[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


Or another name: "It sounds more like typical acoustic
music to ______ (insert name)."

Mostly said by people who actually have no idea at all
what the original acoustic performance sounded like
because they weren't there.

As I wrote, "typical acoustic music".

Oh, so Jenn you think that all acoustic music sounds the same?


There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops, inner groove
distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc. Yet I have yet to hear an LP
that fails to have one or more of those failings. I've visited the homes of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but yet when they play
vinyl, one or more of those failings is audible. I've been to what are
alleged to be some of the best high end audio shows around, and even in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has one or more of those
problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I can count on vinyl
to stick its hand right up and say "I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that there's something going
on with you that keeps you from hearing the well-known audible flaws of
vinyl.

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


Or another name: "It sounds more like typical acoustic
music to ______ (insert name)."

Mostly said by people who actually have no idea at all
what the original acoustic performance sounded like
because they weren't there.

As I wrote, "typical acoustic music".

Oh, so Jenn you think that all acoustic music sounds the same?

What makes you think that?



There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops, inner groove
distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc. Yet I have yet to hear an LP
that fails to have one or more of those failings. I've visited the homes of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but yet when they play
vinyl, one or more of those failings is audible. I've been to what are
alleged to be some of the best high end audio shows around, and even in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has one or more of those
problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I can count on vinyl
to stick its hand right up and say "I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that there's something going
on with you that keeps you from hearing the well-known audible flaws of
vinyl.

Wrong Arny. As I've said many times before, it's a matter of "picking
your poison". It's ALL artificial. I can listen through a few tics. I
can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic.

[Clyde Slick]

On 29 Aug, 16:57, Jenn wrote:


*I can listen through a few tics. *I
can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic

well put!!!
excellent

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On 29 Aug, 16:57, Jenn wrote:


*I can listen through a few tics. *I
can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic

well put!!!
excellent

Thanks

[Mr.T]

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...
On 29 Aug, 16:57, Jenn wrote:
I can listen through a few tics.

Even better when I don't have to any more.

I can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic

Me either, regardless of whether it ends up on vinyl, CD, tape, or carving
on a cerial box.

well put!!! excellent.

It simply reaffirms your bias then I take it?
Good for you.

MrT.

[Clyde Slick]

On 6 Sep, 03:19, "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message

...
On 29 Aug, 16:57, Jenn wrote:

I can listen through a few tics.

Even better when I don't have to any more.

I can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic

Me either, regardless of whether it ends up on vinyl, CD, tape, or carving
on a cerial box.

well put!!! excellent.

It simply reaffirms your bias then I take it?
Good for you.

MrT.

it wasn't me that you were responding to

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Jenn said:

I can listen through a few tics. I can't listen through a recorded
violin sound that resembles an instrument made of plastic.

Plastic is less likely to contain the defects and unevenness that occur
naturally in wood. Thank's Jenn for, admitting-Jennn that you invariably
preffer defects to perfection Jeenn.

[Chronic Philharmonic]

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


Or another name: "It sounds more like typical acoustic
music to ______ (insert name)."

Mostly said by people who actually have no idea at all
what the original acoustic performance sounded like
because they weren't there.

As I wrote, "typical acoustic music".

Oh, so Jenn you think that all acoustic music sounds the same?

What makes you think that?



There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops, inner groove
distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc. Yet I have yet to hear an LP
that fails to have one or more of those failings. I've visited the homes
of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but yet when they play
vinyl, one or more of those failings is audible. I've been to what are
alleged to be some of the best high end audio shows around, and even in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has one or more of
those
problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I can count on
vinyl
to stick its hand right up and say "I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that there's something
going
on with you that keeps you from hearing the well-known audible flaws of
vinyl.

Wrong Arny. As I've said many times before, it's a matter of "picking
your poison". It's ALL artificial. I can listen through a few tics. I
can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic.

If it sounds that way, it is because of the production quality, not because
of the technology. Digital audio is the closest thing we have to a straight
wire between the performance and your living room.

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article ec0uk.34$Dj1.14@trnddc02,
"Chronic Philharmonic" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


Or another name: "It sounds more like typical acoustic
music to ______ (insert name)."

Mostly said by people who actually have no idea at all
what the original acoustic performance sounded like
because they weren't there.

As I wrote, "typical acoustic music".

Oh, so Jenn you think that all acoustic music sounds the same?

What makes you think that?



There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops, inner groove
distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc. Yet I have yet to hear an LP
that fails to have one or more of those failings. I've visited the homes
of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but yet when they play
vinyl, one or more of those failings is audible. I've been to what are
alleged to be some of the best high end audio shows around, and even in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has one or more of
those
problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I can count on
vinyl
to stick its hand right up and say "I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that there's something
going
on with you that keeps you from hearing the well-known audible flaws of
vinyl.

Wrong Arny. As I've said many times before, it's a matter of "picking
your poison". It's ALL artificial. I can listen through a few tics. I
can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic.

If it sounds that way, it is because of the production quality, not because
of the technology. Digital audio is the closest thing we have to a straight
wire between the performance and your living room.

I've heard the effect on CD. I've not heard the effect on the best LPs.

[Chronic Philharmonic]

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ec0uk.34$Dj1.14@trnddc02,
"Chronic Philharmonic" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


Or another name: "It sounds more like typical acoustic
music to ______ (insert name)."

Mostly said by people who actually have no idea at all
what the original acoustic performance sounded like
because they weren't there.

As I wrote, "typical acoustic music".

Oh, so Jenn you think that all acoustic music sounds the same?

What makes you think that?



There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops, inner groove
distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc. Yet I have yet to hear an
LP
that fails to have one or more of those failings. I've visited the
homes
of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but yet when they
play
vinyl, one or more of those failings is audible. I've been to what are
alleged to be some of the best high end audio shows around, and even
in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has one or more of
those
problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I can count on
vinyl
to stick its hand right up and say "I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that there's something
going
on with you that keeps you from hearing the well-known audible flaws
of
vinyl.

Wrong Arny. As I've said many times before, it's a matter of "picking
your poison". It's ALL artificial. I can listen through a few tics.
I
can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made of plastic.

If it sounds that way, it is because of the production quality, not
because
of the technology. Digital audio is the closest thing we have to a
straight
wire between the performance and your living room.

I've heard the effect on CD. I've not heard the effect on the best LPs.

Here's an experiment you could run, if you really want to get at the truth:
Copy the LPs that exhibit the sound you prefer to a CD, using a high quality
sound card, taking care that any ticks and pops do not exceed digital full
scale, while simultaneously making sure the rumble and surface noise stays
above the properly dithered digital noise level (fortunately, this is not
difficult). Then play back the LP and the newly-recorded CD in a properly
implemented A-B-X listening test, and see if you can distinguish any
difference between the two with any statistically significant repeatability.

[MiNe 109]

In article AbZuk.279$393.193@trnddc05,
"Chronic Philharmonic" wrote:

I've heard the effect on CD. I've not heard the effect on the best LPs.

Here's an experiment you could run, if you really want to get at the truth:
Copy the LPs that exhibit the sound you prefer to a CD, using a high quality
sound card, taking care that any ticks and pops do not exceed digital full
scale, while simultaneously making sure the rumble and surface noise stays
above the properly dithered digital noise level (fortunately, this is not
difficult). Then play back the LP and the newly-recorded CD in a properly
implemented A-B-X listening test, and see if you can distinguish any
difference between the two with any statistically significant repeatability.

That wouldn't help the poorly recorded cds on which the effect manifests.

Stephen

[Chronic Philharmonic]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article AbZuk.279$393.193@trnddc05,
"Chronic Philharmonic" wrote:

I've heard the effect on CD. I've not heard the effect on the best
LPs.

Here's an experiment you could run, if you really want to get at the
truth:
Copy the LPs that exhibit the sound you prefer to a CD, using a high
quality
sound card, taking care that any ticks and pops do not exceed digital
full
scale, while simultaneously making sure the rumble and surface noise
stays
above the properly dithered digital noise level (fortunately, this is not
difficult). Then play back the LP and the newly-recorded CD in a properly
implemented A-B-X listening test, and see if you can distinguish any
difference between the two with any statistically significant
repeatability.

That wouldn't help the poorly recorded cds on which the effect manifests.

No, this would only prove or disprove the ability of the medium to
accurately reproduce whatever is fed into it. That's what a medium is
supposed to do. Gold in, gold out. Garbage in, garbage out. A poorly
recorded CD, like a poorly recorded LP, is garbage.

[Arny Krueger]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message

In article AbZuk.279$393.193@trnddc05,
"Chronic Philharmonic" wrote:

I've heard the effect on CD. I've not heard the effect
on the best LPs.

Here's an experiment you could run, if you really want
to get at the truth: Copy the LPs that exhibit the sound
you prefer to a CD, using a high quality sound card,
taking care that any ticks and pops do not exceed
digital full scale, while simultaneously making sure the
rumble and surface noise stays above the properly
dithered digital noise level (fortunately, this is not
difficult). Then play back the LP and the newly-recorded
CD in a properly implemented A-B-X listening test, and
see if you can distinguish any difference between the
two with any statistically significant repeatability.

That wouldn't help the poorly recorded cds on which the
effect manifests.


Yet another technical tyro who have the medium and message hopelessly
confused. No coincidence - a LP lover.

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article AbZuk.279$393.193@trnddc05,
"Chronic Philharmonic" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...

I've heard the effect on CD. I've not heard the effect on the best LPs.

Here's an experiment you could run, if you really want to get at the truth:
Copy the LPs that exhibit the sound you prefer to a CD, using a high quality
sound card, taking care that any ticks and pops do not exceed digital full
scale, while simultaneously making sure the rumble and surface noise stays
above the properly dithered digital noise level (fortunately, this is not
difficult). Then play back the LP and the newly-recorded CD in a properly
implemented A-B-X listening test, and see if you can distinguish any
difference between the two with any statistically significant repeatability.

I'd be happy to do that. Perhaps I can find someone to help me
implement it. If I can't tell the difference, I'll be happy to report
that.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops,
inner groove distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc.
Yet I have yet to hear an LP that fails to have one or
more of those failings. I've visited the homes of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but
yet when they play vinyl, one or more of those failings
is audible. I've been to what are alleged to be some of
the best high end audio shows around, and even in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has
one or more of those problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I
can count on vinyl to stick its hand right up and say
"I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that
there's something going on with you that keeps you from
hearing the well-known audible flaws of vinyl.

Wrong Arny.

No, right.

As I've said many times before, it's a
matter of "picking your poison".

Both arsenic and water can be poisonous, but I'll pick the glass of water
every time.

The sound quality failings of the vinyl format are well-known and
generally-agreed-upon to be by far the stronger poison to our mutual goal of
lifelike sound.

It's ALL artificial.

Not necessarily. I've played CDs through a live sound system and
temporarily fooled people into thinking there is a live performance going
on.

I can listen through a few tics.

Leaving the remaining highly audible problems of rumble, pops, inner groove
distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc.


I can't listen through a recorded violin sound that resembles an
instrument made
of plastic.

Blame the production people, not the essentially perfect medium that is
readily available to us all.

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops,
inner groove distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc.
Yet I have yet to hear an LP that fails to have one or
more of those failings. I've visited the homes of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but
yet when they play vinyl, one or more of those failings
is audible. I've been to what are alleged to be some of
the best high end audio shows around, and even in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has
one or more of those problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I
can count on vinyl to stick its hand right up and say
"I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that
there's something going on with you that keeps you from
hearing the well-known audible flaws of vinyl.

Wrong Arny.

No, right.

As I've said many times before, it's a
matter of "picking your poison".

Both arsenic and water can be poisonous, but I'll pick the glass of water
every time.

Good for you. I hear it differently. Please keep enjoying your music,
and I'll enjoy mine.


The sound quality failings of the vinyl format are well-known and
generally-agreed-upon to be by far the stronger poison to our mutual goal of
lifelike sound.

It's ALL artificial.

Not necessarily. I've played CDs through a live sound system and
temporarily fooled people into thinking there is a live performance going
on.

I can't imagine that happening, but good for you and for those people.
Nothing coming through a speaker ever sounds close to real, IMO.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Aug 31, 10:43*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*"Arny Krueger" wrote:





"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message


*There are ways that acoustic music NEVER sounds,

Exactly, acoustic music never has rumble, tics, pops,
inner groove distortion, rolled off highs and lows, etc.
Yet I have yet to hear an LP that fails to have one or
more of those failings. I've visited the homes of
audiophiles with tens of thousands in audio gear, but
yet when they play vinyl, one or more of those failings
is audible. I've been to what are alleged to be some of
the best high end audio shows around, and even in
carefully-setup listening rooms, the vinyl always has
one or more of those problems.

and there are plenty of recordings that sound that way.

Right, and among the "recordings that sound that way", I
can count on vinyl to stick its hand right up and say
"I've got clearly audible flaws".

We've been through this before.

Right Jenn, and the only logical conclusion is that
there's something going on with you that keeps you from
hearing the well-known audible flaws of vinyl.

Wrong Arny.

No, right.

* As I've said many times before, it's a
matter of "picking your poison".

Both arsenic and water can be poisonous, but I'll pick the glass of water
every time.

Good for you. *I hear it differently. *Please keep enjoying your music,
and I'll enjoy mine.



The sound quality failings of the vinyl format are well-known and
generally-agreed-upon to be by far the stronger poison to our mutual goal of
lifelike sound.

* It's ALL artificial.

Not necessarily. *I've played CDs through a live sound system and
temporarily fooled people into thinking there is a live performance going
on.

I can't imagine that happening, but good for you and for those people. *
Nothing coming through a speaker ever sounds close to real, IMO.

I've been fooled before, but only when there are corners or hallways
between the source and me.

I think GOIA's bias is showing.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


Both arsenic and water can be poisonous, but I'll pick
the glass of water every time.

Good for you. I hear it differently.

Obviously. You've got that recent large expenditure on substandard
technology to justify to yourself.

Please keep enjoying your music, and I'll enjoy mine.

You're changing the subject Jenn, from analysis of relevant facts to
personal preferences.

The sound quality failings of the vinyl format are
well-known and generally-agreed-upon to be by far the
stronger poison to our mutual goal of lifelike sound.

It's ALL artificial.

Not necessarily. I've played CDs through a live sound
system and temporarily fooled people into thinking there
is a live performance going on.

I can't imagine that happening,

Attributable to a lack of real-world experience.

but good for you and for those people.

Dismissive attitude noted, Ironic coming from a person with such limited
real world experience with audio.

Nothing coming through a speaker ever sounds close to real, IMO.

You've obviously never done the experiment I described, or done it right.

As usual Jenn, you've placed yourself on a high pedestal above people who
simply know more about the topic than you do.

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:


Both arsenic and water can be poisonous, but I'll pick
the glass of water every time.

Good for you. I hear it differently.

Obviously. You've got that recent large expenditure on substandard
technology to justify to yourself.

You've got the chronology wrong.


Please keep enjoying your music, and I'll enjoy mine.

You're changing the subject Jenn, from analysis of relevant facts to
personal preferences.

I'm not changing the subject at all, Arny. It's not about analysis of
facts. For me, listening to music is about, in this order:
1. The music itself
2. Listening to the best sound possible on a given recording according
my my ears.

Perhaps your priorities are different.


The sound quality failings of the vinyl format are
well-known and generally-agreed-upon to be by far the
stronger poison to our mutual goal of lifelike sound.

It's ALL artificial.

Not necessarily. I've played CDs through a live sound
system and temporarily fooled people into thinking there
is a live performance going on.

I can't imagine that happening,

Attributable to a lack of real-world experience.

No, I've listened to a great deal of live music and a great many audio
systems in several locales.


but good for you and for those people.

Dismissive attitude noted, Ironic coming from a person with such limited
real world experience with audio.

It's not dismissive at all. If some people can be fooled in this way,
they are ahead of the game.


Nothing coming through a speaker ever sounds close to real, IMO.

You've obviously never done the experiment I described, or done it right.

What experiment?


As usual Jenn, you've placed yourself on a high pedestal above people who
simply know more about the topic than you do.

A ridiculous statement. I've in no way said that I'm better or on some
kind of other "pedestal". All I've said is that I hear what I hear, you
hear what you hear, and everyone should enjoy what sounds best to them.
I have no idea why you have such a problem with that concept.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
, "Arny
Krueger" wrote:


Both arsenic and water can be poisonous, but I'll pick
the glass of water every time.

Good for you. I hear it differently.

Obviously. You've got that recent large expenditure on
substandard technology to justify to yourself.

You've got the chronology wrong.

Prove it.

Please keep enjoying your music, and I'll enjoy mine.

You're changing the subject Jenn, from analysis of
relevant facts to personal preferences.

I'm not changing the subject at all, Arny. It's not
about analysis of facts. For me, listening to music is
about, in this order:

1. The music itself

Then any medium that has even modest fidelity, like the LP format, might
even suffice.

2. Listening to the best sound possible on a given
recording according my my ears.

In fact for most people, listening is not just about the ears. It's about
the ears and the brain. This one fact alone might explain your great
obsession with the ancient and widely-discredited LP format.

Perhaps your priorities are different.

Well, I do a lot of production of recorded media and sound reinforcement.

The sound quality failings of the vinyl format are
well-known and generally-agreed-upon to be by far the
stronger poison to our mutual goal of lifelike sound.

It's ALL artificial.

Not necessarily. I've played CDs through a live sound
system and temporarily fooled people into thinking
there is a live performance going on.

I can't imagine that happening,

Attributable to a lack of real-world experience.

No, I've listened to a great deal of live music and a
great many audio systems in several locales.

Several locales?

LOL!

If you've only visited several locales, please come back when you have
experiences that compare with mine.

but good for you and for those people.

Dismissive attitude noted, Ironic coming from a person
with such limited real world experience with audio.

It's not dismissive at all. If some people can be fooled
in this way, they are ahead of the game.

?????????????

Nothing coming through a speaker ever sounds close to
real, IMO.

You've obviously never done the experiment I described,
or done it right.

What experiment?

The one I just described - playing a specific recording in a medium-sized
venue where music is played much of the time.

As usual Jenn, you've placed yourself on a high pedestal
above people who simply know more about the topic than
you do.

A ridiculous statement.

I have months and months of your statements as evidence, Jenn

I've in no way said that I'm
better or on some kind of other "pedestal".

Quite visible in months and months of your statements as evidence, Jenn.

All I've
said is that I hear what I hear, you hear what you hear,
and everyone should enjoy what sounds best to them. I
have no idea why you have such a problem with that
concept.

For one thing, I favor using the brain while listening. That appears to be
an irreconcilable difference between us, Jenn.