Originally Posted by Artisan Fan
Yet again Andre, you show you have no f'ing clue about audio. The ML system is an actual Levinson design and uses Levinson parts. The only thing they borrowed was the CD transport which high end companies do anyway.
You are really an idiot when it comes to audio.
Nice --- I'm glad you can express yourself before you put your foot in your mouth again. To set some facts straight:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levinson
"Although Mark Levinson products were primarily targeting the stereo or home theater market, nowadays Mark Levinson branded products can also be found in cars. These are developed and produced by Harman Automotive, the car audio department of Harman International, and while typically not sharing any components with Mark Levinson home products
, are designed in collaboration with Mark Levinson sound engineers." (emphasis mine)http://www.marklevinson.com/press/pr...asp?pressID=12
"To achieve the high standards assumed for a Mark Levinson sound system, Madrigal engineers again worked closely with Lexus and HarmanÂ® OEM."
The system is built and designed by Harman. They have far more resources than just ML that have worked on many car audio systems. But it still doesn't change the fact that ML is overrated.
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan
This is full of lies but I will note several issues:
Lies? The first 3 points of my PCM discussion is straight textbook stuff that any sophomore-level linear systems class offers.
The 3 points of LP are easily verifiable in any study of published measurements of LP systems in audiophile magazines, though that hasn't been done for very many years. If you also consider the physics of the LP playback and cutting, many of these facts are obvious. This isn't rocket science, but as long as high-end audio is filled with people with your attitude, it's never going anywhere.
1. We have been talking about LP versus 44.1khz sampling.
Didn't we discuss this already? Yes, CD cannot hold 50 kHz bandwidth, and I don't dispute that. The point is that Bob Ludwig's claim of LP's 50 kHz bandwidth being equivalent to 100 kHz PCM sampling is wrong.
You electrical engineers need to realize that a. science does not explain everything and b. practical, applied knowledge is equally or more important than book theory.
Have you considered the possibility that your own ignorance of basic engineering principles is holding you back or leading you down the wrong paths? Many of the explanations you believe in do not jive with what is known about the real world.
There are other explanations which come from theory supported by over 100 years of "practical, applied knowledge" that could better explain what's happening. Again, I am open to discussing these things, but you seem to lack the intellectual curiousity to even ask me about them even though I've left the door open several times already.
2. You offer no proof of LP's non-linearity metrics. Where is your evidence? There is very little wow and flutter on a modern turntable as well.
Any audio magazine measurement of an LP system trivially shows that this is the case. The noise alone is more non-linear than a PCM channel. I've also referred you to the quad sound efforts which you could expend a tiny bit of effort to go research.
And BTW, though it pains an idiot like me with no f'ing clue about audio to correct someone such as your esteemed practiced self, flutter's primarily a tape, not an LP, phonemenon.
And BTW, wow in an LP is literally a million times worse than wow in a CD (AKA jitter), so if LP wow is not non-linear, CD must be perfect!
3. All the so-called proof here is simply measurements. You simply cannot capture what happens in a complex audio experience by measurements alone. Science does not fully describe an audio waveform.
Yes it does fully describe it --- guess who discovered the principles behind electronic recording and guess who built it? But that's not what's important here.
If something can't even reproduce simple things correctly, it has no hope of reproducing something far more complex. Good standard measurements are a necessary, but not sufficient, standard for good-sounding equipment.