Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
|
#2
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique of the magazines
wrote in message ink.net... http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html Somewhat dated but still spot on. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
said:
http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html Somewhat dated but still spot on. Like this excerpt about "The Audio Critic"? ;-) - begin quote: - The new problem for me, and most others, is the editor no longer believes that any component, other than loudspeakers, can make an audible difference (improvement) in the sound; a cheap (powerful) receiver will sound as good as any power amplifier; the same with CD players, cables, preamp line-stages etc. He states he can prove all this with ABX testing. He also feels analogue, meaning phono reproduction, is far inferior to any CD player and that "tubes are for boobs". No, I am not exaggerating. While I concur about the prime importance of speakers and listening rooms, I don't agree with their position on tubes, phono reproduction, and everything else sounding the same, though I do feel that the sonic differences in most cases are greatly exaggerated. Frankly, if I felt the same way the editor did about audio components, I wouldn't even bother being involved with an audio magazine in the first place. It would be too boring, and besides; What's the point? According to their own findings and philosophy, all you have to do to get the best sound possible is to buy the cheapest receiver, CD player and cables you can find, then buy your favorite loudspeaker with all the money you saved. Further, the only improvement you will ever be able make in the future is with a better pair of speakers. Everything else must be, in effect, perfect, because it all sounds exactly the same. There is also a continually angry, bitter and negative tone to the writing that may put one off. - end quote - -- "Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes." - Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005 |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message ... said: http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html Somewhat dated but still spot on. Like this excerpt about "The Audio Critic"? ;-) - begin quote: - The new problem for me, and most others, is the editor no longer believes that any component, other than loudspeakers, can make an audible difference (improvement) in the sound; a cheap (powerful) receiver will sound as good as any power amplifier; the same with CD players, cables, preamp line-stages etc. He states he can prove all this with ABX testing. He also feels analogue, meaning phono reproduction, is far inferior to any CD player and that "tubes are for boobs". No, I am not exaggerating. While I concur about the prime importance of speakers and listening rooms, I don't agree with their position on tubes, phono reproduction, and everything else sounding the same, though I do feel that the sonic differences in most cases are greatly exaggerated. Frankly, if I felt the same way the editor did about audio components, I wouldn't even bother being involved with an audio magazine in the first place. It would be too boring, and besides; What's the point? According to their own findings and philosophy, all you have to do to get the best sound possible is to buy the cheapest receiver, CD player and cables you can find, then buy your favorite loudspeaker with all the money you saved. Further, the only improvement you will ever be able make in the future is with a better pair of speakers. Everything else must be, in effect, perfect, because it all sounds exactly the same. There is also a continually angry, bitter and negative tone to the writing that may put one off. - end quote - -- I didn't say it was perfect. I don't agree with AC's notions about there being not being any components other than loudspeakers that can affect the sound of an audio system, obviously the WAVAC can. Phono cartridges seem to as well as their preamps, but as for the rest................... Cables, are surely not going to change or improve anything. I don't want anything to do with tubes, and I certainly have yet to hear a difference in CD players, or any of the amps or receivers I've owned. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 21:07:30 GMT, wrote:
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message .. . said: http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html Somewhat dated but still spot on. Like this excerpt about "The Audio Critic"? ;-) - begin quote: - The new problem for me, and most others, is the editor no longer believes that any component, other than loudspeakers, can make an audible difference (improvement) in the sound; a cheap (powerful) receiver will sound as good as any power amplifier; the same with CD players, cables, preamp line-stages etc. He states he can prove all this with ABX testing. He also feels analogue, meaning phono reproduction, is far inferior to any CD player and that "tubes are for boobs". No, I am not exaggerating. While I concur about the prime importance of speakers and listening rooms, I don't agree with their position on tubes, phono reproduction, and everything else sounding the same, though I do feel that the sonic differences in most cases are greatly exaggerated. Frankly, if I felt the same way the editor did about audio components, I wouldn't even bother being involved with an audio magazine in the first place. It would be too boring, and besides; What's the point? According to their own findings and philosophy, all you have to do to get the best sound possible is to buy the cheapest receiver, CD player and cables you can find, then buy your favorite loudspeaker with all the money you saved. Further, the only improvement you will ever be able make in the future is with a better pair of speakers. Everything else must be, in effect, perfect, because it all sounds exactly the same. There is also a continually angry, bitter and negative tone to the writing that may put one off. - end quote - -- I didn't say it was perfect. I don't agree with AC's notions about there being not being any components other than loudspeakers that can affect the sound of an audio system, obviously the WAVAC can. Phono cartridges seem to as well as their preamps, but as for the rest................... Cables, are surely not going to change or improve anything. I don't want anything to do with tubes, and I certainly have yet to hear a difference in CD players, or any of the amps or receivers I've owned. You should test your ability to determine *subtle* differences with dbts. |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
dave weil a écrit :
You should test your ability to determine *subtle* differences with dbts. You should test your ability to hear *big* frequency hole in bull**** speakers before trying to teach the others... ;-) Considering your review of Trotsky speakers your HiFi credibility is nearly zero Dave. -- Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote. But what's new around here? Dave Weil - Sun, 05 Oct 2003 00:57:15 -0500 |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
wrote in message link.net... .... and I certainly have yet to hear a difference in CD players, or any of the amps or receivers I've owned. At this point, I'm not even sure that you have listened to any of them, yes, that you have even listened to any of your own equipment. Instead of actually listening to Respighi's The Pines of Rome, all you had to do was read a review by someone else who listened to it, and voila, you have acquired perfect understanding of the work. |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
Sander deWaal wrote:
said: http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html Somewhat dated but still spot on. Like this excerpt about "The Audio Critic"? ;-) - begin quote: - The new problem for me, and most others, is the editor no longer believes that any component, other than loudspeakers, can make an audible difference (improvement) in the sound; a cheap (powerful) receiver will sound as good as any power amplifier; the same with CD players, cables, preamp line-stages etc. He states he can prove all this with ABX testing. He also feels analogue, meaning phono reproduction, is far inferior to any CD player and that "tubes are for boobs". No, I am not exaggerating. THe writer's incredulity tells a tale on him. While I concur about the prime importance of speakers and listening rooms, I don't agree with their position on tubes, phono reproduction, and everything else sounding the same, though I do feel that the sonic differences in most cases are greatly exaggerated. Frankly, if I felt the same way the editor did about audio components, I wouldn't even bother being involved with an audio magazine in the first place. It would be too boring, and besides; What's the point? Speakers and room treatments and recordings constitute a rather large scope for reviewable items -- as do the feature-sets available on most modern components (minimalist hi-end nonsense excluded). The writer simply lacks imagination in this instance. According to their own findings and philosophy, all you have to do to get the best sound possible is to buy the cheapest receiver, CD player and cables you can find, then buy your favorite loudspeaker with all the money you saved. Further, the only improvement you will ever be able make in the future is with a better pair of speakers. Everything else must be, in effect, perfect, because it all sounds exactly the same. This is , in effect, an exaggeration of what Aczel has written. And the writer presents no evidence that real sonic improvements routinely accrue from changing cables, CD players, or receivers. That's because there isn't any. There is also a continually angry, bitter and negative tone to the writing that may put one off. Just like Mikey Fremer was put off by the writer, I guess. -- -S "The most appealing intuitive argument for atheism is the mindblowing stupidity of religious fundamentalists." -- Ginger Yellow |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
"dave weil" wrote in message ... On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 21:07:30 GMT, wrote: "Sander deWaal" wrote in message . .. said: http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html Somewhat dated but still spot on. Like this excerpt about "The Audio Critic"? ;-) - begin quote: - The new problem for me, and most others, is the editor no longer believes that any component, other than loudspeakers, can make an audible difference (improvement) in the sound; a cheap (powerful) receiver will sound as good as any power amplifier; the same with CD players, cables, preamp line-stages etc. He states he can prove all this with ABX testing. He also feels analogue, meaning phono reproduction, is far inferior to any CD player and that "tubes are for boobs". No, I am not exaggerating. While I concur about the prime importance of speakers and listening rooms, I don't agree with their position on tubes, phono reproduction, and everything else sounding the same, though I do feel that the sonic differences in most cases are greatly exaggerated. Frankly, if I felt the same way the editor did about audio components, I wouldn't even bother being involved with an audio magazine in the first place. It would be too boring, and besides; What's the point? According to their own findings and philosophy, all you have to do to get the best sound possible is to buy the cheapest receiver, CD player and cables you can find, then buy your favorite loudspeaker with all the money you saved. Further, the only improvement you will ever be able make in the future is with a better pair of speakers. Everything else must be, in effect, perfect, because it all sounds exactly the same. There is also a continually angry, bitter and negative tone to the writing that may put one off. - end quote - -- I didn't say it was perfect. I don't agree with AC's notions about there being not being any components other than loudspeakers that can affect the sound of an audio system, obviously the WAVAC can. Phono cartridges seem to as well as their preamps, but as for the rest................... Cables, are surely not going to change or improve anything. I don't want anything to do with tubes, and I certainly have yet to hear a difference in CD players, or any of the amps or receivers I've owned. You should test your ability to determine *subtle* differences with dbts. Should the need arise, I will. |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message ... wrote in message link.net... .... and I certainly have yet to hear a difference in CD players, or any of the amps or receivers I've owned. At this point, I'm not even sure that you have listened to any of them, yes, that you have even listened to any of your own equipment. Instead of actually listening to Respighi's The Pines of Rome, all you had to do was read a review by someone else who listened to it, and voila, you have acquired perfect understanding of the work. You can believe whatever you want, it matters nothing to me. |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
A critique fo the magazines
nyob123 wrote
Clyde Slick wrote nyob123 wrote .... and I certainly have yet to hear a difference in CD players, or any of the amps or receivers I've owned. At this point, I'm not even sure that you have listened to any of them, yes, that you have even listened to any of your own equipment. Instead of actually listening to Respighi's The Pines of Rome, all you had to do was read a review by someone else who listened to it, and voila, you have acquired perfect understanding of the work. You can believe whatever you want, it matters nothing to me. * * * * It matters nothing to you of course as long as empowered to smother and asphyxiate your chicken a little bit at a time. * * * * It's all a gutless recreant objectivist wants. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FA eBay: 1950s ELECTRONICS MAGAZINES | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Audiophilia updated | Audio Opinions | |||
FA: Speaker Builder, Glass Audio magazines | Marketplace | |||
FA: Speaker Builder, Glass Audio magazines | Marketplace | |||
Best magazines for home theatre to subscribe to? | Audio Opinions |