or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › What stereo(s) do you listen to? What do you want?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What stereo(s) do you listen to? What do you want? - Page 6

post #76 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
Based on my experiences, I find the LP to be more accurate and true to what happened in the studio.

Dude, please stop.

That's like saying a jpeg is more accurate and true to the original image than an an uncompressed image is. The master tape has all the info you're gonna get. By definition, anything that comes after the master will have "compromised" or lost information. The final record may just sound better than the original master, but by transfering to LP you can't add something that wasn't there to begin with. By definition, it is impossible for it to be more accurate.

Claming that by your experiences you think it is just makes you seem like a nutter. It is one thing to say that you like the sound of LPs or tube amps. Many people find them pleasing to the ear. It is another thing entirely to claim they are more accurate.
post #77 of 2370
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQgeek View Post
Dude, please stop.

That's like saying a jpeg is more accurate and true to the original image than an an uncompressed image is. The master tape has all the info you're gonna get. By definition, anything that comes after the master will have "compromised" or lost information. The final record may just sound better than the original master, but by transfering to LP you can't add something that wasn't there to begin with. By definition, it is impossible for it to be more accurate.

Claming that by your experiences you think it is just makes you seem like a nutter. It is one thing to say that you like the sound of LPs or tube amps. Many people find them pleasing to the ear. It is another thing entirely to claim they are more accurate.

I'm sorry you don't agree but I have significant experience working as an engineer on some very profitable and successful records. You learn things from doing. And there is often a big gap between theories and practice. And the implication that 16/44 CD is just not factually correct and I want members here to learn something about audio.
post #78 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
I'm sorry you don't agree but I have significant experience working on successful records. You learn things from doing. And the implication that 16/44 CD is just not factually correct and I want members here to learn something about audio.

We're not talking about CDs. You said an LP was more accurate than the original master. That is completely impossible.
post #79 of 2370
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serg View Post
Where did you read about the oppo blue ray player? I have the DV-981HD and its the best dvd player out there for the money.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...highlight=oppo
post #80 of 2370
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQgeek View Post
We're not talking about CDs. You said an LP was more accurate than the original master. That is completely impossible.

What?? I never said that. The master tape is always more accurate than the LP.

Edit: I see that I responded to a quote that referred to a master tape-I missed that. I was and have been referring to the CD discussion. Master tapes sound wonderful whether analog or hirez PCM.
post #81 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
And the implication that 16/44 CD is just not factually correct and I want members here to learn something about audio.

Spewing dogma isn't usually considered teaching.

--Andre
post #82 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
I'm sorry you don't agree but I have significant experience working as an engineer on some very profitable and successful records.
I thought we established that you were an audio engineer the same way a garbageman is a sanitation engineer.
post #83 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
Can I have your shoes then?
Soon... When his broker starts selling some on eBay.
post #84 of 2370
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post
I thought we established that you were an audio engineer the same way a garbageman is a sanitation engineer.

How so?
post #85 of 2370
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
Spewing dogma isn't usually considered teaching.

--Andre

There's nothing more dogmatic than an engineer like yourself with no real world recording experience.
post #86 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
There's nothing more dogmatic than an engineer like yourself with no real world recording experience.

So what do you call someone who keeps bringing up their own (constantly changing) qualifications without any kind of credible link to their claims, tries to discredit others based only on what they've read about them on the Internet, and tries to prove their claims by dropping famous names?

Or someone who can't seem to reconcile the fact that they enjoy a medium, and the fact that the medium is technically flawed?

Or someone who won't or can't address entirely reasonable points given to them unless it happened to agree with their world view already?

Or someone who lacks the intellectual curiousity to even try to see what the other side is talking about?

--Andre
post #87 of 2370
uh oh. Not even lolcats can save this thread now...
post #88 of 2370
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
So what do you call someone who keeps bringing up their own (constantly changing) qualifications without any kind of credible link to their claims, tries to discredit others based only on what they've read about them on the Internet, and tries to prove their claims by dropping famous names?

Or someone who can't seem to reconcile the fact that they enjoy a medium, and the fact that the medium is technically flawed?

Or someone who won't or can't address entirely reasonable points given to them unless it happened to agree with their world view already?

Or someone who lacks the intellectual curiousity to even try to see what the other side is talking about?

--Andre

I've spent numerous hours reading arguments on all sides of this topic but the ears are the best instrument for making judgments here on sound quality and clearly the vinyl record captures something that a 16/44 CD cannot.

Each storage format is flawed but the question is a relative rank ordering. I find LP to be much more satisfying than digital unless there is high resolution sampling like 24/96 or 24/192.
post #89 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman View Post
uh oh. Not even lolcats can save this thread now...

What about a loldog:

post #90 of 2370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
clearly the vinyl record captures something that a 16/44 CD cannot.
...
I find LP to be much more satisfying than digital unless there is high resolution sampling like 24/96 or 24/192.

These two statements do not depend on each other. Just because you enjoy LP doesn't mean it captured something that CD did not. And just because a recording medium captures something more doesn't make it any more enjoyable.

--Andre
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › What stereo(s) do you listen to? What do you want?