advertisement


Streaming transports SQ differences?

Strictly Stereo said:
I think it's great. As a DAC, it has basically the same mix of inputs and outputs as the Vega G1 and it sounds almost as good. As a streamer it is arguably better as they have added back in most of the features they cut from the Vega models, including the built-in storage options.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that's why it's so useless to listen to some bloke on the internet/in a magazine talk about something sounding better than something else, as if it's objective fact. But measurements by calibrated precision instruments (much more precise than our hearing) do give objective, reproducible data regarding the fidelity of a piece of equipment to the source signal.

A piece of equipment that is truly high fidelity then gives you a known referenece point from which you can colour the tone (i.e. distort the signal) to taste, or to correct for room deficiencies, or potentially even hearing deficiencies (which are measurable, as you point out).

Why some 'audiophiles' are so resistant to these ideas, when ultimately they could help them to tailor their systems to their environments, hearing and tastes, without necessarily shelling out huge wads of cash or going through a merry go round of equipment, is beyond me.
 
Julf said:
...putting ketchup and extra salt on everything, even in a michelin-star restaurant.
Click to expand...

This is of course a perfectly valid option, even if some people might frown upon it. For most of the people I meet, playing back music at home is about first and foremost about fun rather than accuracy. So if you want red sauce with your filet mignon, have at it.
 
Andrew C! said:
Not necessarily. If I have a penchant for wanting a certain sound, then I should be able to cater for that. Each persons idea of that will differ, and it makes none of them wrong in their opinion. Just because the particular flavour suits me doesn't mean it should suit everybody. Nor does it mean my particular likes are right or wrong.

I know what I like, and why I like it. If others ask my opinion on why I like something, then its up to them to decide. deride or validate my opinion accordingly. TBH also I don't usually offer opinions on hardware other than what I've tried. I don't see the point.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but you recognise your subjective tastes. The problem is when you have people on forums, or in magazines such as What Hi-Fi, talking about pieces of equipment sounding different or better than others as if their subjective response (often coloured by things like expectation bias) corresponds to some objective notion of sound quality.
 
mjwolf said:
Yes, and that's why it's so useless to listen to some bloke on the internet/in a magazine talk about something sounding better than something else, as if it's objective fact. But measurements by calibrated precision instruments (much more precise than our hearing) do give objective, reproducible data regarding the fidelity of a piece of equipment to the source signal.
Click to expand...

There is a third option, which is to go and have a listen to the equipment for yourself. Another person's opinion is not going to tell you whether or not you will enjoy a particular system or component, but neither will objective measurements.
 
Strictly Stereo said:
This is of course a perfectly valid option, even if some people might frown upon it. For most of the people I meet, playing back music at home is about first and foremost about fun rather than accuracy. So if you want red sauce with your filet mignon, have at it.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that Donald Trump will appreciate this sentiment.
 
Strictly Stereo said:
There is a third option, which is to go and have a listen to the equipment for yourself. Another person's opinion is not going to tell you whether or not you will enjoy a particular system or component, but neither will objective measurements.
Click to expand...

No, of course measurements can't tell you what you like, but they can rationalise it. If you like the sound of valve amplification, that can be correlated with the rolled off high end and second harmonic distortion that they typically exhibit. But that can not be called high fidelity.
 
mjwolf said:
No, of course measurements can't tell you what you like, but they can rationalise it. If you like the sound of valve amplification, that can be correlated with the rolled off high end and second harmonic distortion that they typically exhibit. But that can not be called high fidelity.
Click to expand...

Hows the email to Trump going?
 
Andrew C! said:
Not necessarily. If I have a penchant for wanting a certain sound, then I should be able to cater for that. Each persons idea of that will differ, and it makes none of them wrong in their opinion. Just because the particular flavour suits me doesn't mean it should suit everybody. Nor does it mean my particular likes are right or wrong.
Click to expand...

Sure, nothing wrong with going with personal, subjective preference - but from a pure engineering point of view, as I wrote, it is like always wearing rose-tinted glasses or putting ketchup and extra salt on every dish, even in a michelin-star restaurant.
 
Julf said:
If you say so, but I am just curious - how do you know that?
Click to expand...

I think what we're seeing here is another victim of our post-truth age, tired of listening to so-called experts like scientists and engineers. I bet he voted for Trump and Brexit, no doubt influenced by Russian Twitter bots and Hi-Fi media's anti-Chi-Fi propaganda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top