Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Did I say that?

You have posed the question in a very ambiguous way.

It all depends what you mean by face value. Here again is the quotation from Stan Ricker from the record jacket:

"Well, let's put it this way. The signal from the digital sounds exactly the same as what we heard coming from those transformerless Schoepps [sic] microphones. What more can you say?"

----from the record jacket of Frederic Fennell, The Cleveland Symphonic Winds, Holst: Suite No. 1 in E-flat; Suite No. 2 in F/Handel: Music for the Royal Fireworks/Bach: Fantasia in G. Telarc Digital 5038

I take it that he and some others did not notice any difference between the mic feed and the output of the Soundstream recorder. He said so and I have no reason to doubt it. If they had done DBTs, they *might* have gotten positive results as a DBT could have been more sensitive.

However, Mr. Ricker asserted there was no audible difference between the mic feed and the output of the recorder, thus he seemingly accepted the null hypothesis, in effect. The null hypothesis may or may not be true, but Mr. Ricker hadn't proved it and it cannot be proven with statistics, either.

But really, we do not know what Mr. Ricker would have said had someone asked about issues of proof. Perhaps he did not mean to be taken as technically as all that.

If you take the trouble to follow the discussion further down the thread, you will find that I also said that DBTs would have been better.


____________________________________________________________
"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:
  Parts Connexion  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.