The official audio myth busting thread

[Mike Lavigne]

I appreciate your tone and demeanor, Mike. It reads in stark contrast to that which is permeating this forum. Your friends from Vancouver are fortunate to know you and must have enjoyed your hospitality and convivial approach to sharing music.

thanks for the kind words Peter. occasionally we have to remind ourselves that if it's not fun or satisfying in some way why go there.

 

[spazmatron]

my comment had to do with my system's ability to cover the whole frequency spectrum with lots of head room and space for note development; not that mine or any system is at an ultimate music reproduction end point.

a high tide raises all boats (formats). this last year I've been tuning my 'whole system' in various ways. my path is the pursuit of musical truth. every advance in system performance increases the uniqueness of every recording (distortion is a 'sameness' in the way of the music to my way of thinking), and exposes differences where they exist. who can predict where the next dollop of musical truth might be found?

I am glad your enjoying the 110% your rig is giving you... Roll on 120%

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

my comment had to do with my system's ability to cover the whole frequency spectrum with lots of head room and space for note development; not that mine or any system is at an ultimate music reproduction end point.

a high tide raises all boats (formats). this last year I've been tuning my 'whole system' in various ways. my path is the pursuit of musical truth. every advance in system performance increases the uniqueness of every recording (distortion is a 'sameness' in the way of the music to my way of thinking), and exposes differences where they exist. who can predict where the next dollop of musical truth might be found?

Mike, you and I are in 100% agreement on this one.

Tim

 

[amirm]

Let me be very clear: no one here should feel pressure to participate in any test whatsoever. Even after you accept it, you can back out.

I see the goal of any such thread to create more information for willing parties. I am willing so I will participate . If you are not, you are not.

 

[amirm]

I appreciate your tone and demeanor, Mike. It reads in stark contrast to that which is permeating this forum.

Peter, this must be the third such comment you have made in just the last few days. You probably missed a great thread we had last year where the membership collectively spoke and said if someone is not happy, we are not to bend the forum to please them. They can stay or leave. That, they can decide. What they can't and must not do is repeatedly post dissatisfaction both in public and private as you have been doing as a way to change the forum to their wishes.

As you know, this is a non-profit forum. We have worked hard and spent a lot of time, resources, money and sweat to get it here. So imagine how unappreciative you seem when you come and eat of our table yet repeatedly complain as such. The complaints are off-topic and against our TOS (see #2 and others).

Peter, I love your participation when you are not in this mood and encourage you to stick to the topics of the threads and not post commentaries like this. I bet even you would feel better once you put aside such angst and just talk about the common areas we have and love. I like to wake up in the morning and read about those, and not what you have post here. Will you do that for us/me?

 

[amirm]

I appreciate the point by point analysis of my post, Amir. I will try to answer your questions individually as best I can:

1. Listening. I already suspect that quad DSD is superior to vinyl when it comes to making a faithful copy of the original master tape. You and Blizzard have already biased me to suspect this that this is true, but I can not be sure until I hear it. Then, I may not care in the sense that it will not change my approach. It would be good for the industry though, because digital has historically been rather poor sounding. And does not necessarily mean, though, that quad DSD is preferred to vinyl. That is a different question and has been much discussed.

I don't recall ever making such a statement about DSD. I know the theory of how it works but like to have listening test data to rely on and hence my interest in this test.

As to the second part of your answer, I was commenting on this from you: "I am open to you or anyone else convincing me that quad DSD is superior to vinyl when it comes to making a faithful copy of an original master tape." Bolding mine.

I am still without that answer. You have not said what will convince you that quad DSD is superior to Vinyl. So again, what will convince you of this matter if true?

 

[steve williams]

I don't recall ever making such a statement about DSD. I know the theory of how it works but like to have listening test data to rely on and hence my interest in this test.

As to the second part of your answer, I was commenting on this from you: "I am open to you or anyone else convincing me that quad DSD is superior to vinyl when it comes to making a faithful copy of an original master tape." Bolding mine.

I am still without that answer. You have not said what will convince you that quad DSD is superior to Vinyl. So again, what will convince you of this matter if true?

I would think what would convince anyone is to have a listen unless yours was rhetoric question

 

[amirm]

2. Probably very little. It will mean that I can listen to more digital in other people's systems without becoming fatigued or bored and it will open up more music availability.

So after being convinced that "quad dsd is superior to Vinyl" you will continue to have total apathy to that outcome? Then what has interested you in this thread? And what to think of your convictions in this matter?

I mean there are a lot of sources of DSD downloads today. If that is superior to vinyl, I would have thought as an audiophile that keeps trying to get the to source of live music, you would go and spend your dollar in that direction. Why is that not the case? Will you be satisfied the more real experience at your friend's house and not your own?

Anyone else would act the same way under these circumstances and can help set me straight on why you would make the same choice as Peter?

I mean how can one ignore such an outcome when DSD downloads bring tons of convenience and immediate gratification in the form of downloads? If that combined with superior recording ability doesn't do it for you, what is it that will?

 

[amirm]

3. Multichannel is not currently very popular. For instance, none of my Boston area audio buddies listen to multichannel. Sure, it exists, and I heard a very convincing demonstration at RMAF 2010 of a four channel isomic recording that I think was made by Cardas, but I can remember.

Then why say that is a future development you are waiting for? "Quad DSD will be replaced with something even better and new recording standards will be created and multi channel systems are around the corner."

Multi-channel systems are not around the corner. As you state and everyone knows they are here and now. So using that as a way to say something better like them will come around doesn't make sense.

And here is some superbly recorded content in it: http://www.spiritofturtle.com/product-category/download/?filter_channels=43

When people describe multichannel as the future of audio, I assume they mean something like the vast majority of audiophiles, or people in general, will be listening in this way.

I don't see anyone declaring multichannel as future of audio. It is the current state for movies. But for music stereo is dominant here and forever. The discussion here again is you saying we may not want to adopt DSD because multichannel systems are around the corner. There is no basis for that argument.

 

[steve williams]

So after being convinced that "quad dsd is superior to Vinyl" you will continue to have total apathy to that outcome? Then what has interested you in this thread? And what to think of your convictions in this matter?

I mean there are a lot of sources of DSD downloads today. If that is superior to vinyl, I would have thought as an audiophile that keeps trying to get the to source of live music, you would go and spend your dollar in that direction. Why is that not the case? Will you be satisfied the more real experience at your friend's house and not your own?

Anyone else would act the same way under these circumstances and can help set me straight on why you would make the same choice as Peter?

I mean how can one ignore such an outcome when DSD downloads bring tons of convenience and immediate gratification in the form of downloads? If that combined with superior recording ability doesn't do it for you, what is it that will?

As I see it Peter did answer the question by first asserting that he is an all vinyl system and will not change but that he is receptive to listening to others' digital systems if the sound is better as he will hopefully not find it fatiguing.

Or are you trying to convince yourself. I don't see Peter doing anything except being truthful and you continue to pound him trying to convince him he is wrong. BTW are you telling us that Quad DSD is better than vinyl, or are you just assuming? Perhaps you should do the test and come back to us with the results rather than taking exception with Peter's position

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink

 

[PeterA]

Peter, this must be the third such comment you have made in just the last few days. You probably missed a great thread we had last year where the membership collectively spoke and said if someone is not happy, we are not to bend the forum to please them. They can stay or leave. That, they can decide. What they can't and must not do is repeatedly post dissatisfaction both in public and private as you have been doing as a way to change the forum to their wishes.

Amir, I don't think my other comments are like this one, but I respect your comment. I was complimenting Mike L's tone and demeanor, and elsewhere in my post, his approach to sharing music and his system. Mike seemed to appreciate the compliment and spirit by which it was offered. I will delete the other sentence as it violates the TOS.

I did not miss that previous thread. And I am not the only one complaining about the tone of the forum. I will try to do it in a more private way from now on.

 

[amirm]

Amir, I don't think my other comments are like this one, but I respect your comment. I was complimenting Mike L's tone and demeanor, and elsewhere in my post, his approach to sharing music and his system. Mike seemed to appreciate the compliment and spirit by which it was offered. I will delete the other sentence as it violates the TOS.

I did not miss that previous thread. And I am not the only one complaining about the tone of the forum. I will try to do it in a more private way from now on.

Sigh. So you repeat the comment again in this last line? And say you are still going to create work for us as management in that regard by continuing to complain behind the scenes??? You can't be like any other member coming here to discuss some topics related to audio hardware and software and have it be that? You must add to our workload as management?

 

[amirm]

As I see it Peter did answer the question by first asserting that he is an all vinyl system and will not change but that he is receptive to listening to others' digital systems if the sound is better as he will hopefully not find it fatiguing.

I like to have him speak Steve. But I will ask you the same question. Hypothetically speaking, after I have convinced you DSD is better than Vinyl, what will you do Steve? Will you only enjoy that experience at someone else's house and continue to listen to a system that is less faithful to the "live sound" as Peter puts it?

Or are you trying to convince yourself. I don't see Peter doing anything except being truthful and you continue to pound him trying to convince him he is wrong. BTW are you telling us that Quad DSD is better than vinyl, or are you just assuming? Perhaps you should do the test and come back to us with the results rather than taking exception with Peter's position

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink

We are trying to figure out how to conduct tests that have value to membership Steve. Lots of strong posts were made and I am trying to parse the constructive and useful ones from the argumentative rants. As I explained to Peter, I have made no statement at all about DSD being better than Vinyl. I am trying to figure out what all of your posts mean in the context of this thread as opposed to bashing Mike.

You too can contribute to the answers. What do you need for a test comparing DSD to Vinyl to be convincing to you? And if convinced, will it matter to you? Or do these things have no real answers?

 

[steve williams]

I suggested you try the test Amir because you have a perfect offer from MikeL to listen to the formats exactly how you want . What better offer could anyone receive

 

[PeterA]

I don't recall ever making such a statement about DSD. I know the theory of how it works but like to have listening test data to rely on and hence my interest in this test.

As to the second part of your answer, I was commenting on this from you: "I am open to you or anyone else convincing me that quad DSD is superior to vinyl when it comes to making a faithful copy of an original master tape." Bolding mine.

I am still without that answer. You have not said what will convince you that quad DSD is superior to Vinyl. So again, what will convince you of this matter if true?

No, you did not. That was my incorrect assumption. I apologize.

I wrote "you or anyone else" in the sense that a human would have to set up the conditions by which I could be convinced. I would need to listen for myself to the original master tape, and then to the vinyl and DSD versions to hear if either is a faithful copy of the original. To be more specific, my two ears and my brain's interpretation of what I perceive while listening will be what convinces me or not. I can not know until I subject myself to that evaluation if I will be convinced.

Looking at measurements of the output, as someone suggested earlier, would probably not convince me one way or the other, because I still believe that measurements can not tell me everything about how something sounds. Measurements tell us many useful things and our ears/brain also tell us many useful things. And measuring outputs does not seem to be what is being suggested by Blizzard in this myth busting experiment. If that response does not answer your question, I am sorry. It is my attempt at an honest answer to you.

However, as I have suggested before, this is not the critical question for me. What is critical to me is which format will I continue to buy. That is a different matter and question and requires a different answer.

 

[PeterA]

So after being convinced that "quad dsd is superior to Vinyl" you will continue to have total apathy to that outcome? Then what has interested you in this thread? And what to think of your convictions in this matter?

I mean there are a lot of sources of DSD downloads today. If that is superior to vinyl, I would have thought as an audiophile that keeps trying to get the to source of live music, you would go and spend your dollar in that direction. Why is that not the case? Will you be satisfied the more real experience at your friend's house and not your own?

Anyone else would act the same way under these circumstances and can help set me straight on why you would make the same choice as Peter?

I mean how can one ignore such an outcome when DSD downloads bring tons of convenience and immediate gratification in the form of downloads? If that combined with superior recording ability doesn't do it for you, what is it that will?

Total apathy? Hardly. As I wrote earlier, if quad DSD sounds better than the digital that I have heard before, I will be more likely to enjoy listening to digital in other people's systems and I would enjoy the exposure to new music that becomes available in this format. I actually welcome that condition. My interest in this thread was stirred by the OP which was much broader than a quad DSD vs. vinyl debate. The OP is about audio myth busting. I think that is a more general topic, and one in which I am interested.

You are suggesting that if the DSD version is a more accurate copy of the master tape, that it is de facto superior to vinyl. That is your assumption and a different matter. Your comments that follow are IMO based on a false premise.

I can already go to listen to other systems that sound more convincing or believable than my system. That does not mean that I can or would rush out and change everything. Budget and effort are just two of the reasons. I love MadFloyd's system and it is better than mine in most areas. However, that does not mean that I am not satisfied with my system. That would be absurd. Think about what that would mean to audiophiles in general if once they heard a better system, they would be automatically dissatisfied with their own systems.

It is not all about convenience and immediate gratification in the form of downloads. I addressed that earlier, up thread, in my post about why I like analog. And immediate gratification is overrated, IMHO.

I hope that clarifies my view on this topic.

 

[spazmatron]

How many guys here when confronted with music that's clearly better than what they have would just ignore it and go home to their systems.

Unless restraint for financial reasons we will all go looney for better music at home no matter what... Right?

I don't think I will make the test but suggest you measure the out puts as well as listen. How you do that so what's captured is relevant to the subjective experience I don't know. King amir might?

If this was done then the results could be kept and studied over time, as new test methods present them selfs.

 

[amirm]

You are suggesting that if the DSD version is a more accurate copy of the master tape, that it is de facto superior to vinyl. That is your assumption and a different matter. Your comments that follow are IMO based on a false premise.

I made no references to master tapes or any specific tests of that nature. I don't know why you keep attributing such things to me. I am trying to understand what you said. Not convincing you of any audio test outcome.

 

[PeterA]

The discussion here again is you saying we may not want to adopt DSD because multichannel systems are around the corner. There is no basis for that argument.

Amir, could you please show me a post in which I say "we may not want to adopt DSD because multichannel systems are around the corner"? I don't recall making that argument. I admitted that multichannel system exist, and wrote that they are not popular. I remember someone writing that they are the future of audio, but I can not recall who wrote it or when.

On the contrary, I think some people will want to adopt DSD, and if it is as good as people are saying, that will be wonderful for the industry. I am going to hear my first quad DSD recordings in a few weeks and look forward to the experience. And after a while, there will probably be another digital format after DSD.

 

[Blizzard]

Total apathy? Hardly. As I wrote earlier, if quad DSD sounds better than the digital that I have heard before, I will be more likely to enjoy listening to digital in other people's systems and I would enjoy the exposure to new music that becomes available in this format. I actually welcome that condition. My interest in this thread was stirred by the OP which was much broader than a quad DSD vs. vinyl debate. The OP is about audio myth busting. I think that is a more general topic, and one in which I am interested.

You are suggesting that if the DSD version is a more accurate copy of the master tape, that it is de facto superior to vinyl. That is your assumption and a different matter. Your comments that follow are IMO based on a false premise.

I can already go to listen to other systems that sound more convincing or believable than my system. That does not mean that I can or would rush out and change everything. Budget and effort are just two of the reasons. I love MadFloyd's system and it is better than mine in most areas. However, that does not mean that I am not satisfied with my system. That would be absurd. Think about what that would mean to audiophiles in general if once they heard a better system, they would be automatically dissatisfied with their own systems.

It is not all about convenience and immediate gratification in the form of downloads. I addressed that earlier, up thread, in my post about why I like analog. And immediate gratification is overrated, IMHO.

I hope that clarifies my view on this topic.

Hi Peter,

How did the listening session go comparing quad DSD on the Merging NADAC to vinyl on the Kronos with Black beauty tone arm, and Pass XS Phono preamp? I thought you were attending an event comparing the 2 yesterday?