@grey9hound +1
Sounds like someone got out of bed on the wrong side. |
Yes, I failed to mention that the Lab12 power conditioner piqued my interest as well. But alas, it too got great reviews so I guess it must be looked at suspiciously as well.
C’mon guys (and gals), teajay is a professional reviewer but he’s always been upfront about it and what he contributes here is, as I’ve always seen it, as just another audiophile.
Same goes for schroeder. They’re not here to push a product but tune us onto one, as all of us do.
All the best,
Nonoise |
So, who thinks Hamiliton will win the F1 crown? |
@mzkmxcv,
You have a peculiar way of seeing (hearing?) things.
|
Sterility does not equate to transparency. Tone, timbre, sound staging, fullness and realism can most definitely point to transparency if that is in the original recording.
The lack of those qualities can take a natural and pleasing production of a real event and render it lifeless, or sterile, as teajay pointed out.
All the best,
Nonoise |
tim·bre/ˈtambər/noun- the character or quality of a musical sound or voice as distinct from its pitch and intensity."trumpet mutes with different timbres"synonyms:tone, sound, sound quality, voice, voice quality, color, tone color, tonality, resonance"the timbre of the reeds"
tone/tōn/noun- 1. a musical or vocal sound with reference to its pitch, quality, and strength."the piano tone appears monochrome or lacking in warmth"synonyms:timbre, sound, sound quality, voice, voice quality, color, tonality"the tone of the tuba"
I could go one but It will sound like I'm talking to some silly AI program which cannot hear but "knows" measurements. All the best, Nonoise |
I don't know anyone who listens to the test tones that reviewers use to determine how good, or bad, a piece of equipment performs. Those test tones are not representative of any piece of music that I know of. They're a metric that has been agreed upon as a standard to go by and are not, by any means, the last word. The final arbiter are our ears.
That's why most competent manufacturers do their final tuning by ear, using the tests as a starting point. One can reverse engineer a posit that a certain piece of gear will sound good based on a test tone but it is never conclusive.
Just look at all the caveats reviewers cite after learning that a lot of gear measured and tested doesn't correlate to how it sounds (or should). We've all read such reviews.
All the best,
Nonoise |
That’s not what Floyd Toole and Sean Olive has found. Toole said people picked the more ideal speaker every single time, no exceptions. So in one test that you cite, everyone picked the same speaker, which produces the most distortion of any audio component, by a large margin. That same speaker which was designed to sound a certain way and most likely, pleasing to most, despite what it's hooked up to. That's a far cry from what you stated in the previous post about practically everyone picking the best measured device. All the best, Nonoise |
@mzkmxcv, I think you missed my point, which is that no speaker can be ideal as all speakers are a compromise due to the fact that they are the biggest generators of distortion in the audio chain. The fact that everyone picked that speaker only goes to show that despite it's drawbacks, everyone liked it due to it's flavoring and the ear of the the guy who designed it. Some designers are better at it than others. Show me one double-blind study where the listeners did not pick the best measuring device as the most preferred. Now if everyone picked the same CDP, DAC, amp or cable, you could have an argument since those would measure theoretically below what you'd argue someone could hear. A speaker can't to a trained ear. All the best, Nonoise |
@mzkmxcv,
No. No grasping at straws as the measurements show only part of the story. The only straw being grasped is the one you chose in saying that the measurement is definitive of what an ideal speaker should sound like without being there to hear it for yourself.
Hearsay is the ultimate straw man.
All the best,
Nonoise |
