advertisement


"Audiophile" quality hardware in the music industry.

darrylfunk said:
your trying to change the subject again dave with your so desired mythical computer generated musicians.
prat as described by hi fi buffs like yourself can be created in the studio, where it can be manipulated to be more exagerated or less so.
now back to the topic.
Click to expand...

Again, please provide the proof with the Hendrix file as requested. I'm not expecting any results so I'm off for breakfast.
 
And all this talk of a digital Bonham..

I said to someone a few years ago that one day when enough CPU power is available, there will be virtual musician plug-ins that emulate the playing style and sound of specific musicians.

The coding of the learning algorithm would be pretty complicated, however, the more source material available then I imagine the better the plug-in would be.

And if you watch Caprica and how the sentient avatars came into being.. it seems I wasn't the only one with this idea.
 
darrylfunk said:
to alan.

i will i think they are an excellent band.
i play the stuff in my dj sets....

the covers project was fun....in a goth way :)
are you now in the band?
Click to expand...


Not as such. I'm technically my gf's "manager" although I'm pitching in when and where I can on the audio front.

I did the FOH at the Castle Party festival in Poland which was great fun with about 4000 people inside the walls but apparently the gig could be heard for a couple of miles so it was more like doing FOH for 30000 people.

Are you DJ'ing just from CD's or do you do vinyl as well?
 
mikebirtill said:
pros use their ears to make judgements and arent taken by audiophile bullshit. Have you heard apogee or prism? or some pro active monitors? they are fantastic by and large.
Click to expand...


That's right. I just sold one of my "audiophile" pieces to a famous pop musician (totally by chance on ebay). He wrote me back to say that while it sounded nice, the sound was "suspicious" and "on purpose". LOL. Indeed!!!
 
dave said:
It's defined as above by the folks that recognize it and use it for evaluating equipment. Not suprisingly, it has no meaning or is used in any fashion by those with agendas.
Click to expand...
Dave, the key phrase is in bold and concurs with my point above.
 
darrylfunk said:
why do you want me to provide you with this what has it got to do with anything.
your like a skipping cd mate!!!
Click to expand...

Do you have some sort of disorder? Please re-read my replys on this matter beginning from last night and over the past two hours.
 
Greg said:
Dave, the key phrase is in bold and concurs with my point above.
Click to expand...

Perhaps if you agree with the nonsense-reviewer-speak called "leading edges" which implies a transient overshoot which no gear in the PR&T camp exhibits that I'm aware of. PR&T can be present on systems with extended response or not and with systems marketed as having the attribute or not as well. For example, ARC reproduces PR&T and I doubt William Johnson was ever aware of the acronym.

Naim and Linn gear can sound subjectively 'slower' or 'faster' than other gear depending upon program material so the whole thing about PR&T brands sounding faster than others is a myth anyway. Again, tempo is just one tiny part of PR&T as it was intended to explain what FE listeners found attractive with certain components. I've personally never been happy with the acronym but it's here..it stuck..and we live with it.
 
Joe Petrik said:
Alan,

Do you know why the best jazz recordings from the late 1950s into the 1960s sounds so bloody amazing?

The music is, of course, immeasurably better than the standard audiophile Sheffield fart album fare, but what floors me is just how good these recordings sound.

Was it the simplicity of the recording chain back then?

Joe
Click to expand...

The simplicity of the music played a part, small groups of players, compare with orchestral music of the same period.
 
Do you know why the best jazz recordings from the late 1950s into the 1960s sounds so bloody amazing?
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced they do. Or to put it another way. If RvG had had my laptop and USB interface back in 1957 it would have sounded even better.

There's some relevant high resolution Coltrane in a next door thread. If you're interested.

Paul
 
Paul,

There's some relevant high resolution Coltrane in a next door thread. If you're interested.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'll have a listen tonight.

Joe
 
Mescalito said:
Oh yeah? Describe and define this attribute. Not the sudio created artifact, but the actual raw beast.

Chris
Click to expand...

It's what makes Coltrane "Coltrane" in his own unique way. No device can create this out of thin air nor is it a distortion. It's a part of the signal once recorded and is either faithfully passed, lost or distorted by other gear in the chain. Some gear is better at reproducing it than other gear. Each of us depends upon it to a greater or lesser extent to bring us satisfaction and pleasure with what we hear.

Brand A may deliver more PR&T than Brand B but if your expectations are such that you don't require more for satisfaction, Brand A is a waste of money for you if it's more expensive than B. However, others may require Brand A for their satisfaction. This has nothing to do with marketing, snob appeal or anything other than our individual makeup.
 
dave said:
It's what makes Coltrane "Coltrane" in his own unique way. No device can create this out of thin air nor is it a distortion. It's a part of the signal once recorded and is either faithfully passed, lost or distorted by other gear in the chain. Some gear is better at reproducing it than other gear. Each of us depends upon it to a greater or lesser extent to bring us satisfaction and pleasure with what we hear.

Brand A may deliver more PR&T than Brand B but if your expectations are such that you don't require more for satisfaction, Brand A is a waste of money for you if it's more expensive than B. However, others may require Brand A for their satisfaction. This has nothing to do with marketing, snob appeal or anything other than our individual makeup.
Click to expand...
Dave, with respect, this is insanity. You're just describing music. PRaT is basically nonsense. A system either conveys the music or it doesn't. Systems that shy away from low frequencies in order to retain PRaT are pointless.
 
In an attempt to pull this thread away from arguments over PR&T and drag it screaming and kick back the the original theme....... (Fat chance)

I have recently auditioned the Benchmark DAC1 HDR which is primarily a PRO bit of kit. I think I am a convert to PRO kit now. It is well built, reasonable priced and sounds fantastic!

I could use it to drive some PRO active monitors.... Hmm....
 
Greg said:
Dave, with respect, this is insanity. You're just describing music. PRaT is basically nonsense. A system either conveys the music or it doesn't. Systems that shy away from low frequencies in order to retain PRaT are pointless.
Click to expand...

There's clearly a difference between kit in the amount of detail retrieved and much of it is what distinguishes the difference between performers. You may have lower expectations and requirements which may allow to you get just as much satisfaction from a boom box as a good hifi. Nothing wrong with that if it's the case but don't expect everyone else to be the same.

Another Internet myth is that PR&T is exclusive to bass-shy systems. Systems ending with Naim DBLs or Linn DMS Isobariks are just two examples of systems that reproduce PR&T and have low frequency extension.

If PR&T is so well understood by the engineering community and easily accomplished, why is it I can instantly recognize my best friend by his voice over a bandwidth-limited, distorted old-fashioned land line telephone yet often have trouble distinguishing his voice, his drumming (even my own voice and guitar work) when recorded and played back using high quality studio and high-end hifi equipment?

regards,

dave
 
dave said:
It's what makes Coltrane "Coltrane" in his own unique way. No device can create this out of thin air nor is it a distortion. It's a part of the signal once recorded and is either faithfully passed, lost or distorted by other gear in the chain. Some gear is better at reproducing it than other gear. Each of us depends upon it to a greater or lesser extent to bring us satisfaction and pleasure with what we hear.

Brand A may deliver more PR&T than Brand B but if your expectations are such that you don't require more for satisfaction, Brand A is a waste of money for you if it's more expensive than B. However, others may require Brand A for their satisfaction. This has nothing to do with marketing, snob appeal or anything other than our individual makeup.
Click to expand...

Dave,
That is the most truly arm waving explanation of anything audio related I have seen in a long time.

What you are saying is "I think this PRAT thing exists so it does."

Chris
 
You're completely missing the picture if this is actually what you believe Chris. Please note my edit:

"If PR&T is so well understood by the engineering community and easily accomplished, why is it I can instantly recognize my best friend by his voice over a bandwidth-limited, distorted old-fashioned land line (telephone) yet often have trouble distinguishing his voice, his drumming (even my own voice and guitar work) when recorded and played back using high quality studio and high-end hifi equipment?"
 
darrylfunk said:
sounds to me you are confused by the higher fidelity and the brain cannot deal with the extra information....:cool:
Click to expand...

There is a medical condition where some individuals have perception problems with sound and/or color recognition (different from color-blindness for example) but I can't recall the name of the condition. Perhaps it explains why some individuals have their needs met with a pocket radio and others get nothing out of the best hifis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top