Audio Myths Workshop

[Meffy]

It's also extremely rare for threads to get locked over at the Womb. And I wanted to respond to something Ethan said.

Oh well, I guess we can move it over to here...

Kinda depends on whether it's more of the same or someone proceeds to actual proper testing. Acrimony without end, without point isn't particularly useful. Discussion that leads somewhere, OTOP... well. *shrug*

To avoid misunderstanding I'll expand on this. I don't mean the thread will be locked if existing KVRfolk get into yet another of "those" arguments. Just if there's a wholesale transplantation of arguments and arguers from elsewhere to here. Discussing specific points of interest from the Womb thread is kosher.

[deaf dunderkwac]

hell I based my opinion on the crap quality of cd's uing professional playback equipment including a 2K$ Studer. The mastering and encoding of cd's was awesomely awful for all the 80's and early 90's.
Had to do with the equipment used for mastering as much as the a-d encoders.

But eventually the u-matics got replaced and cd's became listenable.

Of this regard I was not the only person on staff who held these views. Our whole radio engineering staff (classical) rejected cd's with the same complaints I had.
Myself and most (but not all) of the TV audio staff felt that the quality wasn't poor enough to warrant not using the more obvious benefits of cd playback pertaining to cueing cuts and transfers in the digital domain.
CD's on the average, became noticeably better-sounding around 95 and I found them to be unobjectionable after 97.
Although cd's will always suffer a time-smear between left and right channels, that artifact is not a big deal-breaker.

[A.M. Gold]

To avoid misunderstanding I'll expand on this. I don't mean the thread will be locked if existing KVRfolk get into yet another of "those" arguments. Just if there's a wholesale transplantation of arguments and arguers from elsewhere to here. Discussing specific points of interest from the Womb thread is kosher.

What if two or three of them come here? meLoCo_go and Ethan are both KVR members, to name a couple.

It's possible those two might come here if the former got into this thread and the latter started reading it, but I think Ethan is getting tired of arguing about this. Nothing but a blind test will even begin to sway him from his theory/measurement based position.

I've seen this kind of thing before. Scientists get the idea that they've proven something and it doesn't matter to them at all that other scientists or technicians find flaws in their work. They can be incredibly unyielding once they get past a certain point in convincing themselves through their own research.

But it was exactly the technical questions and counterarguments that intrigued me in that thread, since I found it fascinating that so few people rushed to Ethan's defense.

Things might be more balanced here, but, then again, that could just lead to an endless and incredibly murky argument thread (as you seem to fear).

[Gamma-UT]

t's possible those two might come here if the former got into this thread and the latter started reading it, but I think Ethan is getting tired of arguing about this. Nothing but a blind test will even begin to sway him from his theory/measurement based position.

I suspect a blind test will reinforce the theory/measurement position: that being the point of a blind test.

[A.M. Gold]

hell I based my opinion on the crap quality of cd's uing professional playback equipment including a 2K$ Studer. The mastering and encoding of cd's was awesomely awful for all the 80's and early 90's.
Had to do with the equipment used for mastering as much as the a-d encoders.

But eventually the u-matics got replaced and cd's became listenable.

This is enlightening but it raises the issue of having to be very careful in purchasing CD's to ensure that they were mastered after a certain point, plus there is probably no definite year you could name since new equipment gets phased in over time in studios.

It's possible most of the classical CD's I own were mastered before the mid '90's. I haven't bought them in quite a while.

[A.M. Gold]

t's possible those two might come here if the former got into this thread and the latter started reading it, but I think Ethan is getting tired of arguing about this. Nothing but a blind test will even begin to sway him from his theory/measurement based position.

I suspect a blind test will reinforce the theory/measurement position: that being the point of a blind test.

Although that can still leave the converter issue as a big variable.

I have no position on whether the "math" aspect of digital audio has anything to do with the problem, but there are countless soundcards and CD players out there so it would be extremely hard to eliminate that aspect of it as being the source of the problem in many cases.

[audiosabre]

I heard the difference between the dithered/undithered audio. Wasn't huge, but it's good to know that I can hear it.

The dithered one sounded fuller, warmer and musical

John

[Meffy]

What if two or three of them come here? meLoCo_go and Ethan are both KVR members, to name a couple.

*shrug* Will play it by ear but it's doubtful it will get locked unless wholesale war breaks out. Still and all, as I said before, simple, conclusive tests win out over sophistry every time.

[deaf dunderkwac]

imo

Lot's of myths get started in this industry because we are so easily fooled when it comes to audio events.
Some myths are started by professionals to rationalize their decision or lack of funds to forgo the capital outlays to replace the equipment or systems in question.
Controversy ensues debate that hopefully lasts long enough to gather the funds necessary to replace said equipment and your reputation remains untarnished.
Pretty gud planning.
Backfires when some audio enthusiast gets wind of the controversial myth however. The myth then lives on forever. and ever. and grows. and mutates into wooden knobs that make your audio 300% betterer for 'only' $1500 per knob.

I also haz a deal on my new improved highest-definition 1-meter long digitally-rated turntable cables discounted today for only $259 per channel (min. order is 100)

[re8]

2 minutes in, & already there is deep wisdom.
+1

[A.M. Gold]

What if two or three of them come here? meLoCo_go and Ethan are both KVR members, to name a couple.

*shrug* Will play it by ear but it's doubtful it will get locked unless wholesale war breaks out. Still and all, as I said before, simple, conclusive tests win out over sophistry every time.

True, but I don't think the test could really be simple. My fear is that Ethan would try to make it into a simple test and it might end up missing the source of the problem with digital audio altogether, but that's just a hunch.

I got into that debate because I don't think consumer grade digital audio is that spectacular, and definitely not "flawless". That necessarily includes CD players, low end sound cards, integrated lap-top audio, and mp3 players/iPhones.

[A.M. Gold]

The myth then lives on forever. and ever. and grows. and mutates into wooden knobs that make your audio 300% betterer for 'only' $1500 per knob.

I also haz a deal on my new improved highest-definition 1-meter long digitally-rated turntable cables discounted today for only $259 per channel (min. order is 100)

To me, though, this is muddying the waters. Ethan started evoking those sorts of con-jobs and basically lumping them together with people who have dared believe that 96 KHz sampling rate can sound better than 44.1 (which he says is impossible).

I reacted strongly to some of his rhetoric because I thought it was irresponsible to conflate complaints about the general sound quality of digital audio with people who think their floor joists are ruining the signal traveling through their speaker cables. His attitude of essentially equating the lunatic fringe of the audiophile world with the much more common dissatisfied consumers of digital audio left a bad taste in my mouth, to be perfectly honest.

[sinzero]

I doubt meLoCo_go and Ethan will start up again here. It seemed like their particular exchange at the womb reached an impasse or at least fizzled out

[sinzero]

Who has the most to lose from taking this blind test?

reading thru the thread I couldn't understand the reluctance to take Ethan up on his offer. The best refute to his claim would have been to show him one can consistently hear the difference

yet, some people over there got down right irrational (imo) in their comments. It surprised me in a few cases

[A.M. Gold]

I don't know and I'm not sure why weedywet dropped out of it. They may have similar reservations to what I have about how the test is configured but some of those guys have a lot of experience with high-end converters so for them it wasn't really an issue of how mid and low end soundcards sound.

I found it interesting that Bob didn't seem to be backing up Ethan's claims. Bob's been working on trying to get the most out of digital sound for most of the past twenty years.

If anything these pros really should have a vested interest in supporting a claim that there is nothing wrong with digital sound quality rather than attacking it. They make a living off of it. They aren't releasing reel to reel master tapes to the general public, and I'm pretty sure they actually record to DAW on a fairly regular basis.