[Sonnova]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 10:33:09 -0800, bob wrote
(in article ):

On Nov 20, 10:41 am, Sonnova wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:09:08 -0800, bob wrote
(in article ):

On Nov 19, 5:04 pm, Sonnova wrote:

I'm not. The whole point of my participation in this discussion is that if
we
can't make an audio system convey the sense of realism associated with
live
music by making each link in the chain as perfectly squeeky-clean as is
technologically possible, then perhaps that kind of accuracy is not all
that
important to the reproduction of music.

You are confused on a number of levels. First of all, "sense of
realism" has relatively little to do with quality of reproduction, and
relatively much to do with the listener's--to borrow a phrase--willing
suspension of disbelief.

Since I agree with you fully, I must not be too terribly confused.

You may agree with it, but it's the opposite of what you've been
saying so far.

You can't engineer for that, except perhaps
to give people tone controls and DSP and such, to allow them to get
for themselves whatever sound promotes that suspension of disbelief--
for them. (Note that the high-end gods decree this approach to be
anathema.)

But that's my point.

Then you haven't made your point very well, I'm afraid.

Or it might be sufficient to give people a dial to turn
that doesn't actually do anything to the sound--that they simply
believe they are altering the sound may be all it takes to convince
them it sounds "more real."

That might work with some people, not with others

Oh, yes, it'll work with everybody. The research on psychoacoustic
bias (which this is an example of) is quite clear. I could easily fool
you with something like that.

You're also confusing the specific with the general. A particular
distortion profile--that associated with vinyl playback--may well be
euphonious for some number of listeners. That does not mean that
distortion in general is benign.

I never said it was benign. You read that into my words.

Your exact words were, "not all that important." Extensive research
suggests you're wrong about that.

Why don't you be a little more honest and quote me in context? I said that
given that euphonic colorations can make music sound more "real" then perhaps
accuracy is not all that important (I'm paraphrasing here for brevity, but
that's essentially what I said). Oh, yes, and you notice that the "perhaps"
makes my assertion a rhetorical query, not a statement.

There's plenty of research--as Arny
said, dating back to the 30s--showing that in general, most people
prefer non-distorted sound most of the time.

As do I. You really don't have a clue as to where I'm coming from, do you?



Audio gear has been made since Thomas Edison by profit-seeking firms.
The emphasis has been on lowering distortion because that's what the
public at large wanted, and profit-seeking firms always try to give
the people what they want. That there exists a handful of people who
like something else doesn't change the general case.

No, you don't get it. I'm sorry for that. I was hoping for a nice
discussion.
All I get is people purposely misrepresenting what I write, followed by an
inordinate amount of hostility. Too bad.

No one is intentionaly misreading wqhat you said. We are trying to
understand your very muddled (and apparently not particularly well-
informed) arguments. If everyone is getting them wrong, perhaps the
problem is not with everyone, but with the person who isn't expressing
himself very well?

I'm expressing myself extremely clearly. What is happening is that there are
a few of you on this NG who purposely misinterpret, and misread other
people's posts with the intent of discrediting anyone who doesn't agree with
them.

The last time I was in this group was about 5-6 years ago and there was lot
more activity than there is today. I now think I know why.

To set the record straight, my assertions in this thread a

1) Modern CD technology is excellent, but I have *some* phonograph records
that sound better than the best CDs. I am a recording engineer. I think I
know what real music sounds like.

2) Since it is a given that LP is fraught with inaccuracies and mechanical as
well as electrical distortions and compromises, If there are LPs that sound
better than any CD, then it must be a fortuitous arrangement of circumstances
whereby the colorations inherent in the medium have combined to make the
whole better than the sum of its parts.

3) I never said that distortion, in and of itself, was good or in any way
desirable. I did say that certain euphonic colorations MIGHT be beneficial to
achieving at least some of the emotional impact of music in the home.

4) It is my contention that most people don't care about accurate sound at
all, they just want to hear the tunes.

As for not being well informed, what have I said to give you THAT impression?