Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Harry Lavo" wrote in message snip Arnies attempts to show off by blathering irrelevancies Notice that this holds true even against 352kh/32bit DXD pcm processing. Notice that this holds true whether or not we are speaking of 64fse DSD (SACD) or 128fse DSD (mastering). It is inherent in the technology. Notice also that the inherent higher noise of SACD (a so-called detriment) takes place well above 20khz and peaks at -80db. Even Arny will have trouble arguing that those are audibly significant (although that doesn't keep him from using them to belittle SACD). Harry, where are the results of your reliable listening tests supporting the existance of any audible differences between any of these formats? If these formats differ as much as you seem to claim, you should be able to readily demonstrate the difference with your ears, and your audio system. http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24.htm Meaningless, since this is the performance of a certain commercial product, and not necessarily representative of the inherent properties of the respective formats. First, note that Arny has snipped without attribution the very tests and comparisons that I cited the results of...including the fact that the test recordings were chosen especially because they were based on the identical, uncompressed recordings in the comparative media. I'll repeat the answer that Harry deceptively removed from the flow of my post: The tests you cite Harry lack proper experimental controls. BTW Harry's URL is wrong, the correct URL is http://www.digitalaudio.dk/ax24_present.htm . Speaks to the care with which Harry does his analysis. Actually, Arnie, the page I cited has changed and when I was referred to it it contained the graphs on that same page, much smaller. Obviously a page has been added to increase the size of the charts. Nonetheless, it is the charts themselves that are important, not your blatherings in an attempt to discredit me. You've done enough butchering of posts on your own Harry. You whined and blathered to obfuscate my responses. I notice you have nothing to say about what lies there. That's a lie. Here's what I said: Meaningless, since this is the performance of a certain commercial product, and not necessarily representative of the inherent properties of the respective formats. But once again, you have snipped my commentary and observations to prevent the reader from making his own judgements. I'll repeat the answer that Harry deceptively removed from the flow of my post: The tests you cite Harry lack proper experimental controls. You continue to amaze me with your blatent dishonesty and unwillingness/inability to engage in any meaningful discussion of DSD as it emerges as a stronger and stronger pro audio technology, One product does not make a market trend. simply because you might have to acknowledge that you were premature in your dismissal of same five years ago. The market has spoken. SACD and DVD-A media sales have fallen dramatically. The market found out that the emperor had no clothes. snip baseless opinions |
#2
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Harry Lavo" wrote in message snip, irrelevant to the following simply because you might have to acknowledge that you were premature in your dismissal of same five years ago. The market has spoken. SACD and DVD-A media sales have fallen dramatically. The market found out that the emperor had no clothes. Well, Arny, it's nice to see you still haven't forgotten your old McDonalds gambit. Still consistently used when your technical arguments don't stand up, I see. |
#3
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news ![]() "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Harry Lavo" wrote in message snip, irrelevant to the following simply because you might have to acknowledge that you were premature in your dismissal of same five years ago. The market has spoken. SACD and DVD-A media sales have fallen dramatically. The market found out that the emperor had no clothes. Well, Arny, it's nice to see you still haven't forgotten your old McDonalds gambit. Wrong Harry. SACD players and media are generally positioned as higher end products. They never ever made it into the McDonald's market. The obvious lesson is that in this higher end market, SACD and DVD-A simply lacked legs. It is an incontrovertable fact that there is zero evidence that the SACD and DVD-A technologies provide even an audible diffrerence in anybody's home system, if reasonble comparison techniques are used. If the difference were as great as you will probably claim to your dying day, it should be pretty easy to demonstrate. Harry, you seem to be just as incapable of resolving differences in the realm of marketing as you are in resolving differences in the area of technology. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
SACD player recommendation | Audio Opinions | |||
SACD player recommendation | High End Audio | |||
SACD Player Recommendation | High End Audio | |||
Recommendation for SACD player | Audio Opinions | |||
Recommendation for SACD player | Tech |