Audiophile Crap
- Thread starter dorian gray
- Start date
Krilons Resa
Jerry's married?!
Demilich
Remember
Fuck this thread, I don't have a problem with shit sound
most of the music I like wouldn't benefit from audiophile crap anyway
most of the music I like wouldn't benefit from audiophile crap anyway
Krilons Resa
Jerry's married?!
Until you hear and experience it. You just gotta stay well in front of the bell curve, because it can get really fucking stupid.
holy crap ... check this out
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/01/16/ces.luxury.turntable/index.html#cnnSTCText
this is something to strive for
four fucking arms? and if you look at the video it seems that only one arm plays at once.
whacko!
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/01/16/ces.luxury.turntable/index.html#cnnSTCText
this is something to strive for
four fucking arms? and if you look at the video it seems that only one arm plays at once.
whacko!
- Apr 8, 2004
- 21,258
- 489
- 83
I was thinking about this stuff yesterday. If my physics education from 12 years ago serves me well, there are only three components to a wave: frequency, wavelength, and amplitude. A fourth component - distortion - is introduced by the analogue, which would be the speakers in this case (and every component that comes between the CD and the listener's ears). In our case, faithful reproduction of the original signal it what matters. But, how does an "audiophile"` know what is faithful and what is not?
It's my belief, from personal experience, that what a listener considers "great-sounding" speakers is not faithful reproduction (because how does one know if it's what the artist intended or not?) but rather the ability to handle increasing amplitude of the wave without "coloring" the wave with distortion (as perceived by the listener). There has to be an upper limit to this: for one, the listener can only tolerate so much volume without the eardrum itself distorting and for two, surely $25000 speakers don't have any property that would make them any less prone to distortion than say, $200 speakers.
This is why I think audiophiles are wasting their time and money. If you demand perfect reproduction, the only true source of the material would be to hear the music live, and *only* live. I guess you could also ask the artist how their work sounds on your system
My point to all this is that there has to be some kind of threshold of expense vs fidelity. I don't know where that is. The end result is so subjective that it's impossible to pinpoint.
It's my belief, from personal experience, that what a listener considers "great-sounding" speakers is not faithful reproduction (because how does one know if it's what the artist intended or not?) but rather the ability to handle increasing amplitude of the wave without "coloring" the wave with distortion (as perceived by the listener). There has to be an upper limit to this: for one, the listener can only tolerate so much volume without the eardrum itself distorting and for two, surely $25000 speakers don't have any property that would make them any less prone to distortion than say, $200 speakers.
This is why I think audiophiles are wasting their time and money. If you demand perfect reproduction, the only true source of the material would be to hear the music live, and *only* live. I guess you could also ask the artist how their work sounds on your system
My point to all this is that there has to be some kind of threshold of expense vs fidelity. I don't know where that is. The end result is so subjective that it's impossible to pinpoint.
- Apr 8, 2004
- 21,258
- 489
- 83
holy crap ... check this out
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/01/16/ces.luxury.turntable/index.html#cnnSTCText
this is something to strive for
four fucking arms? and if you look at the video it seems that only one arm plays at once.
whacko!
Wow, that's stupid. Why not make a turntable out of radioactive gas? Or one that's telepathic? That's what this stuff is about. It has nothing to do with music. People that buy this stuff have never picked up a guitar in their lives.
And don't get me started on vinyl. That's great for albums that never made it onto CD and all but releasing modern albums on vinyl for its proprietary "characteristics"....come on.
I was thinking about this stuff yesterday. If my physics education from 12 years ago serves me well, there are only three components to a wave: frequency, wavelength, and amplitude. A fourth component - distortion - is introduced by the analogue, which would be the speakers in this case (and every component that comes between the CD and the listener's ears). In our case, faithful reproduction of the original signal it what matters. But, how does an "audiophile"` know what is faithful and what is not?
It's my belief, from personal experience, that what a listener considers "great-sounding" speakers is not faithful reproduction (because how does one know if it's what the artist intended or not?) but rather the ability to handle increasing amplitude of the wave without "coloring" the wave with distortion (as perceived by the listener). There has to be an upper limit to this: for one, the listener can only tolerate so much volume without the eardrum itself distorting and for two, surely $25000 speakers don't have any property that would make them any less prone to distortion than say, $200 speakers.
This is why I think audiophiles are wasting their time and money. If you demand perfect reproduction, the only true source of the material would be to hear the music live, and *only* live. I guess you could also ask the artist how their work sounds on your system
My point to all this is that there has to be some kind of threshold of expense vs fidelity. I don't know where that is. The end result is so subjective that it's impossible to pinpoint.
not only that, but if from one listening session to another you develop less or more earwax you're fucked.
and don't get me started on different room dimensions or where you position yourself
audiophiles are whacko
- Apr 8, 2004
- 21,258
- 489
- 83
Krilons Resa
Jerry's married?!
Circuit City ... buh bye
http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/16/news/companies/circuit_city/index.htm?postversion=2009011611
http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/16/news/companies/circuit_city/index.htm?postversion=2009011611
holy crap this is brilliant!!! ... and half the job is drinking 
http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/11/empty-wine-jugs-make-a-fine-6-1-surround-system-who-knew/
http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/11/empty-wine-jugs-make-a-fine-6-1-surround-system-who-knew/
Krilons Resa
Jerry's married?!
Krilons Resa
Jerry's married?!
- Apr 8, 2004
- 21,258
- 489
- 83
Did you just now see that post?Those Sonys are in the garage.I have no means of listening to music in the house. The wife will say, "can you *please* set something up so I can listen to music?" to which I'll respond, "what's the budget?"
Nothing ever comes of it though.
Psychonaut
God Of Emptiness
The cool thing about all of this audiophile crap is that there's pretty much something for everyone's budget. I wish I had the money to pour into this stuff but I think everything I have sounds really good. For the most part, it's a delicate matter of speaker placement and tuning. My mid-budget JBL surround system gets many compliments and I believe it's because I spent hours and hours listening to everything and moving speakers until I thought it sounded right.
- Apr 8, 2004
- 21,258
- 489
- 83
