Originally Posted by Joseph L
Actually, I make my coffee in a narrow-neck Silex vacuum pot manufactured in 1938. Every day. And I roast my own beans in a home-made roaster that includes a programmable PID which allows precise temperature control over the incoming air flow.
As much as you would like to pretend, you can taste the difference too.
I have a substantial collection of 96 bit FLACs, ripped from either the analog master tapes or specially mastered and pressed heavyweight vinyl using a superior machine to decode the vinyl.
If you think that only assholes appreciate delicious beverages and good audio, then you should guzzle your instant coffee and listen to a transister radio, and leave people who know the difference in peace. Live and let live.
McDonalds and Dry-Aged Prime Beef are not the same thing. But if you cannot appreciate the difference, then by all means, enjoy yourself. Just don't put down others, please.
And one more thing. I listen to a LOT of music through my little computer sound system. It uses two-way speakers with 4 inch woofers, a simple transistor preamp (no "tone controls", no balance, no craptastic digital effects to "improve" the sound by adding lots of out-of-phase artificial bullshit) and a simple direct tube-type amplifier. Analog inputs. No DAC. It has an iPod dock, But I hook it up to the laptop mostly.
The difference between a good recoding and a mediocre recording is like night and day, even on that system - which I got for $89.00 off of eBay. So the remark that anything better than Airplay is going to be hugely expensive is just ... incorrect.
And when I listen using my high fidelity system? Please. That system really lets you hear what is going on, deep down in the recording. Everything, including the fact that Annie Lennox uses multiple overdubs of her voice. With most of the crap that the know-nothings buy, you can't even tell the difference between the bass drum and the bass guitar. My main system has a 12 inch passive subwoofer hooked up to a 500 watt mono amp. the bass is no louder than some crappy system. Instead, it is deeper and tighter. If you listen, and you notice, it enhances the music greatly. Not only that, but the simple two-way main speakers are accurate and tight. One could replicate my setup, which uses early-1980's components, for very short money.
Sorry for the rant. But I felt I really had to respond to the ignorance and condescention.
I'm starting to think you are my eldest brother! I don't deny being able to taste a good cup of coffee, but I don't waste hundreds of pounds on getting the difference every single morning because I've told myself "I just can't drink instant anymore." If you enjoy your coffee THAT much then fair enough, I can respect that. I was being condescending as is my want when someone posts 'x: FAIL, y: FAIL' comments.
'Just don't put down others, please.' - Don't pretend your original comment was some nobel minded appraisal. It was a silly comment with wording unworthy of your subsequently revealed erudition and warranted the response I gave it.
You can surely understand that you are in a very small minority in owning 96bit FLAC recordings in any quantity. I also have to question how any amount of 'decoding the vinyl' (I think you mean encoding the vinyl sound) could add anything into the recording that wasn't already there. By that I mean that unless the original recording done in the studio was 96bit then it's a pointless exercise. You could quote Nyquist but that would only be valid if there had been no digitalisation of the stream during the mastering process which is unlikely these days and in the past low-quality digital effects would have been used even in many analogue recordings done to master tapes, god help you if you're a Pet Shop Boys fan! Perhaps you think Annie Lennox had a sampler from the future when she recorded 'Why' back in 1992? I am certainly an audiophile, but some people just take it beyond what is justifiable and spend more time worrying about bit rates than they do enjoying the music. The Beatles recorded onto a 4-track and bounced down. I don't think the resulting sound is worthy of 96bit FLAC encoding whoever does it, a shame though that is.
You compare your eBay recording gear to a wireless streaming protocol. How are the two the same? Do you have an audio streaming system that you got off eBay too?
I'm right with you on the joys of listening to a good recording on a great system. I have two 96bit audio interfaces which I use to record my music and the first time I listened to a song through my monitors with sub -100dB noise and crystal clear studio grade audio I was bouncing around in my chair on an adrenaline rush. It's wonderful. But that sound came from a 44.1k, 16bit stereo source. The equipment you choose to play the sound out with is just more important. If I used AirPlay through that interface, the same audio would come through and it would sound great (theoretically, according to the numbers you quoted.)
My post had not a hint of ignorance in it. Condescending yes, because your original post was irritating in its cynical appraisal of a perfectly adequate spec sheet for AirPlay.
Originally Posted by WelshDog
All true Joseph. It seems there are so many now who not only cannot discern the difference between excellence and mediocrity, they actually seem hostile to the idea of even trying. This is what the bean-counter driven, corporate culture has done to our people. It feeds them crap and tells them it is great. The psychological warfare of advertising ensures that the hook will be taken.
I certainly have seen that my German made power tools do a better job than their Black and Decker competition. They will last longer and are a joy to use. Kind of like a Mac.
I resent that idea that I am hostile to the idea of striving for excellence. I am not. I simply believe that going through a spec sheet that matches the industry standard for optical media and putting 'FAIL' on the end of each item is manifestly silly, debates about psychological warfare and media opiates aside.
Originally Posted by jragosta
Do the two of you also use green magic markers on the edges of your CDs?
Maybe you feel that your vinyl records sound better if you stand on your head and rotate your left arm in a counterclockwise direction, too.
Every single double blind study with proper controls has shown that normal people can not tell the difference between equivalent vinyl and cd music (yes, I'm aware of the audiophile 'tests' where they never bothered to match volumes precisely - and then said "See how easy it is to tell when they switch from vinyl to CD?"). A very tiny number of individuals can hear frequencies well above 'normal' (I have a friend who was tested to 26,000 Hz), and they MIGHT be able to tell a difference, but since there's so little sound in that range, even that is unlikely.
Just a few sources for you:http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-b...etter-than-CD-http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-b...-refuse-to-die
The sentence about the arm had my laughing aloud! No disrespect to Joseph and WelshDog
The points you make about the blind tests are very valid and I've read all kinds of similar material in the past. I fear you'll never convince some though and that's fair enough, I respect them for their view. I just don't like CD audio being looked down on as MacDonald's audio. Logic playing all the tracks to a song before mixdown is beautiful, but that quality no more makes it to vinyl than it does CD.
Originally Posted by Joseph L
No doubt. Likewise, normal people can not tell the difference between a fresh lobster from the icy waters off of Maine, and the frozen stuff fresh from the microwave at Red Lobster. I have no problem with those folks, so long as they enjoy.
That's a very elitist thing to say. You're implying you have a more refined palate and we aren't understanding. That's not what's happening here. Many blind tests show that the quality you claim to hear in the vinyl simply isn't there to all but Kal-El and Peter Parker. There is a very clear difference in freshness between a fresh lobster taken from the sea bed and a frozen microwave meal.
Originally Posted by jragosta
The difference is that even trained 'audiophiles' can't tell the difference between CD and vinyl in a properly conducted test. Every time you see someone bragging about the difference, they're either conducting the test very badly - or comparing Apples to Oranges.