I do not want and I will not. Those who are truly worthy will hear and find everything on their own or with the help of best friends if it is difficult.
That’s electrostatic thing is really funny.
Look here and see how wrong you are, again.
Quad 63 (and later) Delay Line Inductors
Hans
Hans, I know this and other information about 10 times better than you, maybe even more. Against my background, you don’t know anything at all. You and your buddies fall in love with the bait all the time.I even doubt that you have a higher education.😀😀😀😀😀
Last edited:
So when you know everything so much better, why you are frequenting this forum.
It’s way below your standing.
It would be a relief to be freed from your permanent insults.
Hans
OK, how should one set up the listening test? Please give some details so that they can try it themselves.
You trying your old tired game on this thread? It doesn't have your name written all over it but perhaps it will get closed all the same, I wouldn't shed a tear.
I communicate with like-minded people and there are enough of such interesting people. There are always people who know slightly different information, or from other sources or languages than me. And who are happy to accept a different point of view, too. Nothing personal.
If you are really interested, you can always tune in better than others, based on his experience or mistakes, as you think, to get an exhaustive result in your opinion.😉
Last edited:
Hi Gunfu,
As I read this part of "The Black Hole", and since (I think) you are Russian, I wonder how that sentence was meant. There's a couple of ways it could go: One, you mean "amazing" - "like stereo recordings"; two, you mean "amazingly like stereo". Maybe a third way which I'm not thinking of at the moment. Just thought I'd mention that, since, sometimes a simple language construct can be misleading.
So, anyway, here are a couple of my positions on the topic of mono versus stereo music reproduction, adapted from my previous writings elsewhere.
Every instrument (that I can think of) is a mono source. As a result, for audio recording and playback, or sound reinforcement, it makes sense to reproduce it in mono. Where the "issues" arise is when we have, for example, a string quartet. Do we really want the violin and viola coming from the same location, with the violinist sitting on the violist's lap (while they're performing), or, should one sit behind the other (as would seem to be in the case in mono)? If one sits behind the other (or on the other's lap), who gets "top billing"? 😉
This is one problem with mono playback of multi-instrument recordings - there is no sense of "left-center-right" and everywhere between (and outside of the stereo speaker placement).
Stereo "semi-resolves" that problem: "You are over there, and I am over here." 🙂 There are other advantages of stereo over mono. However, at the moment, I have to make dinner. Suffice it to say for now, that if the balance among the various musicians (the direct sound) and the ambient sound can be made just right, mono can sound VERY good.
🙂
Then what's up with your "It's easier to take and try different cables yourself."?
Having the book without sharing the context is not helpful. Lets look at Mark's whole quote for the nth painful, nitpicking time
The subtle, or even not-so-subtle, differences between better quality DACs will be revealed by a high resolution monitor system in a good listening room.
However, it is possible to substitute loudspeakers of progressively lesser quality of reproduction, and to continue to repeat the tests until no difference can be heard between the different DACs. To a lesser degree, the same effect may be noticed when changing amplifiers or loudspeaker cables."
Various things are not defined here such as
-what do they believe is a high resolution monitor system
- what is a good listening room
-what is a better quality DAC
-Is this unblinded opinon or has any attempt to prove the case with DACs sounding different been made.
And note this can be inferred as saying that speakers and room matter more than anything else, and the author does not go as far as saying amplifiers or cables matter as he uses the word 'may'.
Paraphrasing an already out of context paragraph just moves it even further from what the author actually intended. So yes it is misleaded by both you and Mark.
I'm really bored of this now btw.
A particularly violent and abusive scene of that young man's situation; unsure what you're trying to communicate regarding levels of obsession. Er, this is how we do it in Russia? Umm, this is the level of obsession we bring to our listening, re the constituent components of our sound systems?
If THAT depicts in any way, shape or form what it takes to achieve "high end" sound reproduction, I for one want no part in it -
If you watch only one scene from a movie, you will never understand the whole plot. And this is an American film and it is beautiful.
Hi Dave
To properly record true stereo you need to use two microphones. This is how audiophile recordings are made by several small firms. But usually stereo is recorded with one microphone for each musical instrument. Or a bunch of microphones such as for recording a drum kit or chorus. Then the sound engineer brings it all to his taste on different channels in different proportions, but it is still no longer a real stereo as with two microphone recordings. There are other technical problems in the correct two microphone stereo recordings, for example, when recording choral music or large orchestras.
Regarding the playback of high-quality mono recordings, there is also information about the location of the instruments, since the instrument surrounds itself with a sound field, and we hear distant sounds or loud sounds and reflections in mono too. This is perceived as volume, “air”, in principle, just like in the wrong stereo recording which was carried out using one microphone for each musical instrument or vocalist.🙂
Last edited:
Bill, you now seem to be taking issue with what the authors said. If you are looking for a reason so you can dismiss their findings and hang onto your old outdated beliefs then just say so.
As Jakob found, what I said was very close to what the authors said (only in inverse form). I never claimed it was a direct quote or I would have put quotation marks around it.