High resolution vs Vinyl

so it's fair for him to make criticisms and we can't validate his testing point for those criticisms? Perhaps it can be inferred that he is worried that voicing his system might lead to his opinion being lessened if it's found that there is an imbalance in his analogue vs digital gear. As I said earlier, comparing a cheap plastic $200 turntable to an expensive digital front end is not fair. How are we to know if his system has allowed him to make a fair comparison? You can argue (unreasonably I might add) that his system is of little value to the conversation, and I still disagree. If someone makes a scientific theorem to the community, they have to open their doors to scrutiny from the rest of the community before being acknowledged. How is that unreasonable here?

Dave

His personal equipment isn't really relevant at all. A persons level of experience / knowledge base can come from experiences in the field, listening to other systems, theoretical or scientific discussions etc.

It is not worth arguing about whether it is relevant or not that he discloses his personal system. As far as I am concerned he has the right to tell everyone to mind their own business. But people can feel free to continue badgering him and basically being rude as they see fit. I'm not going to argue about that any further.

It would be nice if he did list some of the various systems he has heard along the way (doesn't have to be his own). Knowing what people have experienced along the way helps us greatly in appreciating how they have developed their view points. That said, their view points could be entirely academic. I personally don't have a high opinion of academics as I prefer real world knowledge through experience etc. That said, I don't just disregard opinions based on academic theory.

People love to argue for the sake of it, don't they. That is the one thing in audiophile circles that really annoys me. People seem more interested in arguing and defending their own view points rather than actually having an open mind about things. But as Paul Spencer quoted.... "It is one thing to have an open mind but it is another to have such an open mind that your brain falls out" you don't need to be silly about being open minded, some things are just downright wrong.

f Arg isn't going to reveal his system (as is his right), then his opinion has zero value to me [until he does so].

I'm sure he won't lose any sleep about it.

He isn't going to divulge his system, so guys, stop bitching and moaning about and get on with the show.

. . . You see only what is an advantage to your agenda . . .

Please expand on what you see as my agenda . . . seriously, now.

Gavin, I'm the one that originally asked the question of Arg. I agree the issue and any SNA member's system are 2 different issues. I'm just curious how the knowledge and position each of us take on issues is informed by and informs the systems that we choose.

Ahhhh, OK . . I thought it was Orph. My apologies to Orph.

I too would be curious to see where he's coming from on a more personal level and it might well add some insight.

However, with the sharks obviously circling together with the clear misunderstandings as to how to participate in a civil debate, I can't blame him for maintaining his position.

If he did disclose, all we'd have left after that would be a couple more pages of unsubstantiated personal attacks and you'd have to put your Mod hat on and close the thread, I reckon.

Let's think positive here. Arg's composure under fire might mean we all learn something . . unsettling as that may be.

Cheers,

Gavin

Mate, you just seem to be blind (no pun intended) to what is said, and see things different as intended, and that can appear as you might be doing so intentionally.

If I'm wrong I apoligise, but it appears very similar to how Drizt twists things to suit himself, and given you follow the same track for the most part, It's hard not to see you in the same light.

Please expand on what you see as my agenda . . . seriously, now.

Ahhhh, OK . . I thought it was Orph. My apologies to Orph.

I too would be curious to see where he's coming from on a more personal level and it might well add some insight.

However, with the sharks obviously circling together with the clear misunderstandings as to how to participate in a civil debate, I can't blame him for maintaining his position.

If he did disclose, all we'd have left after that would be a couple more pages of unsubstantiated personal attacks and you'd have to put your Mod hat on and close the thread, I reckon.

Let's think positive here. Arg's composure under fire might mean we all learn something . . unsettling as that may be.

Cheers,

Gavin

I'd put my Mod hat on at the first sign of a personal attack on anyone.

Whilst you can comment about something that you don't own (or haven't experienced), it lacks validation to those who HAVE experienced it and will state what they used etc.

Certainly, but he's only commenting regarding the technology, not any particular piece of equipment.

It's not a big deal knowing someone's system - most of us have described our systems in posts, or include them in our signatures. One surely can understand our suspicions when one stubbornly hides behind a veil of secrecy.

OK, let me phrase this differently. If Arg stated (and could prove) he owned the undisputed leader in both the high end of vinyl and digital systems, what then?

Answer: He could then only state his opinion of the difference and subjective opinion of both.

But again . . that's not what the thread is about and nor is it what he's saying.

He's commenting on the technology. He still has to back up his statements, but those statements aren't based on his own personal system, so any suggestion that it is, is a fallacy . . non sequitur.

Cheers,

Gavin

Mate, you just seem to be blind (no pun intended) to what is said, and see things different as intended, and that can appear as you might be doing so intentionally.

If I'm wrong I apoligise, but it appears very similar to how Drizt twists things to suit himself, and given you follow the same track for the most part, It's hard not to see you in the same light.

No worries . . it's all good.

But please point out where I've been blind or twisted anything and I'll happily respond, apologise and correct same.

In this discourse over this last couple of pages, my intent has been to essentially state a point of order.

That's it really.

I'd put my Mod hat on at the first sign of a personal attack on anyone.

I've no doubt Prof . . I was just hoping to avoid a potential train wreck.

Cheers,

Gavin

No need to point anything out, it just keeps this thread going, and it needs to die, and the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.

Same goes for the silly test one in C&S.

Mate, you just seem to be blind (no pun intended) to what is said, and see things different as intended, and that can appear as you might be doing so intentionally.

If I'm wrong I apoligise, but it appears very similar to how Drizt twists things to suit himself, and given you follow the same track for the most part, It's hard not to see you in the same light.

It is interesting that the personal attacks keep coming from the same group of people.

No need to point anything out, it just keeps this thread going, and it needs to die, and the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.

Same goes for the silly test one in C&S.

So stop enciting flame wars and leave the thread.

So stop enciting flame wars and leave the thread.

:confused::confused::confused:

I think you have the wrong person, you need to speak too D........Oh! that's right.

Is this the one ?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]40850[/ATTACH]

Ahem. That's just silly. This is the real one.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]40851[/ATTACH]

That's a plod hat rather than a mod hat

I don't plod, I meander.

Ahem. That's just silly. This is the real one.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]40851[/ATTACH]

Loved the Young Ones

You guys have got it all wrong, this is a mod's hat:

I mean, who'll argue with a mod if they can force choke the crap out of you?

Dave

That's not a Mod, that's a Master Mod

Hehe, it even fits as we have a Dark Side here, and the force is indeed strong!

That's not a Mod, that's a Master Mod

Hehe, it even fits as we have a Dark Side here, and the force is indeed strong!

A sith mod!

VL, I stand corrected!

hmm...I sense that the force is greater in this one.

His personal equipment isn't really relevant at all. A persons level of experience / knowledge base can come from experiences in the field, listening to other systems, theoretical or scientific discussions etc. ....

....He's commenting on the technology. He still has to back up his statements, but those statements aren't based on his own personal system, so any suggestion that it is, is a fallacy . . non sequitur.

Thanks guys, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Challenge to the two moderators (and valvelover) who don't get it: see if you can find any post of mine in this thread where I have either stated or implied that my post is based on casual home listening to my own equipment. I will retract or correct my errors in those posts if they exist.

Thanks guys, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Challenge to the two moderators (and valvelover) who don't get it: see if you can find any post of mine in this thread where I have either stated or implied that my post is based on casual home listening to my own equipment. I will retract or correct my errors in those posts if they exist.

Arg, I never assumed that you were talking from the sole experience of your own home system, I'm just curious how your choice of equipment and music is informed by your beliefs. It's certainly not an opportunity to denigrate your equipment or music!

....I have studied the human perceptual processes and I learned a few things. I have posted in the past in this thread some of my learnings. Have you looked into the issue of human perception? If so, what have you learned about the validity of uncontrolled casual listening tests?

My posts are completely consistent with the results of every properly conducted listening test that I am aware of. My posts do not represent a belief I have, they are just the observations of those who take the trouble to observe properly. I'm passing them on, what I am aware of.

There are a number of reasons why digital playback systems (including the analogue stage of a DAC) may sound different from each other. But if, by 'sound different', we are talking about casual plug'n'play listening tests, then THAT is the overriding reason, all by itself. The amount of sober, unbiased evidence supporting this conclusion is completely overwhelming and not worth arguing. Therefore that reason has to be removed first. At this point a lot of audiophiles just want the fact to go away because it interferes with their preferred playtime activities. Namely plug in, play, and stand in lordly judgement (and utter ignorance of what they just participated in).

I understand that my bringing this matter to the attention of fellow audiophiles can cause some distress, because so many of us have formed an entire universe of audio reality based mainly on casual home listening 'tests', and a good proportion of us have spent very significant amounts of money on the very same basis over many years, even decades. I'm not just challenging these people on a matter of opinion; I am challenging their whole world view of audio playback, and how to conduct their favourite hobby, and by inference questioning the quality of their purchasing decisions and the path they have taken for many years. To say there will be some resistance would be quite an understatement! B)

cheers

(my bold adjustments to proftournesol's summary): vinyl may add a type of distortion that increases the enjoyment of some vinylphiles but not all

RBCD digital playback may (but probably doesn't audibly) add a type of distortion that subtracts from the enjoyment of some vinylphiles but not all. It's likely that higher resolution digital systems reduce the already inaudible digital distortion, especially if the vinyl distortion is added to the playback chain and that this is preferred by a majority of listeners who by deduction would like the master tapes less than their vinyl....

I am bumping the last couple of posts that I recall being directly on topic. They were so far back.

Would like to read comments and discussion. The only comment I recall was "nonsense" by Orpheus. Maybe there is some good rational reasoning behind that? The only reasoning I am aware of is "Because I like my expensive vinyl better than my expensive digital, in a casual home listening environment". I have gone to some trouble (and apparently put my credibility at risk) explaining why we simply cannot use that type of listening 'test' to compare equipment. I mean it sincerely and dispassionately, not to score points. We simply cannot use that type of test, it is just wrong, it leads to terrible results and poor decisons and waste of money, it serves the interests of salesmen/women, and it is a disservice to the audiophile who wants high performance and fidelity to the master tape, yet it is depressingly prevalent in the audiophile community because of (a) a poor level of understanding of the experimental process (comparing equipment is an experiment) and its traps and pitfalls, and ( the rigorous method of doing a comparative listening test is slow, tedious, time consuming, involves a lot of people and their time and attentiveness, involves equipment that is not readily available (and is therefore costly), and is not available at retail outlets -- and is therefore extremely unattractive and unsexy to practically every audiophile on the planet, many of whom are basically music lovers with little understanding of the technology, science (including physics, biology and psychology), and experimental knowledge that underpin all this -- we just want to get to the music we love, excellently reproduced, not go through seven hells.

And that's how we get to the unfortunate position of making so many decisions based on a poor test method. It's understandable, and it will continue, but that doesn't make it right.

And all the test papers, and white papers in the world, don't mean you are right, it just helps you form an opinion, right or wrong.

... The only reasoning I am aware of is "Because I like my expensive vinyl better than my expensive digital, in a casual home listening environment". I have gone to some trouble (and apparently put my credibility at risk) explaining why we simply cannot use that type of listening 'test' to compare equipment. I mean it sincerely and dispassionately, not to score points. We simply cannot use that type of test, it is just wrong, it leads to terrible results and poor decisons and waste of money, it serves the interests of salesmen/women, and it is a disservice to the audiophile who wants high performance and fidelity to the master tape, yet it is depressingly prevalent in the audiophile community because of (a) a poor level of understanding of the experimental process (comparing equipment is an experiment) and its traps and pitfalls, and (B) the rigorous method of doing a comparative listening test is slow, tedious, time consuming, involves a lot of people and their time and attentiveness, involves equipment that is not readily available (and is therefore costly), and is not available at retail outlets -- and is therefore extremely unattractive and unsexy to practically every audiophile on the planet, many of whom are basically music lovers with little understanding of the technology, science (including physics, biology and psychology), and experimental knowledge that underpin all this -- we just want to get to the music we love, excellently reproduced, not go through seven hells.

Only because it's raining.

So what you're saying is that the only way to decide if a piece of gear will work for you at home, in your own room and with all the other bits of gear you own is to not listen to it in that room and with all that gear but in fact somewhere else and a no doubt completely different environment using a lot of expensive equipment and the views of a whole heap of other people that won't be listening to it in your system and in your room.