David; as I enjoy reading about stereo matters, and would like to follow up, would you please cite the "studies" to which you refer in your above post. Thanks. Craig. |
David; My friend works long and hard to make a living and quite frankly doesn't usually have the time to fool around with vinyl, but he can get some listening time in with CDs. Other than this comment, I now give up. You win. Have a nice day. Craig. |
Jm is right David. Why don't you drop the snotty, superior attitude? Usually I find your posts intelligent and interesting-- what happened? He asked a legitimate question about a DIGITAL music concern. Good digital sounds different than good analog but not worse IMHO. If you choose vinyl as a music source I've got no problem with that, but why should you have a problem with those that choose something else? In this hobby we all have problems from time to time-- you should know that. BTW it would be interesting to read what you came up with if you wrote all night long on "vinyl vs analog" (your words). Cheers. Craig |
Carl; we were posting about the same time, so I just caught yours. Good Advice; I'm heading for my stereo now. Happy Freedom (of speech etc.) Day. Craig |
Hi Carl; Again we were posting at the same time. I appreciate your stepping in as "mediator". I certainly have nothing against vinyl, but I've chosen digital-- and as of now it's sounding pretty darn good (I just got an ML transport and DAC-- used of course). I surely do agree with you about SACD, and in fact I recently read in some hi-end mag. (don't remember where) that Sony considers the format a "flop". Cheers. Craig |
Carl; Yeah I use a SF Line 2-- very neutral but with body. I like the additive effect of tubes. The high-end IS expensive. My overall strategy has been to get the best possible digital playback I can afford. (I think I'm there). The ML 360S DAC (especially) provided a really nice improvement in music quality/character. It's as if Diana Krall, Margo Timmins, and Natalie Cole are actually in my room. You've spoken so highly about the CD-50 that I really would lke to hear it, but as you can see, I'm pretty well committed to the system I have. Thanks for asking. Craig |
David......Diana Krall and Natalie Cole sound different from each other, but one is not "better or worse" than the other-- personally I like them both-- as I do good vinyl and good digital music. Whether either of us likes it or not, in the early 80s there was a "war" between analog and digital music formats and analog lost badly. "to the victor goes the spoils". Vinyl will continue to hang on by its fingernails for years because of its perceived superior sound quality by a few afficionados such as yourself and my friend (and I'm glad it will be around). My friend has a $15K analog front end, and also an excellent CD system. I've asked him which he listens to most, and he said he preferred vinyl, but listened to CDs 90% of the time because of their quick and easy use and music availability. I responded to your "vinyl vs analog" error with sarcasm-- sorry. AudiogoN can be an enjoyable chat room so I propose a truce-- there's room for both of us. Cheers. Craig |
Albert; I enjoyed your well written post (just above). It describes very well how many LP users/lovers must feel. But I must respectfully disagree with one of your conclusions, ie "built on a format that has reached perfection......". Perhaps this means that the format(LP)is as good as it will ever get? Or it could mean that the goal of recreating the live performance was finally achieved only to be lost by the digital takeover. I choose to (optimistically) believe that some future digital format, in the hands of dedicated artists and engineers, is the best chance, or maybe the only chance, for this goal to be realized. Sincerely. Craig. |
.......I hasten to add-- I have never heard YOUR system. I bet it is SPECTACULAR. Craig. |
Albert; Your post of 7/7 is the most powerful, eloquent, and oviously painful statement I've yet to see in this forum. My follow-up posts above are just "blather" (to use one of Carl's words), and add nothing. Please disregard them. My only excuse is that it was 1:30 A.M. when I impulsively posted them. Your statement stands on its own. Respectfully, Craig. |
David; It was actually Rockvirgo above that said "CD listeners appear far more serene", but I did ask for the studies you mentioned on this subject. And thanks for noting the Stereophile article. I had read it, and found it interesting-- don't remember if it was statistically significant or not though. I'll take another look. BTW, what did you think of Albert's well written post on the state of LP/analog? As noted, I thought it was right on, but I take no comfort in the decline of vinyl. Thanks, Craig. |
David; The study you refer to by german psychology student J. Ackerman, and reported on by M. Sauer in Jan. and Feb. 2000, Stereophile issues has not reported statistical significance and so, at least this time,it is only opinion, speculation, conjecture, or anecdotal evidence that Ackerman's hypothesis (unstated) is true. No reputable scientific journal would publish a study without statistical significance, and the 95% confidence level (that the hypothesis is correct) is the desireable level to achieve, but the 90% level, while weaker, is publishable. But Stereophile is in the business of selling magazines, and this particular subject took up quite a few "sort of interesting" pages. If Ackerman's study were statistically significant, I would think that Stereophile would have followed up and reported it by now-- but I've seen nothing. As for the girl that heard Ackerman's music 150+ times, M. Sauer made much of this, but in fact it amounts to an uncontrolled study with only one "sample"-- meaningless (except to the girl). I once conducted a study that involved the collection of hundreds of samples over a year and a half only to find out (from statisticians) that my hypothesis only had a confidence level of 52%, ie meaningless; frustrating and disappointing. I hope this post hasn't excessively bored Audiogon readers, but Ackerman's study needs some perspective. Craig. |
Hi Carl; My predispositions are not relevant here (but I think I have an open mind). The statistical significance of Ackerman's study is highly relavant (but unreported). Universaties will often informally publish (in-house) MS and PHD theses even without statistical significance-- after all, negative information can be valuable too, and in these cases, it is the effort and quality that is graded. Reputable scientific journals don't publish non-significant results because they can't afford to-- methods and results have to stand up to peer review. I would just like to see the FINAL result(s) of Ackerman's study. If they aren't significant, I'd guess we'll never see them though. Craig |
3141510; Are you a music lover? If not, what are you doing on Audiogon's site? |
