In this thread I hope that we, the WBF members, will use my system and preferences to drive through thoughtful discussions on high-end matters. The tittle was chosen to reflect my interests in this hobby - high-end stereo sound reproduction with science and experimentation, and free discussion, but framed on the intrinsic rule of Speaker's Corner - don't be offensive, avoid direct confrontation with the poster, focus on the audio content of posts and please do not use hate speech or extremist views. Disagreement and humour are welcome. but if you come to WBF to have an enjoyable fencing session, please ignore this thread.
Surely subjective aspects are needed and welcome - when used with proper tools (scientific method with statistical analysis, experimentation producing measurable and observable data) psychology is a science. However, audio experiences should be replicable, different perspectives
are a source of knowledge.
The high-end is a subset of stereo sound reproduction. IMO, unless stereo is well understood debates end mostly by semantic driven discussions. Stereo per se is a very interesting subject.
The two more incendiary sentences in this hobby involve trees and soundfield. Curiously they are strongly connected, but unfortunately extremely affected by semantic interpretations.
So. I start with "if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make sound?” Surely I do not expect agreement on this question, but understanding why we disagree is mandatory, and in particularly, an acceptance of the need to be precise in the meaning of the word "sound" in next posts. To confirm the importance of the subject in this forum, please see this site: https://therecordist.com/the-sound-of-tree-falls/
BTW, considering this is a system thread, I should add that today I am listening to SoundLab A1-PX's driven by conrad johnson electronics fed by a dCS Vivaldi stack. As I feel changes are part of the high-end adventure I am not sure about to what I will be listening tomorrow.
.
Surely subjective aspects are needed and welcome - when used with proper tools (scientific method with statistical analysis, experimentation producing measurable and observable data) psychology is a science. However, audio experiences should be replicable, different perspectives
are a source of knowledge.
The high-end is a subset of stereo sound reproduction. IMO, unless stereo is well understood debates end mostly by semantic driven discussions. Stereo per se is a very interesting subject.
The two more incendiary sentences in this hobby involve trees and soundfield. Curiously they are strongly connected, but unfortunately extremely affected by semantic interpretations.
So. I start with "if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make sound?” Surely I do not expect agreement on this question, but understanding why we disagree is mandatory, and in particularly, an acceptance of the need to be precise in the meaning of the word "sound" in next posts. To confirm the importance of the subject in this forum, please see this site: https://therecordist.com/the-sound-of-tree-falls/
BTW, considering this is a system thread, I should add that today I am listening to SoundLab A1-PX's driven by conrad johnson electronics fed by a dCS Vivaldi stack. As I feel changes are part of the high-end adventure I am not sure about to what I will be listening tomorrow.
.
