rixthetrick,
'And do you suppose that it cannot possibly be improved upon, in any way by anybody?'
No one is going to argue with that. Specifications and tolerances can always be improved. However, transmitting audio signals over Wi-Fi is not considered particularly challenging nowadays, is it?
It wasn't too long ago that wired connections were considered advisable for 4K etc but now most routers can manage it wirelessly. The demands required for streaming high definition audio should easily be well within the wireless capabilities of any router anywhere, shouldn't they?
Therefore shouldn't we be primarily concerned whether these improvements are of any actual sonic use to us, or are they merely just another marketing ploy to add another zero or 2 (or maybe even 3) to the price demanded?
That's the problem here, isn't it? The perennial problem facing all audiophiles; the fact that anyone, anywhere can sell anything regardless of whether it has any discernible effect for any price they choose. All they seemingly have to do is to imply some quasi-nebulous sonic improvement, and they have a mandate.
As many of us may have already fallen for this tactic previously, what does this say about us a group? Are we really so gullible and so easily led?
If so, then how should we protect ourselves against such devious attempts to hoodwink us?
The one thing that might help us would be the demand for more double blind testing, but that is usually met with much hostility and resistance by almost all sides.
Alan Shaw once offered a free pair of Harbeth's top of the range M40 loudspeakers to anyone who was able to come down and successfully identify a sonic difference between 2 level matched amplifiers under such conditions at his factory.
Guess what happened? No one took him up on his offer. Not even after years and years of debating and arguing the point!
Even more recently Gene Della Salla of Audioholics fame got into a Facebook spat with his sometimes sparring partner, none other than Michael Fremer, over the worth of power conditioners (see Audioholics Community).
Needless to say Fremer's responses so far have been far from convincing, merely reactionary and defensive. In previous times Michael was not always adverse to double blind testing.
Maybe times have changed and once more the scam continues as the cartel continues to protect itself.
Fair enough, they all want to keep their jobs, but how do we audiophiles protect ourselves?
'And do you suppose that it cannot possibly be improved upon, in any way by anybody?'
No one is going to argue with that. Specifications and tolerances can always be improved. However, transmitting audio signals over Wi-Fi is not considered particularly challenging nowadays, is it?
It wasn't too long ago that wired connections were considered advisable for 4K etc but now most routers can manage it wirelessly. The demands required for streaming high definition audio should easily be well within the wireless capabilities of any router anywhere, shouldn't they?
Therefore shouldn't we be primarily concerned whether these improvements are of any actual sonic use to us, or are they merely just another marketing ploy to add another zero or 2 (or maybe even 3) to the price demanded?
That's the problem here, isn't it? The perennial problem facing all audiophiles; the fact that anyone, anywhere can sell anything regardless of whether it has any discernible effect for any price they choose. All they seemingly have to do is to imply some quasi-nebulous sonic improvement, and they have a mandate.
As many of us may have already fallen for this tactic previously, what does this say about us a group? Are we really so gullible and so easily led?
If so, then how should we protect ourselves against such devious attempts to hoodwink us?
The one thing that might help us would be the demand for more double blind testing, but that is usually met with much hostility and resistance by almost all sides.
Alan Shaw once offered a free pair of Harbeth's top of the range M40 loudspeakers to anyone who was able to come down and successfully identify a sonic difference between 2 level matched amplifiers under such conditions at his factory.
Guess what happened? No one took him up on his offer. Not even after years and years of debating and arguing the point!
Even more recently Gene Della Salla of Audioholics fame got into a Facebook spat with his sometimes sparring partner, none other than Michael Fremer, over the worth of power conditioners (see Audioholics Community).
Needless to say Fremer's responses so far have been far from convincing, merely reactionary and defensive. In previous times Michael was not always adverse to double blind testing.
Maybe times have changed and once more the scam continues as the cartel continues to protect itself.
Fair enough, they all want to keep their jobs, but how do we audiophiles protect ourselves?