Re: Expensive cable!

[isw <isw@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

In article <jNWdnacv5qGJKpHVnZ2dnUVZ_rKtnZ2d@xxxxxxx>,
 "Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> "Lewis Gardner" <lgardner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:480ca8b1$0$19784$d94e5ade@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Robert Green wrote:
> >
> > >>>But I did hear a difference.
> > >>
> > >>I have a strong suspicion that if the changes had been made without your
> > >>knowledge and participation (or had not been made, but you were told
> > >>they were), you would have found it considerably *more* difficult to
> > >>hear any difference. Impossible, even.
> > >
> > > While your point is well taken, it's very likely there was a difference.
> > > Unless that SMF was pulling the old "Circuit City" trick of having much
> more
> > > expensive speakers accidentally also be switched on when you ask to
> listen
> > > to the sale price speakers, there's a very good chance that there was a
> > > substantial, detectable difference in the ability to reproduce atypical
> > > program material ( i.e. "non-musical" sounds).
> > For me the key was "non-musical" sounds. Even though we played some
> > classical samples I could not hear a difference. It could be that my
> > ears are not "developed" enough but I do hear the bus on The Trinity
> > Sessions.
>
> I said "non-musical" sounds with great trepidation because fans of groups
> like "Art of Noise" might take serious exception.  I just read an article
> somewhere that claimed that overall, musical fidelity expectations have
> become quite low since so many people listen to music exclusively through
> MP3 player headphones.  If you know where to listen, MP3 compression has
> some serious limitations, and ironically, they're in the quietest of
> passages where it's easy to hear compression artifacts.

It's a lot more accurate to call what the MP3 algorithm does "encoding"
rather than "compression", as "compression" has a long history with a
very different meaning, in audio. "Compression" reduces the difference
in amplitude between loud and soft passages; MP3 encoding does no such
thing.

MP3 encoding isn't a yes/no thing, it's a toolkit (actually, a group of
them, as all encoders are distinctly NOT identical in performance).
Which brand of "tool" is chosen, and the skill with which it is used,
can make all the difference. Using an inadequate encoding algorithm or
too low a bitrate, can certainly make for bad sound.

*Properly* encoded with a superior algorithm, MP3 is indistinguishable
from CD source (and that includes "noises" as well as "music") by almost
all *professionals* (who know precisely what artifacts to listen for),
for almost *all* source material. Less skilled listeners don't stand
much of a chance of telling the difference.

> > No tricks. Just the two of us and equipment. No switching devices were
> > used. When speakers were switched we physically moved the speakers in
> > and out of position and swapped wires. This did not allow AB testing but
> > what we were listening for was the ability to hear additional background
> > sounds like distant birds and insects. You either heard them, didn't
> > hear them or heard something but couldn't make it out.
>
> I'll bet that acoustically speaking, that a far-away insect looks a lot like
> a noise transient that needs filtering!  There was a time when I could hear
> the difference between an Alan Parsons LP and a CD, but that was a while
> back.
>
> The format I chose wasn't about audio fidelity as much as overall audio
> quality.  LPs that had very quiet opening passages were virtually impossible
> to keep pristine.  The "landing" of the needle, no matter how gentle, was a
> landing nonetheless.  Unless you could handle LP's as adroitly as a juggler,
> after a while, the pops would appear.  Not so with CD's.  Quiet passages
> aren't as quiet as they could be, but they stay quiet a lot longer.

Quiet passages on a CD are demonstrably over 20 dB *quieter* than
anything a vinyl can manage under any conditions, even when brand-new,
and no matter how "fine" the playback gear is. If you can hear "noise"
on a CD, it's because it was in the source material to begin with, and
so is part of the recording (and therefore something that any good
system *should* reproduce).

Isaac