In Reply to: RE: Flat earth audiophile beliefs? posted by andy19191 on January 27, 2009 at 23:44:27:
> > You mean like all amps sound the same? > >
> You are being dishonest. >
No, I am not being dishonest.
> Nobody says all amplifiers sound the same given the existence of things like SET valve amplifier generating tens of percent distortion. They say something like all competent amplifiers sound the same when driven in their valid operating range. For example:
http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm
Explanation? >
Now I think you are being dishonest. Of course no one has ever said all amps sound the same even when they are clipping. I didn't see any point in making obvious excpetions. I find it interesting that you think you can speak for everyone on this subject.
> > CDs give you perfect sound forever?
> Again you are being dishonest.>
Not at all. This was an actual marketing claim.
> This is, I believe, an advertising phrase and should be viewed as such by any sane person.>
Yes it was a marketing claim. Why does it get a free ride? Have you checked the subject of the thread?
> I have never seen anybody say the phrase and mean it. Have you?>
Yes. Myself back when I bought that B.S. at face value. But more to the point. I have seen many people say the same thing in other words. the perfect audible transaprency of CDs has been touted since it first hit the market and continues to be touted to this day. And to think, all that time and effort wasted on the design and manufacturing of newer "better" A/D and D/A converters. Why? When all we nneded for perfect transparency were those first generation 14 bit players playing non-dithered CDs. Silly audiophiles who thought things didn't sound right. didn't they know it was all the fault of the master tapes?
> If I stand on my CDs the sound is no longer perfect. If I want to record a 30 kHz signal a CD is 100% imperfect. Etc...>
And you accuse me of being dishonest?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Flat earth audiophile beliefs? - Analog Scott 01/28/0910:18:30 01/28/09 (23)
- Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - Tony Lauck 11:25:23 01/28/09 (22)
- RE: Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - theaudiohobby 11:58:50 01/28/09 (21)
- As opposed to... - E-Stat 19:15:29 01/28/09 (0)
- RE: Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - Tony Lauck 12:25:04 01/28/09 (19)
- RE: Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - theaudiohobby 04:59:41 01/29/09 (18)
- RE: Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - Tony Lauck 07:47:34 01/29/09 (17)
- RE: Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - theaudiohobby 08:43:30 01/29/09 (16)
- RE: Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - morricab 06:56:08 01/30/09 (4)
- RE: It's a marketing slogan not a scientific definition - theaudiohobby 02:43:43 01/31/09 (2)
- RE: It's a marketing slogan not a scientific definition - morricab 11:26:31 02/1/09 (1)
- RE: It's a marketing slogan not a scientific definition - theaudiohobby 17:08:38 02/1/09 (0)
- Warning to LFOs: Caution! Anecdotal Evidence! - Tony Lauck 07:30:29 01/30/09 (0)
- "The man on the street given his experience with vinyl ..." - robert young 10:31:20 01/29/09 (0)
- RE: Perfect Sound: "Science" not Marketing - Tony Lauck 10:26:59 01/29/09 (9)
- Perfect time to check out - E-Stat 19:38:40 02/3/09 (0)
- RE: Why attribute a scientific definition to a marketing slogan - theaudiohobby 01:23:20 01/30/09 (7)
- I'm not certain that I did. - robert young 04:32:37 01/30/09 (6)
- RE: I'm not certain that I did. - theaudiohobby 08:46:04 01/30/09 (5)
- Spare me... - robert young 14:06:30 01/31/09 (4)
- RE: Does not take away from my point.... - theaudiohobby 14:52:07 01/31/09 (3)
- Originally in this thread - Analog Scott 18:21:35 01/31/09 (2)
- RE: Originally in this thread - theaudiohobby 03:31:57 02/1/09 (1)
- RE: Originally in this thread - Analog Scott 09:17:38 02/2/09 (0)