Thanks Evenharmonics
The line you quoted was poorly considered as seemingly giving the wrong impression.
One normally responds as a function of caring about something presented. As long as there is sufficient analytical clarity in the response, the future liking or disliking isn't supported by dialog having been so analytically concluded. in other words there is no hanging on of emotion in me to support continuation without further input. That is the case here.
No need to thank me. I have nothing to do with your freedom to post what you want to post. It's been with you when you joined this forum.
Credible evidence mentioned earlier was on your "This was for reasons that they were superior in SQ to integrated devices.". I for one was wondering which comparison process you used for assessing the sound quality of the devices.
My thanks was an offering of respect that my analytical responses can sometimes be taken to lack thereof.
The word "credible" is in the opposing view as "not credible" that can be described as (1) Doubtful, implausible, inconceivable, incredible, questionable, unbelievable, unlikely. or (2) dishonest, insincere, not dependable, unreliable, untrustworthy.
Hence the use of the word "credible" as a measure in the context of stating "A is superior to B" contains a whole series of derogation and condemnation if my assessment of sound quality does not meet the standards being applied as to credibility. What is in it for me to engage, if in any way, the judgement is declared inclusive of a judgement of my credibility.
If you're simply talking about personal preferences credibility has little to do with it.
Preferences can be characterized as a "feeling" of liking or wanting one thing more than another thing, and thereupon this supports your point. If this continues by making choices based upon preferences this is normally done upon some conclusion that one is superior to the other in some way. Hence the issue of credibility is not related to the preference, rather to the conclusion of the choice.
Your continued dancing around is an indication that you don't have any evidence supporting the sound quality claim you've made. BTW, it's not against the forum rule. However, it's an indication on where you are coming from, that's all.
Lets leave it simply that you are not entitled to more evidence than the presentation "A is superior to B", and that to make moral judgments based solely upon that presentation questions what this indicates.
Thanks for the thumbs up Scott, you are probably giving me too much credit.
The problem with so called 'trusted ears' is, IME people a/ have very different ways of listening depending on their experience and b/ tend to have
preferences leaning either toward a musical 'tubey' sound or on the other extreme, super accurate 'detailed' etc
Example of a/, years ago I was at a HiFi social gathering, pretty decent system comparing a few dACs. Song comes on with a big open Acoustic
Guitar strum. A few comments WRT the 'realism' of the GTR etc. I heard two things: 1/ The guitar was using a Piezo pickup which sounds like 'quack' to
those who know (and play) and it also appeared to have a subtle modulation effect like stereo chorus. No one else heard that but my old ears did 🙂
WRT b/ I know quite a few HiFi folk that run tube systems and also R2R or 0xOS DACs. These can sound really good, with great 3D imaging and a sense
of realism that, well, isn't real, it's Hollywood, but very listenable and usually forgiving on less than great recordings.
On the other end of the spectrum are those that love super detailed or 'accurate' sounding system. These can sound really amazing BUT I find you
also have to start throwing away your badly recorded music because more and more of it sounds what it is....
It's not uncommon for the latter folk to have a small music selection and a lot
of that is very HQ junk, musically speaking.
There are some amazing albums out there that just aren't recorded that well.
AS far as AK4499 is concerned, a friend is buying a Topping D90 so I'll get to have a listen soon.
I've been involved with all of these various hifi mods for many years now and am kind of over it to a certain degree. Becoming more interested these days
in the recording side of things. I find a greater sense of reward to build something that's used in the process of capturing a performance.
TCD
That's a claim, not an evidence.
Posting observation isn't making moral judgements. Possibly there is a language barrier at play...
Which without any more information is no different than anyone else's "B is superior to A" or "B is indistinguishable from A" .
Might want to let it run for 2-3 days to stabilize upon first use. After that initial settling I only give the clocks awhile to warm up if it has been fully powered off. YMMV.
This is too often glossed over. I've no issue with people creating their own truth but they often refuse to admit it. Personally I am a big fan of defeatable tone controls rather than fixed ones though 🙂
Embarassingly I do own a few albums that meet that criteria. Crystal Clear records did some direct to disc albums of horrible music beautifully recorded (as did sheffield labs).
J Gordon Holt I always think summed that up best!
This is true if A and B are in isolation as not defined. "A is superior to B" is no different from "B is superior to A" to your point. If "A is superior to B" exists in combination with "B is superior to A" without any more information then "B is indistinguishable of superiority from A".
Ok... where do we go from here?
They are not tone controls.
There's a big difference between tone controls and what 0 x OS DACs and tube systems do. One of my friends owns a TDA1541 0xOS DAC -> SET amp
-> Goodmans Axiom 80 (single driver) with Altec sub based system.
I (and many others) have always felt that his system is among the best we've heard within it's constraints of bottom end and dynamic range.
This never sat well with the objective side of me, as I know his system has to be colored even though it sounds good.
One day I brought a friend who was a really good sound engineer (was Tommy's S.E. for 18 months or so, has recorded many albums) to go up and
have a listen to the system as he had never heard a HQ flea powered high efficiency system. We played dozens of CD's, over the afternoon, some that
John (SE) had brought with him and knew really well.
Driving home I asked him "what did you think of the system", he said, "well it's probably the best digital I've ever heard".
TCD
Mark, agreed, I would love to come over and visit you guys, wife and myself did have parts of US + Canada on the travel bucket list. With the current state of
affairs I can't see it happening for a long time.
Amazingly, Australia appears to have largely dodged a bullet. How the economy holds up is another scenario entirely, I'm sure the US will have some kind of
flow on effect down under.
We'll just have to wait and see how it all unfolds. So far I'm very thankful to be living here, still have work, be able to get out, walk and ride in the bush etc.
TCD
I have friends!.. ok one friend... well I thought he was my friend... ok he left me... now I only have my crucifix and something to whistle about... "always look on the bright side of life"... whistle, whistle...whistle, whistle...
You know guys, your comments about Crystal Clear and Sheffield show how little you are actually concerned with improving audio quality, but just like listening to music.
Without these 2 former record companies and their direct disc offerings, we would have had little REFERENCE QUALITY audio sources, so important to improving audio products. These small companies could not afford the big attractions, and how many 'stars' would put up with the difficulties of direct disc recording? So they settled for what they could get, pretty good music, but extra quality sonics.
Why do you guys even bother with audio quality questions, anyway? You're happy with your modest systems, so why not give the rest of us a break? We want to continue discussing improving our audio systems.
Without these 2 former record companies and their direct disc offerings, we would have had little REFERENCE QUALITY audio sources, so important to improving audio products. These small companies could not afford the big attractions, and how many 'stars' would put up with the difficulties of direct disc recording? So they settled for what they could get, pretty good music, but extra quality sonics.
Why do you guys even bother with audio quality questions, anyway? You're happy with your modest systems, so why not give the rest of us a break? We want to continue discussing improving our audio systems.