[Scott[_6_]]

On Feb 12, 1:39=A0pm, ScottW wrote:

=A0and this argument has me a bit confused.
On the one hand vinyl has supposed (and I assume) audible euphonic
distortions that make it superior to CD for the creation of the
acoustic illusion
and on the other side is vinyl has audible distortion.

I can see where this would seem confusing. I'm not saying the euphonic
colorations are inaudible. I am saying they are not identifiable as
audible distortion without a reference. Others are saying nay to the
very idea of euphonic colorations in vinyl playback and that there are
readily identifiable colorations that prevent any LP from sounding
truly great.



There does not appear to be an argument that vinyl is audibly
different,
just wether those differences are preferable or not.

It runs much deeper than that. There is the question of whether or not
vinyl is inherently so colored by distortions that those audible
colorations are identifiable by ear alone without any reference to
compare it with.



Then again...if vinyl is not audibly different than vinyl and Arny
should fail in his
test....then it's not clear how the argument of preference for vinyl
can be
sustained on the basis of euphonic distortion.

There are two parts to the test. the second part of the test askes the
testee to rate the sound quality of each sample. If some of the
samples that are sourced from vinyl are rated as excellent or great it
is evidence against the assertion that no LP can truly sound great due
to the effects of the inherent colorations of the medium.



Superior mastering for select works...ok. Euphonic distortion...not so
much.

Either way this test will test the assertions I am challenging. Those
being that the inherent colorations of vinyl are so severe that they
prevent any LP from truly sound great and that the colorations are so
severe that they can be identified by ear alone. Superior mastering
will hardly matter in testing those assertions.



well...if they are of superior masters than the CD, what does that
prove?

It doesn't matter. Even if the LPs are better mastered if the
assertions about the inherent colorations of vinyl are true the test
should reveal them to be true.




=A0IMO, vinyl can sound "excellent" and with select samples of sound of
sufficient

Probably why I'm not asking you to take the challenge.


volume and content to mask the obvious audible noise floors of vinyl
may well be indistinguishable by ear.

I plan to include very quite passages and passages with the trail off
of sustained notes. that should address that concern.


Likewise, I'm sure many of us have CDs of sufficiently poor quality
that we have a preferance for vinyl.
I've got 2 vinyl versions of Kate's Hounds of Love (Speakers Corner,
which I still thank you for)
and the new Audio Fidelity version which is so different I can't quite
get used to it.

But without a control of masters for equality, then no matter the
sample you choose, I am assured it is far to small to extrapolate to
the world of recorded music to be of any significance.

If I fail to supply any samplessourced from vinyl that can't be
readily identified as sourced from vinyl and/or fail to get a grade of
excellent or great (depending on what frading scale we use) Then the
evidence certainly suggests I am wrong and the nay sayers are right.
Mastering is irrelevant to that test. if the testees fail to identify
the vinyl sourced samples as such and give some of those samples the
highest grade it supports my position. Mastering has no bearing since
it can not change the inherent colorations of the medium.






=A0I expect we've all got plenty of badly mastered CDs to allow you to
make a point.

That wouldn't make my point though. samples of porrly mastered CDs
will not affect the results in testing whether or not the LP sourced
samples were so colored that none of them are rated as great or
excellent nor would it prevent one from identifying the LP sourced
samples as such if they really are as colored as claimed.


=A0Tell you what, you include tracks of MoFis Vinyl of Modern Cool
(which I haven't heard) and the CD and
then I'll be impressed.


I don't have that. I don't even know what it is. I was going to use
nothing but acoustic music. Mostly if not exclusively classical. I was
going to use the very best sounding LPs and CDs I have as sources from
both analog and digital recordings. I don't think using crap sounding
digital sources helps support my position. If I did that and the
testee simply chose to say all the samples sounded like crap. Well, I
wouldn't have a leg to stand on in rebutting that claim. If I include
the best digital recordings from the best CDs that easy out is
eliminated. If the testee calls all the samples bad at that point then
the testee shoots his credibility in the foot. If it were to come to
that I would ask that the testee supply his own sample of what he
considers to be a great sounding sample so all interested parties can
compare for themsleves after the results are revealed.