[Eeyore]

MiNe 109 wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote:

Idle speculation suggests a problem with
harmonically complex high frequency sounds.

Next.

Weird DAC distortions.

If that's the case, they can be measured.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Harry Lavo wrote:

You know damn well I am speaking of filter pre-echo on transient bursts, not
tape or groove pre-echo of musical passages.

It's not pre-echo.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Harry Lavo wrote:

I am not interested in cryogenic treatment, okay? I have zero interest in
it. My comments were about the quality of Meitner's design, engineering,
and production, which were impugned here, but are standards within both the
pro audio community and the high-end audio community.

I have never heard a single pro-audio practicioner mention his stuff.

OTOH......
http://www.prismsound.com/music_reco...tudio_home.php

I've worked for these guys myself in fact.

Graham

[Eeyore]

MiNe 109 wrote:


"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote
"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote

Idle speculation suggests a problem with
harmonically complex high frequency sounds.

Next.

Weird DAC distortions.

Next.

Lack of sufficiently high frequency range to properly form combinant
tones.

What frequency do you reckon is required ?

Graham

[Eeyore]

Jenn wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

Graham

[Eeyore]

MiNe 109 wrote:

Brick-wall filtering artifacts.

Modern converters aren't brick wall filtered though. That's the whole
raison d'etre ( or one of them ) of oversampling.

Graham

[Jenn]

Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

Graham

As Sondheim wrote, "There won't be trumpets..."
http://64.41.69.21/technical/reference/

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank. Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make you buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote:

Idle speculation suggests a problem with
harmonically complex high frequency sounds.

Next.

Weird DAC distortions.

If that's the case, they can be measured.

Of course.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:


"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote
"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote

Idle speculation suggests a problem with
harmonically complex high frequency sounds.

Next.

Weird DAC distortions.

Next.

Lack of sufficiently high frequency range to properly form combinant
tones.

What frequency do you reckon is required ?

100kHz, to be safe. :-)

No opinion beyond "probably higher than cd."

Stephen

[Eeyore]

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Jenn" wrote

My only gripe with your "Trumpets" files is that it doesn't sound like real
trumpets, because they aren't real trumpets.

Where did I say that they are real trumpets, and where is it written on
stone that they have to be real trumpets for the intended purpose, which is
hearing differences?

Probably because if the sample is labelled 'trumpets' you might reasonably expect
it to be a sample of trumpets ?

Graham

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

http://www.pcabx.com/product/reference/

Stephen

[Eeyore]

Jenn wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

My only gripe with your
"Trumpets" files is that they don't sound like real
trumpets, because they aren't real trumpets.

Where did I say that they are real trumpets,

Sept. 25, 2006
Jenn: By the way, for truth in advertising purposes on your site,
you should
relabel "trumpets" "violin" etc. as "synth trumpet" "synth violin" etc.

Arny: Those are recordigns of real instruments. They are just recorded
in a way that you lack the mental abilities to recognize as being the
sound of a real instrument.

This is way too funny !

Graham

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

Brick-wall filtering artifacts.

Modern converters aren't brick wall filtered though. That's the whole
raison d'etre ( or one of them ) of oversampling.

Good thing!

Stephen

[Eeyore]

Jenn wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

Graham

As Sondheim wrote, "There won't be trumpets..."
http://64.41.69.21/technical/reference/

Good Lord ! I'll bet that sounds good through a QSC amplifier !

Graham

[Eeyore]

MiNe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank. Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make you buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Eh ?

Surround sound is a tedious distraction. It's fine for big screen movies but
utterly pointless in the home. It sounds so *fake* !

Graham

[Eeyore]

MiNe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
MiNe 109 wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote
"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote

Idle speculation suggests a problem with
harmonically complex high frequency sounds.

Next.

Weird DAC distortions.

Next.

Lack of sufficiently high frequency range to properly form combinant
tones.

What frequency do you reckon is required ?

100kHz, to be safe. :-)

No opinion beyond "probably higher than cd."

Do please elaborate how the ear hears that high.

Graham

[Jenn]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

Graham

As Sondheim wrote, "There won't be trumpets..."
http://64.41.69.21/technical/reference/

Good Lord ! I'll bet that sounds good through a QSC amplifier !

Graham

Or a QVC

[Harry Lavo]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


MiNe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank.
Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make
you buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Eh ?

Surround sound is a tedious distraction. It's fine for big screen movies
but
utterly pointless in the home. It sounds so *fake* !


Please describe in enough detail that we can understand, what has led you to
this conclusion. Surround setup? Media used? Types of music listened to.
Specific disks that meet your "fake" categorization. I'd really like to
understand how you could come to such a radically different conclusion from
Kal, Steven, and I.

[Harry Lavo]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Harry Lavo wrote:

I am not interested in cryogenic treatment, okay? I have zero interest
in
it. My comments were about the quality of Meitner's design, engineering,
and production, which were impugned here, but are standards within both
the
pro audio community and the high-end audio community.

I have never heard a single pro-audio practicioner mention his stuff.

OTOH......
http://www.prismsound.com/music_reco...tudio_home.php

I've worked for these guys myself in fact.

Graham

And how much surround work do you do? That is where Meitner has made his
name.

[Eeyore]

Jenn wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

Graham

As Sondheim wrote, "There won't be trumpets..."
http://64.41.69.21/technical/reference/

Good Lord ! I'll bet that sounds good through a QSC amplifier !

Graham

Or a QVC

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that.

I fail to see how that sample can be of any use at all when evaluating
sound quality.

I note also the lack of any female ( or male ) voice.

The piano is pretty crap too. The S/N is especially lousy It also sounds
like it was recorded about 20 feet away.

I wish he wouldn't cut off the reverb tails too.

Finger snaps !!!!

French Horns ??

I'm afraid I'm actually crying with laughter.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Harry Lavo wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
MiNe 109 wrote:
In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
MiNe 109 wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank.
Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make
you buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Eh ?

Surround sound is a tedious distraction. It's fine for big screen movies
but utterly pointless in the home. It sounds so *fake* !

Please describe in enough detail that we can understand, what has led you to
this conclusion. Surround setup? Media used? Types of music listened to.
Specific disks that meet your "fake" categorization. I'd really like to
understand how you could come to such a radically different conclusion from
Kal, Steven, and I.

The setup is totally irrelevant. There's too much energy in the rear channels so
it sounds fake.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Harry Lavo wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Harry Lavo wrote:

I am not interested in cryogenic treatment, okay? I have zero interest
in
it. My comments were about the quality of Meitner's design, engineering,
and production, which were impugned here, but are standards within both
the pro audio community and the high-end audio community.

I have never heard a single pro-audio practicioner mention his stuff.

OTOH......
http://www.prismsound.com/music_reco...tudio_home.php

I've worked for these guys myself in fact.

Graham

And how much surround work do you do? That is where Meitner has made his
name.

What's that got to do with it ?

Graham

[Jenn]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

Graham

As Sondheim wrote, "There won't be trumpets..."
http://64.41.69.21/technical/reference/

Good Lord ! I'll bet that sounds good through a QSC amplifier !

Graham

Or a QVC

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that.

Television home shopping network.


I fail to see how that sample can be of any use at all when evaluating
sound quality.

I note also the lack of any female ( or male ) voice.

The piano is pretty crap too. The S/N is especially lousy It also sounds
like it was recorded about 20 feet away.

I wish he wouldn't cut off the reverb tails too.

Finger snaps !!!!

French Horns ??

I'm afraid I'm actually crying with laughter.

Graham

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
MiNe 109 wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote
"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote

Idle speculation suggests a problem with
harmonically complex high frequency sounds.

Next.

Weird DAC distortions.

Next.

Lack of sufficiently high frequency range to properly form combinant
tones.

What frequency do you reckon is required ?

100kHz, to be safe. :-)

No opinion beyond "probably higher than cd."

Do please elaborate how the ear hears that high.

Combination tones, but skin and bone conduction (not the ear) or some
less understood mechanisms are probably in play.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank.
Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make you
buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Eh ?

Surround sound is a tedious distraction. It's fine for big screen movies but
utterly pointless in the home. It sounds so *fake* !

Sorry to be circular about it, but that seems like bad recording/mixing.

My surround system is still in transition, but so far I've enjoyed the
Roy Orbison "Black and White Night" in Dolby 5 channel. I'm saving the
good classical stuff for when my better speakers are up and running
again.

The Silvertone Mavericks DVD-A fits your description: all the
disadvantages of dvd menus and rear channel info consisting of a slight
delay of the front channels.

Stephen

[[email protected]]

Stuart Krivis wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006 14:16:13 -0700, wrote:


Stuart Krivis wrote:
On 5 Oct 2006 14:15:38 -0700, wrote:


Stuart Krivis wrote:
On 5 Oct 2006 10:43:41 -0700, wrote:



Don't expect anyone else to like it though !

And yet amazingly, outside of the intellectual dungeon known as Usenet,
most people agree with me.

Oh, c'mon, you're way off on the fringe of even "high-end" audio.

Hyperbole doesn't win arguments.

That wasn't hyperbole.

Did you have to look it up in the dictionary first?


No, but I've looked you up in the dictionary. You don't want to know
what I found.

I'll make the same offer to you as I did to Arny. As long as the check
clears, I won't tell anyone I'm helping you write decent material.

Boon

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

Harry Lavo wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
MiNe 109 wrote:
In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
MiNe 109 wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank.
Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make
you buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Eh ?

Surround sound is a tedious distraction. It's fine for big screen movies
but utterly pointless in the home. It sounds so *fake* !

Please describe in enough detail that we can understand, what has led you
to
this conclusion. Surround setup? Media used? Types of music listened to.
Specific disks that meet your "fake" categorization. I'd really like to
understand how you could come to such a radically different conclusion from
Kal, Steven, and I.

The setup is totally irrelevant. There's too much energy in the rear channels
so it sounds fake.

That's not universally the case! and many receivers/processors will
allow you to turn down the surrounds. At least mention a recording.

Stephen

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com
Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com
You keep talking about logic, yet you're the one who
thinks he knows what things sound like before he hears
them.

Given how flawed the evaluations you do are Boonie, this
would be you who *knows* what things sound like before
he has properly heard them.

Again, you're guessing. Tell me about one evaluation
I've done in the field of audio that has been discussed
with you.

Wrong question. The right question relates to the evaluations you've bragged
about on RAO and the web that I've read.

You've read a web? Fascinating. Was the spider's name Charlotte?

Boon

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jenn" wrote

If by "bile" you mean that I correctly pointed out that
the file isn't a recording of real trumpets, then yes I
posted "bile".

Dream on.

Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

Where can I find these 'trumpets' ?

Graham

As Sondheim wrote, "There won't be trumpets..."
http://64.41.69.21/technical/reference/

Good Lord ! I'll bet that sounds good through a QSC amplifier !

Graham

Or a QVC

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that.

It's a home shopping network.

I fail to see how that sample can be of any use at all when evaluating
sound quality.

I note also the lack of any female ( or male ) voice.

The piano is pretty crap too. The S/N is especially lousy It also sounds
like it was recorded about 20 feet away.

I wish he wouldn't cut off the reverb tails too.

Finger snaps !!!!

French Horns ??

I'm afraid I'm actually crying with laughter.

The castanets were a big hit a few years back!

I like these castanets better when they walk away:

http://www.splendidezine.com/features/alejandro/

Stephen

[Harry Lavo]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Harry Lavo wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
Harry Lavo wrote:

I am not interested in cryogenic treatment, okay? I have zero
interest
in
it. My comments were about the quality of Meitner's design,
engineering,
and production, which were impugned here, but are standards within
both
the pro audio community and the high-end audio community.

I have never heard a single pro-audio practicioner mention his stuff.

OTOH......
http://www.prismsound.com/music_reco...tudio_home.php

I've worked for these guys myself in fact.

Graham

And how much surround work do you do? That is where Meitner has made his
name.

What's that got to do with it ?


You say "I have never heard a single pro-audio practicioner mention his
stuff". Well, you wouldn't unless you hobnob with the folks who do a lot of
surround encoding. That's what's got to do with it?

[Harry Lavo]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Harry Lavo wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message
MiNe 109 wrote:
In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
MiNe 109 wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank.
Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to
make
you buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Eh ?

Surround sound is a tedious distraction. It's fine for big screen
movies
but utterly pointless in the home. It sounds so *fake* !

Please describe in enough detail that we can understand, what has led you
to
this conclusion. Surround setup? Media used? Types of music listened
to.
Specific disks that meet your "fake" categorization. I'd really like to
understand how you could come to such a radically different conclusion
from
Kal, Steven, and I.

The setup is totally irrelevant. There's too much energy in the rear
channels so
it sounds fake.


How can the setup not matter? I can put far too much energy into my rear
channels if I want to. But that's what surround calibration disks are for.
And with proper rear channel setup, it is only an occassional disk that I
find has "too much" in the rear channels. More often I find "too little"
ambience (classical, jazz) or too little imagination (pop) reflecting many
engineers caution with the newness of the medium.

[paul packer]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:40:42 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



paul packer wrote:

If CD were a faulty medium, it could not make as good a sound
as it does so often--and for Jenn, I include orchestral violins in
that comment. But it's an exacting medium, more so than analogue, and
so requires a surer hand at the recording consol.

Not really.

As long as it doesn't clip it's just fine. Given the huge headroom it can offer
that's hardly a problem.

Graham


To both you and Arnie, I should have referred not to the recording
consol but CD production generally, including the choice of venue.
Whatever is the cause, there's no doubt that CD sound can vary wildly,
and what's more, there are certain labels that put out pretty
consistently poor sound. Among classical labels, I would single out
EMI as producing quite a lot of harsh, overly-bright recordings that
I've never been able to get to sound good with any combination of
equipment. I recently purchased Vaughan Williams' Symphony 5 on EMI
Eminence (Vernon Handley) and the sound is truly dire. What's more, I
came across a professional CD reviewer's reflections on CD sound on
the Net the other day, and he made a similar remark. So why should a
major label be consistently putting out poor sounding orchestral CDs?

Incidentally, I'm not damning all EMI clasical product. Obviously
they've done some great recordings.

[paul packer]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:01:37 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
paul packer wrote:

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 16:03:49 GMT, Jenn
wrote:

Just as how anyone can pretend that the sound of
violins (for example) on CD is hi-fi is beyond me. My
opinion on that was reinforced again at Disney Hall.
But YMMV, and that's fine, in my opinion.

It's true that violins do seem to suffer in the digital
domain more than most instruments.

Can anyone put a finger on this ? Violins aren't
something I routinely listen to so I'm a little in the
dark here.

Yes, Paul is as usual making it up as he goes along.

Why are you mentioning me? I didn't write that.

Having said that, I made a brief recording of my
next-door neighbour ( professional musician ) playing his
violin on my Mini-disc a while back and it sounded Ok to
me.

I do know that massed violins and choirs are very effective at making SETs
do their intermodulation thingie. They can be pretty good for detecting
timbre changes in the midrange. However, in the PCABX tests, it was
generally found that the Trumpets sample that Jenn hates so much was more
effective at doing the same thing for a lot of people.

Back in the days of vinyl, massed violins could sometimes elicit mistracking
and inner-groove distortion. But again, other instruments were often more
sensitive tests. My recollection is that again, brass instruments could be
the tougher challenge.

Why would massed strings elicit inner-groove distortion? Inner groove
distortion is caused by inner grooves, and tends to affect the whole
sound. It's simply obvious distortion, not hardness or brittleness. As
for mistracking, with LPs I always found heavy bass and choirs at
fortissimo the most likely culprits.

[paul packer]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 19:26:16 GMT, Jenn
wrote:


Are you still trying to say that those are real trumpets?

You've got me confused with someone who cares. The purpose of the
www.pcabx.com Trumpet samples is to enhance human abilities to hear certain
common kinds of audible differences, not sell brass trumpets.

I simply asked a question. My only gripe with your "Trumpets" files is
that it doesn't sound like real trumpets, because they aren't real
trumpets. Other than that, I don't care about them. If they serve your
purpose, fine. But they shouldn't be labeled "Trumpets" for they most
assuredly aren't trumpets.


I wonder if Arnie really listens to classical music. I remember my
brother proudly playing a recording of a "violin" done from his
synthesizer and being quite put out when I complained that it didn't
sound anything like a violin. He was into Deep Purple and Black
Sabbath.

[[email protected]]

Eeyore wrote:
MiNe 109 wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank. Remember that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make you buy the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Graham
=====================================

Eeyore states:

" Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Graham

Just for interest. Which surround sound systems
you have experimented with?
Are you talking from general principles or experience?
A few details for us the plebes, please.

Ludovic Mirabel

[paul packer]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:13:47 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


However, it is quite clear that the goal of some synthesizers is an accurate
imitation of acoustic instruments:

http://lonestar.texas.net/~mr88cet/r...uningVl70.html

"Some of the VLs' simulations are really quite extraordinary. If adjusted
carefully, the best handful of these simulations truly are difficult to
distinguish from the real instruments themselves (or from recordings of
those instruments at least). That is, provided that - and this is a very
important criterion - you make an effort to play them in a manner
characteristic of that instrument and of its performers."

Is the person writing that an orchestral music lover who regularly
attends live concerts? Because if he/she isn't, his/her opinion is
valueless.

[paul packer]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:24:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


A total strawman that has not been any part of the
discussion thread.

Dissemble on, dude.


Hmmm...getting out in the fresh air seems to break down Arnie's
inhibitions.

Does nothing for his vocabulary though.

[paul packer]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:49:34 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


I'm merely stating the obvious. However to people with sufficiently low
brows, such as those whose life's accomplishment has been to wait on tables
in bars, it may seem to be more.


Foul, Arnold. That's out of line by any standards.

[[email protected]]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
" wrote:

A few observartions:
1) About cryogenics. No doubt Krivis investigated the
subject and published his results in a respectable peer
revieved audio journal. I don't know if Meitner did. But
if neither did it we have to decide whose authority to
take seriously: Meitner of Museatex or Krivis of RAO.

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank. Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

I've never bothered with it. Sounds mainly like an excuse to make you buy
the
same back catalogue all over again.

Surround sound is potentially a major improvement.

Surround sound is a gimmick mainly.

Howard! Calling Howard!

No, it's a major step forward, more so once the recording side catches
up.

Stephen
======================

You quote Mr. Eeyo

Any clown who considers freezing something to make it
sound better ought to be locked up and the key thrown
away.

I suspect that Meitner hopes to laugh all the way to the bank. Remember
that
in addition to cryogenic CDs Meitner also promotes the magical
properties of
the SACD format.

The dwarf slanderers of RAO are keen to drag everyone to their own
gutters' level. Anyone well-known in audio is out to cheat them out of
their money..

I can not remember if it was Eeyore, or someone like him, who a few
days ago was accusing Meitner of praising phono to "laugh all the way
to the bank"..

It was pointed out that Meitner never made phono equipment. Never mind-
he "promotes" cryogenically treated disks. Except that Meitner does not
make disks any disks- cryogenically treated or not.

Sort of nauseating.
Ludovic Mirabel