In Reply to: RE: Which is more important? posted by Tony Lauck on June 19, 2009 at 22:11:32:
*** And you have "proof" that the ultrasonic noise that you decry is audible? ***
I am not sure what you mean by this? What "ultrasonic noise" am I "decry"ing about? If you are referring to my measured results, they pertain to noise and distortion in the audible band. In fact, in calculating the results, Audio Rightmark discards ultrasonic frequencies.
You mentioned about "forest vs trees" - I find it ironic that you are worrying about frequencies which no one is even sure whether we can sense, vs noise is which clearly measurable and in the audible zone.
I *do* care about how my music sounds, that is, music that I can actually *hear*.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Which is more important? - Christine Tham 06/20/0901:41:12 06/20/09 (8)
- RE: Which is more important? - Tony Lauck 09:45:50 06/20/09 (7)
- You are completely missing the point - Christine Tham 18:52:00 06/20/09 (6)
- RE: You are completely missing the point - Tony Lauck 19:41:23 06/20/09 (5)
- You are indeed missing the point - Ryelands 00:41:51 06/21/09 (4)
- Thanks for the post - Christine Tham 15:39:28 06/21/09 (0)
- RE: You are indeed missing the point - Tony Lauck 08:38:22 06/21/09 (0)
- RE: You are indeed missing the point - theob 03:04:47 06/21/09 (1)
- RE: You are indeed missing the point - Ryelands 03:22:37 06/21/09 (0)