last_lemming: "I think maybe you didn’t read the original post. Nobody questions that one can hear differences. We are questioning how one can say they hear a new component in a new system and in a new room and contribute the qualities they are hearing specifically to that component and only that component and then recommended that component based on that unique situation. There’s no way to separate the wheat from the chaff.
The only true way to compare a component to another component is to have it done in the same room at the same time all other variables being equal. "
Okay, but with due respect that is not new.
Most competent reviews take an approach that changes one thing and otherwise retains the same context. Swap out the 'table but keep the 'arm and cartridge and everything else constant. There are certain protocols involved in making a reasonable comparison. Casual observers may not follow those, but that too is not new. It's pretty easy to separate the wheat from the chaff with a few simple questions.
The fundamental job of a turntable is to rotate the record at 33-1/3 rpm and to do that with minimal noise. It turns out those functions are not that easy to achieve.
It's pretty amazing how adept is our hearing mechanism at recognizing speed differences when presented with such and just how much difference stable accuracy makes to music.
Pitch deviation is an old-world gauge of stable accuracy - our ears are far more sensitive. Our ear/brain ability to differentiate tiny temporal differences has developed over eons; it is a survival skill. Music occurs in time and it is the turntable that literally creates the time in which music is reproduced in our rooms.
It is pretty straightforward to hear differences between two 'tables, each with nominally high stable accuracy where one of those 'tables is measurably more accurate than the other. Wrt @halcro 's comment, I don't think we've yet reached the boundaries of detection.
The only true way to compare a component to another component is to have it done in the same room at the same time all other variables being equal. "
Okay, but with due respect that is not new.
Most competent reviews take an approach that changes one thing and otherwise retains the same context. Swap out the 'table but keep the 'arm and cartridge and everything else constant. There are certain protocols involved in making a reasonable comparison. Casual observers may not follow those, but that too is not new. It's pretty easy to separate the wheat from the chaff with a few simple questions.
The fundamental job of a turntable is to rotate the record at 33-1/3 rpm and to do that with minimal noise. It turns out those functions are not that easy to achieve.
It's pretty amazing how adept is our hearing mechanism at recognizing speed differences when presented with such and just how much difference stable accuracy makes to music.
Pitch deviation is an old-world gauge of stable accuracy - our ears are far more sensitive. Our ear/brain ability to differentiate tiny temporal differences has developed over eons; it is a survival skill. Music occurs in time and it is the turntable that literally creates the time in which music is reproduced in our rooms.
It is pretty straightforward to hear differences between two 'tables, each with nominally high stable accuracy where one of those 'tables is measurably more accurate than the other. Wrt @halcro 's comment, I don't think we've yet reached the boundaries of detection.