>
>>>> Did he really die?
>>>
>>> I was told he did, and he has not posted since. I don't
>>> know for sure.
>>
>> I sure hope not. I thought he was great - extremely
>> knowledgable, and not afraid to mix it up. I learned a
>> heck of a lot from his postings - more than from any
>> other usenet poster.
>
>Apparently, not enough to make you credible.
OMG! I've been SLAMMED!
paul packer
>pac...@iprimus.com.au (paul packer) wrote:
>
>>>> >Far be it from me to correct someone's grammar (Hi, Paul, Ringo!), but
>>>> >shouldn't that be: ..."Far be it from me..."?
>>>
>>>> Er...no, it should be "Far be it for me...."
>>>
>>>Wrong!
>>
>>Sorry, George, I have to pull you up on that. I don't know if it's a
>>cultural thing, but we say, "Far be it for me..." Definitely not
>>"from".
>
>I thought the same, but curiously...
>http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/farbeit.html
Well, I've never heard anybody ever say, "Far be it from me...", nor
does it appear to make sense, so I won't be changing.
Arny Krueger
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> SACD and DVD remain numbers for the sake of numbers.
>
> It's too bad that they did not or could not have come out
> with, like, a 88.2kHz stereo format, 16 bits (or maybe
> more just for marketing's sake) that would play
> transparently on existing players. And for God's sake
> AGREE ON THE STANDARD.
You still don't get it, do you Dizzy? They already have the CD standard that
is capable of transmitting the full power and glory of music.
> Between the complexity and cost of proper "surround
> sound", and the competing standards...
The audio industry needs to solve actual problems, not made-up ones like
these. SACD and DVD-A are solutions looking for a problem.
Arny Krueger
It's not SOTA or anywhere's near. It is a commodity computer, pure and
simple.
Clyde Slick
Signal a scris:
> "Harry Lavo" <hl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>(quote from response to post by the late Stewart Pinkerton)
> >>
> >> Did he really die?
> >
> >
> >I was told he did, and he has not posted since. I don't know for sure.
>
> stopped posting and he was OK, but that was some time ago.
>
maye he is just on an
extended binge.
Arny Krueger
news:1173360855....@c51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
More likely, Pinky is doing what any number of old regulars like JJ have
done - take advantage of a transition in life to break free of the RAO
habit. He is no longer suffering the indignity of being associated in any
way with the Middiot and his clique of no-brains.
Joe Duffy
I certainly miss Stewart, JJ, Zip and Greg.
Each discussed actual audio, unlike most
regulars on rao now.
RAO has always been the cesspool of newsgroups,
but the new level even bests it's previous
low.
For those who have left but not departed,
I would say that they are probably participating
in life rather than wasting energy here.
Joe
Arny Krueger
news:JELCM...@news.boeing.com
> In article <mtednfMzie-whm3Y...@comcast.com>,
> Arny Krueger <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>> "Clyde Slick" <Mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1173360855....@c51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com
>>> Signal a scris:
>>>> "Harry Lavo" <hl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> (quote from response to post by the late Stewart
>>>>>>> Pinkerton)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did he really die?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I was told he did, and he has not posted since. I
>>>>> don't know for sure.
>>>>
>>>> A poster on uk.rec.audio said he had contact with
>>>> Stewart after he stopped posting and he was OK, but
>>>> that was some time ago.
>>>>
>>> maye he is just on an extended binge.
>>
>> More likely, Pinky is doing what any number of old
>> regulars like JJ have done - take advantage of a
>> transition in life to break free of the RAO habit. He is
>> no longer suffering the indignity of being associated in
>> any way with the Middiot and his clique of no-brains.
> I certainly miss Stewart, JJ, Zip and Greg.
Agreed that the worst of them (Greg) was a mental giant of audio compared to
most of our current regulars of the Middiot persusion. Not even Greg has a
stomach for the current cesspool. Hey everybody, watch Art and George duke
it out for RAO's childish bozo of the day award.
> Each discussed actual audio, unlike most
> regulars on rao now.
Yes, most of these guys would rather argue about how the word audio is
spelled.
> RAO has always been the cesspool of newsgroups,
> but the new level even bests it's previous low.
Agreed. It's despicable state is well-known among the Usenet audio groups.
It's always fun to see them get batted down when they try to post on any of
the groups that are even halfways serious about audio.
> For those who have left but not departed,
> I would say that they are probably participating
> in life rather than wasting energy here.
I've gotten private emails and other communications from many of them,
mostly bemoaning the state of RAO.
_ george @comcast.net George M. Middius
The Krooborg is still "ignoring" me. ;-)
> the Middiot persusion
Arnii, do you get your jollies by depositing stinking lumps of Krooglish
all over the place? Given™ your spectacular skill at expressing yourself,
I'm simply amazed you're unable to hold a real-world job.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> "dizzy" <d...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message> >> "Harry Lavo" <h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:JP2dnZ50wNDUVHPY...@comcast.com
>
> >>> Time for a new machine, Arny. On my hardly SOTA Athlon
> >>> 3800 machine, the graphics take all of about three
> >>> seconds to appear.
>
> >> I would hardly call an Athlon 3800+ even "hardly SOTA",
>
> > Who cares what you would call it? He did, quite
> > appropriately, call it "hardly SOTA".
Good old Arns argues a point that nobody contests:
> It's not SOTA or anywhere's near. It is a commodity computer, pure and
> simple.
You are such an insane old asshole. And apparently, not too bright,
either.
Sander deWaal
>>> Did he really die?
I'm astonished to hear this.
I've had very pleasant e-mail conversations with him, and even a
business transaction.
If this news is true, I'm saddened.
We had our quibbles in the newsgroups, but in e-mail he always was a
humorous, helpful person to me.
--
- Maggies are an addiction for life. -
Harry Lavo
I'm missing something, Arny. Could you please deconstruct the phrase
"hardly SOTA" for me in Krooglish? Apparently it means something quite
different to you than to those of us who use the English language.
Harry Lavo
"Signal" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:sifvu2pk6gjqsijpc...@4ax.com...
> "Harry Lavo" <hl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>(quote from response to post by the late Stewart Pinkerton)
>>>
>>> Did he really die?
>>
>>
>>I was told he did, and he has not posted since. I don't know for sure.
>
> stopped posting and he was OK, but that was some time ago.
>
Well, I hope that was all there was to it. I disagreed with Stewart on
many, many things but never wished him ill, and never will. If he is alive
and avoiding usenet, I can understand that. There are days and weeks I
think that might be the solution for me as well. If he has died, I would
hope somebody could confirm it...I don't know how to refer to him any
longer. JJ we know isn't dead; he posts elsewhere.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
On Mar 8, 10:13 am, "Arny Krueger" <a...@hotpop.com> wrote:
> "Joe Duffy" <d...@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> wrote in message
> > RAO has always been the cesspool of newsgroups,
> > but the new level even bests it's previous low.
>
> Agreed. It's despicable state is well-known among the Usenet audio groups.
> It's always fun to see them get batted down when they try to post on any of
> the groups that are even halfways serious about audio.
Um, Arns, you insane old asshole, I see you getting batted down on
those same groups... LOL!
> > For those who have left but not departed,
> > I would say that they are probably participating
> > in life rather than wasting energy here.
>
> I've gotten private emails and other communications from many of them,
> mostly bemoaning the state of RAO.
Yet you're still here.
What a trooper!
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> More likely, Pinky is doing what any number of old regulars like JJ have
> done - take advantage of a transition in life to break free of the RAO
> habit. He is no longer suffering the indignity of being associated in any
> way with the Middiot and his clique of no-brains.- Hide quoted text -
Poor Arns!
Suffering *indignities*!
LMAO!
Insanity at its best...
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> For those who have left but not departed,
> I would say that they are probably participating
> in life rather than wasting energy here.
Hm. What does this say about you?
George M. Middius
Shhhh! said:
> > I've gotten private emails and other communications from many of them,
> > mostly bemoaning the state of RAO.
> Yet you're still here.
> What a trooper!
The contentious atmosphere of RAO is not Arnii's fault, you know. Mr. Shit
has used the "when in Rome...." excuse more times than anybody can count.
(Google can count, but the Krooborg will tell anybody who'll listen that
Google is a font of lies.)
Kroologic leads from the "I didn't start it" excuse (asserted but
unproven) to the "everybody else is worse" lie, and then to the "why
aren't you picking on the enemies of Kroo?" whine. Getting the Krooborg to
take responsibility for its shitfulness is like nailing Jello to a wall.
--
Krooscience: the antidote to education, experience, and excellence
George M. Middius
Shhhh! said:
> > For those who have left but not departed,
> > I would say that they are probably participating
> > in life rather than wasting energy here.
> Hm. What does this say about you?
It says "Kroopologist".
Clyde Slick
Arny Krueger a scris:
While on the other hand,
you relish suffering indignity.
Arny Krueger
What indignity - having some dogs bark at me? LOL!
Posting on RAO keeps me in practice for suffering fools.
paul packer
wrote:
>"dizzy" <di...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:312vu2df99rbddo9b...@4ax.com
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>> SACD and DVD remain numbers for the sake of numbers.
>>
>> It's too bad that they did not or could not have come out
>> with, like, a 88.2kHz stereo format, 16 bits (or maybe
>> more just for marketing's sake) that would play
>> transparently on existing players. And for God's sake
>> AGREE ON THE STANDARD.
>
>You still don't get it, do you Dizzy? They already have the CD standard that
>is capable of transmitting the full power and glory of music.
If you really believe this, Arny, it's time you reminded us again
about your own system. If we knew what it was we could all get one the
same and get the same enjoyment from ordinary CDs that you appear to.
Between soldering jobs, I mean.
dizzy
>"dizzy" <di...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:312vu2df99rbddo9b...@4ax.com
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>> SACD and DVD remain numbers for the sake of numbers.
>>
>> It's too bad that they did not or could not have come out
>> with, like, a 88.2kHz stereo format, 16 bits (or maybe
>> more just for marketing's sake) that would play
>> transparently on existing players. And for God's sake
>> AGREE ON THE STANDARD.
>
>You still don't get it, do you Dizzy? They already have the CD standard that
>is capable of transmitting the full power and glory of music.
In your opinion. Which, in this case, I tend to agree with. So, I do
"get it", apparently...
However I must admit that I wouldn't mind some (more) "overkill" in
regards to the bandwidth, just to "be sure", and to put all the debate
to rest.
Hell, 50 years from now there's going to be usenet flame wars over
whether 22kHz is enough bandwidth or not.
>> Between the complexity and cost of proper "surround
>> sound", and the competing standards...
>
>The audio industry needs to solve actual problems, not made-up ones like
>these. SACD and DVD-A are solutions looking for a problem.
Well, the surround-sound thing is not actually a bad idea... It's
just complex and expensive to do right, and not only from the
consumer's POV.
dizzy
Which makes his "my hardly SOTA Athlon" statement quite appropriate.
Why on God's green Earth would you nit-pick it? It's fine. Are we
speaking the same English language, Arny?
>It is a commodity computer, pure and simple.
Just because you can produce examples of synonymous words or phrases
does not make what he said inappropriate, Arny.
Harry Lavo
"paul packer" <pac...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:45f09802...@news.iprimus.com.au...
Well, we could duplicate his system, but duplicating his (tin) ears might be
more difficult.
Arny Krueger
>> You still don't get it, do you Dizzy? They already have
>> the CD standard that is capable of transmitting the full
>> power and glory of music.
> If you really believe this, Arny, it's time you reminded
> us again about your own system.
Why would that be relevant?
>If we knew what it was we
> could all get one the same and get the same enjoyment
> from ordinary CDs that you appear to.
When did I say that ordinary CDs are guaranteed to provide you with the
satisfaction that you apparently want from recordings?
I never did. I'm only saying that higher sample rates and larger samples
aren't the silver bullet that only a few highly mislead people like Harry
think they are. If they made the big difference that Harry claims they did,
and if the difference was really all that clear, it would be easy enough for
Harry to provide reliable proof of it.
Arny Krueger
Harry, if the difference is so clear, why can't you provide a reliable
example of it?
Harry Lavo
When is it going to become clear to you Arny that I have no interest in
providing "proof" to anybody. I hear it, I enjoy it, I urge others to try
it in the belief that they too will hear and enjoy it. It is for making
musical enjoyment more so. It is for making hobbiest enjoyment more so. It
does not require "proof".
If you require proof, go prove it, or prove it negatively yourself. You
have never done a test of DVD-A or SACD. You were badmouthing SACD before
you had ever heard it, based on your engineering "knowledge". The worst of
expectation bias. You don't believe it, fine, shut up and let others form
their own opinion. If you want to yap on, then do some scientific
experiments yourself that others can peer review and find solid....then
talk.
Harry Lavo
I have Arny Because I have taken the time to listen critically and with a
carefully controlled set of sources, and have described what I hear, Arny.
And that is good enough for me. And after four years, I still hear it and
it still enhances my musical enjoyment. And I am not alone...countless
others hear the same thing and enjoy it as well.
You've been deriding SACD from before you ever heard it Arny. The worst
kind of expectation bias. Either that, or a very tin ear.
George M. Middius
Harry Lavo said:
> Well, we could duplicate his system, but duplicating his (tin) ears might be
> more difficult.
Difficult? I guarantee you don't want to go there.
http://www.geocities.com/glanbrok/RAO_Toons/Krooger_ear.jpg