"Nousaine" wrote in message
news:4tLPa.37141$GL4.8369@rwcrnsc53...
"Harry Lavo" wrote:

..large snips about tests, measurements and jitter .....

Again, I am sure Mr. Nichols' experience is quite real. I am also
sure that the conclusion you seem to want people to infer is simply
unsupportable from his data, because he has NO data on "instruments."
Indeed, he does not state otherwise.

Where's the conflict?


The conflict, Dick, was that SONY and the production plants were all
using
conventional measurements that they *thought* provided adequate quality
control to insure that the finished product would sound like the master.
And these measurements were all based on the "bits is bits" assumption.
But the ear/brain combo said "something doesn't sound right". And by
eliminating possibilities, the problem was narrowed down to the point
where
the *important* variables creating the problem were eliminated because
somebody else had apparently determined the same thing and made sure
those
variables were eliminated. Apparently that Denon plant and the JVC K2
people (that's their XRCD24 line, btw, I believe) trusted their ears too,
at
least the JVC people claim to use rigorous listening as well as
measurement
in setting up their system and Denon is routinely praised by Audiophiles
for
their sound quality (and where John Eargle is (or was?) chief engineer).

Unless something has happened I don't know about I am unaware of John
Eargle's
(IMO probably the finest recording engineer that has ever lived)
association
with Denon. Perhaps you are confusing Delos with Denon.


Oops, my bad! I did make that mistake and in retrospect I know better.
But glad we agree on mr. Eargle's credentials and reputation...although I
might put Marc Aubort up there with him.

But that's not why I'm posting. I want to convey another anecdote. I know
a
fellow who wons a cd production facility. He recounted a story where a
large
Japanese company complained about production samples having 'inferior'
sound
quality.

He copied the defective samples returned to him, reproduced same,
relabeled
some of the 'defective' product and sent them all back. The client then
found
them all to have acceptable sound quality and was happy that he had
'fixed' the
problems.

These anecdotes have no end but by themselves deserve no evidentiary
status.


No doubt people can be fooled but that wasn't the case in the article I
referenced.