Negative show report posts... enough is enough.

[GaryProtein]

Only 40 posts in the last 24 hours. That's a slow day for this thread.

You guys are slacking off!

 

[Joe Whip]

I guess it is time to turn it into a PCM vs. DSD or digiial vs. analog thread to really get things going again! On second thought, maybe not!

 

[mep]

I guess it is time to turn it into a PCM vs. DSD or digiial vs. analog thread to really get things going again! On second thought, maybe not!

DSD sounds better than PCM and analog sounds better than digital. Next.

 

[Audio Guy]

DSD sounds better than PCM and analog sounds better than digital. Next.

Pistachio ice cream tastes better than Chocolate Almond, and Mint Chocolate Chip beats them both. Next. Oh wait, that was an opinion. What do you like? A scoop of analog on your platter? Or a dollop of digital on your spindle?

 

[TheMadMilkman]

This may be true, but...

I just had an exchange with someone who heard the Q1 and preferred it to my Mini 2. It was not a direct comparison, and it was not blind. I reminded him that he heard them in different systems, different rooms, with different music and many months apart. I have little doubt that they sound different and I'm sure most would argue that the Q1 sounds better and for specific reasons. I would enjoy taking a blind test and direct comparison of these two speakers in the same system/room and probably conclude that the newer model sounds better. However, I have asked myself a few times if I should upgrade to buy the Q1. This is where the sighted test becomes more important to me, in fact, it is indispensable when making a purchase decision (at least for big items like speakers). I want to see the speaker because I have to like the way it looks/fits in my living room. I much prefer the aesthetics of the Mini 2, so the superior sonics of the Q1 are not enough to get me to upgrade.

Things might be different if my listening room were an isolated room in the basement or if the system were concealed behind an acoustically transparent curtain. I agree with MadMilkman that an honest assessment of just sound is one thing, and it could or should be done blind. Measurements and blind listening are excellent tools for the designer/engineer and perhaps the audiophile who wants to really "know" which component sounds better, but I would think that most end users also care about what the component looks like if he is deciding which to buy.

My apologies if this should be in a different thread, but I like TheMadMilkman's post and wanted to respond to it.

Oh, I fully agree, and meant to put something about aesthetics in my post. If I were to participate in blind preference testing and after the fact found that I rated a large, ugly speaker as 8.5 / 10 and a small attractive speaker (my own preference is for sub/sat combos) as an 8.0 / 10, I would pick the smaller speaker for my own listening room.

Ultimately, audiophilia is a luxury hobby, and we participate in it as pleasure seekers. Defining that pleasure definitely extends beyond simple sound quality. For me to fully enjoy listening to music, I need to be comfortable. Being in an attractive room with attractive gear helps with that comfort.

And Peter, your room looks particularly comfortable to me.

 

[c1ferrari]

DSD sounds better than PCM and analog sounds better than digital. Next.

+1 Haha

 

[mep]

Pistachio ice cream tastes better than Chocolate Almond, and Mint Chocolate Chip beats them both. Next. Oh wait, that was an opinion. What do you like? A scoop of analog on your platter? Or a dollop of digital on your spindle?

As a matter of fact, Pistachio ice cream does taste better than Chocolate Almond and Mint Chocolate Chip does beat them both.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Pistachio ice cream tastes better than Chocolate Almond, and Mint Chocolate Chip beats them both. Next. Oh wait, that was an opinion. What do you like? A scoop of analog on your platter? Or a dollop of digital on your spindle?

As a matter of fact, Pistachio ice cream does taste better than Chocolate Almond and Mint Chocolate Chip does beat them both.

You're both wrong. Pralines are the ultimate in flavour for this rich creamy dairy dessert.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Cherry Garcia. Enough said.

Tim

 

[JackD201]

We agree on B&J's but make mine Chunky Monkey

 

[mep]

I can agree that both Cherry Garcia and Chunky Monkey are very good.

 

[bonzo75]

Have you measured the calories, none of these allow you to have a flat tummy response

 

[rbbert]

I must confess I haven't run across too many B&J flavors I don't love. It's intersting that if you include their FroYo (still pretty good) the calories per "serving" can run from about 800 to over 1200; of course my "serving" is one pint

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Have you measured the calories, none of these allow you to have a flat tummy response

I'm 62......I don't really care anymore.

 

[JackD201]

Have you measured the calories, none of these allow you to have a flat tummy response

Flat tummy? What's that?

 

[c1ferrari]

You're both wrong. Pralines are the ultimate in flavour for this rich creamy dairy dessert.

Ah, this is the genesis -- apologies to Gary -- of the issue...ya gotta go soy!

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

My midrange definitely gets a bit tubby on too much Cherry Garcia.

Tim

 

[Joe Whip]

The best of course is Raspberry Truffle from Bassetts at the Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia.

 

[FrantzM]

I must confess I haven't run across too many B&J flavors I don't love. It's intersting that if you include their FroYo (still pretty good) the calories per "serving" can run from about 800 to over 1200; of course my "serving" is one pint

Me too.... I have completely removed these from my sight .. When I go to the Supermarket I make sure of avoiding these... Cherry Garcia is too delicious ...

Uh weren't we talking about negative reporting?? Still this an overwhelming psoitive response for B&J. I am certain these would pass any blind test...

 

[DaveC]

B&J FroYo has made me sick before, never again!

I now prefer Talenti Gelato, it's a little less calories but it's still amazing... plus the containers are reusable.