Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Moncrieff/IAR
I'm aware that he's been a 'force' in high end for decades, and I've seen
him referenced most recently on chat boards etc the supposed *audible* flaws of SACD. I see also his IAR journal makes claims to be 'scientific', yet is rather free with claims that DVd players sound worse than CD players, that there's audibnle content to 100 Hz, and that things like CD magnetizers work Is this guy taken seriously? By objectivists or subjectivists? And if so, why? -- -S It's not my business to do intelligent work. -- D. Rumsfeld, testifying before the House Armed Services Committee |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
... I'm aware that he's been a 'force' in high end for decades, and I've seen him referenced most recently on chat boards etc the supposed *audible* flaws of SACD. I see also his IAR journal makes claims to be 'scientific', yet is rather free with claims that DVd players sound worse than CD players, that there's audibnle content to 100 Hz, and that things like CD magnetizers work Is this guy taken seriously? By objectivists or subjectivists? And if so, why? As I said in an earlier post the Orions, I stopped subscribing years ago after I found that I could not trust his hearing to be even remotely in sync with my own, and after I determined that he favored certain people/companies under the guise of "objectivism", and after his quirky and unreliable nature as a businessman became evident. I don't see why anybody on either side should take him seriously. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message
... I'm aware that he's been a 'force' in high end for decades, and I've seen him referenced most recently on chat boards etc the supposed *audible* flaws of SACD. I see also his IAR journal makes claims to be 'scientific', yet is rather free with claims that DVd players sound worse than CD players, that there's audibnle content to 100 Hz, and that things like CD magnetizers work Is this guy taken seriously? By objectivists or subjectivists? And if so, why? Please ignore my other post. I had a brain fart tonight and confused Moncrieff with Peter Aczel of The Audio Critic. Mongrieff is much more objective and scientific...did some very nice work in the early days on phono cartridges, and in general his work on the sound of phono preamps in the '70's I found to square with what I heard. Haven't read him for years; I'm surprised the magazine (IAR) still exists. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Harry Lavo wrote:
Please ignore my other post. I had a brain fart tonight and confused Moncrieff with Peter Aczel of The Audio Critic. Mongrieff is much more objective and scientific... I'm surprised at your judgment. I know of no one, today, whose reviews are "as scientific" than Mr. Aczels. His speaker reviews are after the fashion of the Richard Heyser-Audio school; that is, highly measurement driven. You may also want to check out his recent review of the Benchmark DAC 1. I'm thinking you'll find it to be quite rigorous, objective, and scientific. michael |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Harry Lavo wrote:
"Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... I'm aware that he's been a 'force' in high end for decades, and I've seen him referenced most recently on chat boards etc the supposed *audible* flaws of SACD. I see also his IAR journal makes claims to be 'scientific', yet is rather free with claims that DVd players sound worse than CD players, that there's audibnle content to 100 Hz, and that things like CD magnetizers work Is this guy taken seriously? By objectivists or subjectivists? And if so, why? Please ignore my other post. I had a brain fart tonight and confused Moncrieff with Peter Aczel of The Audio Critic. Mongrieff is much more objective and scientific...did some very nice work in the early days on phono cartridges, and in general his work on the sound of phono preamps in the '70's I found to square with what I heard. Haven't read him for years; I'm surprised the magazine (IAR) still exists. Moncrief started out with some promise, advocating straight wire bypass tests for amplifiers, but soon after he started selling capacitors, he became a lot less rigorous. He now waxes on about botique cables and the like. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ...
Harry Lavo wrote: "Steven Sullivan" wrote in message ... I'm aware that he's been a 'force' in high end for decades, and I've seen him referenced most recently on chat boards etc the supposed *audible* flaws of SACD. I see also his IAR journal makes claims to be 'scientific', yet is rather free with claims that DVd players sound worse than CD players, that there's audibnle content to 100 Hz, and that things like CD magnetizers work Is this guy taken seriously? By objectivists or subjectivists? And if so, why? Please ignore my other post. I had a brain fart tonight and confused Moncrieff with Peter Aczel of The Audio Critic. Mongrieff is much more objective and scientific...did some very nice work in the early days on phono cartridges, and in general his work on the sound of phono preamps in the '70's I found to square with what I heard. Haven't read him for years; I'm surprised the magazine (IAR) still exists. Moncrief started out with some promise, advocating straight wire bypass tests for amplifiers, but soon after he started selling capacitors, he became a lot less rigorous. He now waxes on about botique cables and the like. He actually did a very fine cable survey in the early eighties...measuring resistance and capacitance versus frequency and trying to link it to subjective sound qualities. He found differences, but also concluded that many cables sounded much alike. |