In Reply to: That's funny because posted by E-Stat on December 14, 2006 at 18:50:59:
Stan Ricker apparently did direct comparisons between the mic feed and the output from Soundstream digital recorder on the Fennel recording. Very short switching times results in greater sensitivity. On the other hand, you only did a comparison with what you had heard a few minutes earlier in another room--at least, I take it that's what you meant.
Your account could be read as meaning you were hearing the orchestra for the Firebird recording live and then heard the recorded version a few minutes later, but I don't think that's what you meant.In any case, the young Mr. Ricker, who no doubt had better hearing than when older, didn't notice a difference between the mic feed and the output of the Soundstream digital recorder for the Fennell recordings.
I have both recordings, BTW, and consider both to be excellent.
____________________________________________________________
"Nature loves to hide."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Sure DBTs would have been better, but Ricker's and your sighted comparisons of the Soundstream recorder differed. - Pat D 12/14/0620:32:26 12/14/06 (51)
- So you accept stan Ricker's observations at face value - Analog Scott 21:23:43 12/18/06 (28)
- Did I say that? - Pat D 23:02:55 12/19/06 (27)
- Re: Did I say that you said that or did I ask you a question? - Analog Scott 23:15:43 12/19/06 (26)
- Analog Scott thinks the null hypothesis can be proved! - Pat D 01:59:03 12/20/06 (25)
- I see, you were just looking for any excuse not to answer a simple question - Analog Scott 08:06:51 12/20/06 (24)
- Well, you can't understand the issues until you grasp that the null hypothesis cannot be proven statistically. (nt) - Pat D 15:26:07 12/20/06 (23)
- Nope, you were clearly looking for any excuse not to answer the questions becuase - Analog Scott 20:31:45 12/20/06 (22)
- Analog scott said the null hypothesis can be proven to a 95% level of certainty. Now he refuses to explain how. - Pat D 06:45:51 12/21/06 (21)
- Sadly Pat D is now making things up me to deflect attention from the fact that he won't answer the questions - Analog Scott 22:51:51 12/21/06 (20)
- Didn't your Mommy teach you to tell the truth? I answered your question here. - Pat D 06:22:39 12/22/06 (19)
- Ironic that you would question my honesty and then tell a flat out lie all in the subject line. - Analog Scott 15:12:07 12/22/06 (18)
- You just didn't like the answer I gave. Link provided, BTW. - Pat D 15:29:16 12/22/06 (17)
- baeutiful. A link to no naswer given to my question. Nice. thank you for proving me right - Analog Scott 15:56:14 12/22/06 (16)
- Nothing there, folks. Move along. (nt) - Pat D 16:11:25 12/22/06 (15)
- embarrassed? nt - Analog Scott 17:11:41 12/22/06 (14)
- Just trying to save you some embarrassment. Move along folks, nothing there. (nt) - Pat D 17:33:36 12/22/06 (13)
- Do you ever tell the truth? Seems to me you were doing everything you could to try to embarrass me - Analog Scott 17:36:07 12/22/06 (12)
- No, I figured you were embarrassed enough. Have you figured out that one cannot prove two things to be the same yet? - Pat D 05:43:32 12/23/06 (11)
- Have you figured out that no one is buying your story? - Analog Scott 09:05:59 12/23/06 (10)
- I doubt you would admit to buying anything of mine. - Pat D 10:23:34 12/23/06 (9)
- You seem confused. do you know the difference between me and anybody?. - Analog Scott 11:05:50 12/23/06 (8)
- And ad hominem seems to be the entire substance of your arguments. - Pat D 14:03:19 12/23/06 (7)
- I'd say ad hominem seems to be the entire substance of your arguments. - Analog Scott 17:03:50 12/23/06 (6)
- Could you tell me about proving the null hypothesis. (nt) - Pat D 18:07:19 12/23/06 (5)
- Thank you for proving "ad hominem seems to be the entire substance of your arguments. " - Analog Scott 18:16:14 12/23/06 (4)
- No, the null hypothesis is substantive issue, and you refuse to tell us why you disagree with the statisticians. - Pat D 18:43:54 12/23/06 (3)
- No, the only issue is the fact that an honest answer from you would expose that old objectivist double standard - Analog Scott 09:02:22 12/24/06 (2)
- A side issue irrelevant to audio. Now, understanding the null hypothesis is important for understanding audio DBTs. - Pat D 20:08:45 12/24/06 (1)
- thank you for proving me right, again. - Analog Scott 09:37:12 12/25/06 (0)
- :) - E-Stat 05:34:50 12/15/06 (18)
- All you illustrated is that listening live and listening to a stereo are not the same. - Pat D 11:44:05 12/15/06 (4)
- I am not alone - E-Stat 13:24:15 12/15/06 (3)
- I don't think anybody here will dispute that E man. - Ozzie 07:35:09 12/16/06 (1)
- My family and I love "Salamander Pie" :) [nt] - Ted Smith 17:55:34 12/16/06 (0)
- Agreed, E-Stat. - David W. Robinson 22:43:50 12/15/06 (0)
- Re: :) - theaudiohobby 09:05:04 12/15/06 (12)
- Do you likewise believe - E-Stat 13:27:45 12/15/06 (9)
- Re: Do you likewise believe - Pat D 22:44:22 12/19/06 (0)
- Re: Do you likewise believe - Ozzie 07:39:52 12/16/06 (1)
- What has gotten lost - E-Stat 08:06:51 12/16/06 (0)
- Re: Do you likewise believe - theaudiohobby 01:36:21 12/16/06 (5)
- Creative? - E-Stat 06:56:33 12/16/06 (4)
- Hearing loss? - Ozzie 07:49:42 12/16/06 (3)
- How about some DBTs? - Pat D 15:44:22 12/16/06 (2)
- Re: How about some DBTs? - Ozzie 07:16:59 12/18/06 (1)
- Re: How about some DBTs? - Ted Smith 07:47:57 12/18/06 (0)
- Re: :) - Pat D 11:49:03 12/15/06 (1)
- Re: :) - Ozzie 13:24:18 12/17/06 (0)
- Bla bla bla ... - bjh 21:52:15 12/14/06 (2)
- You're just jealous of my recognition - Pat D 03:57:44 12/15/06 (1)
- Yeah, I foresee a time when MJ's star has faded, when the new slogan sweeping the land is ... - bjh 07:07:42 12/15/06 (0)