AudioBanter.com - View Single Post

wrote:
wrote:

Amateur musicians such as myself and even more so professional
musicians such as Jenn are aware that music exists as a balance of
qualties. The only distortion mechanisms you've ever proposed, if they
were the cause of this vinyl preference, would *upset*, not *preserve*
these balances. You have never proposed a distortion mechanism that
would preserve the musician's intentions, and yet that is how I (and
apparently Jenn) experience analog.

Yet more evidence that your perceptions are not necessarily a good
measure of objective reality.

Rather, your measurements are not necessarily a good description of the
reality of experience.

Those distortions are there, easily measurable, and--by the standards
of modern audio reproduction--quite large in magnitude. Given that, we
have a limited number of possible explanations for the common
perception that vinyl is closer to the live event (however you may wish
to express that):

1) These distortions are euphonic--they may be distortions, but they
sound good to you, and may in some ways evoke things that please you
when listening to live music.

If you wish to undermine the ability of a musician to judge whether a
recording accurately captures their intentions, then you wish to
undermine the whole basis by which musicians get better at their craft
over time. Or recording engineers.

So once again an objectivist must substitute his own langauge. Now we
have vague statements like "sounds good" or "evoke things" (whatever
these 'things' are). How a distortion could more accurately convey
musical intentions remains unexplained.

Mike