trentpancakes
Responses from trentpancakes
| Does it bother you? Judsauce, you GET IT. Thanks, man. | |
| IPC Energizers Every time the listeners heard a significant difference.Are those customers being told that you're turning these devices on? I wonder if IPC would be willing to submit some test units to a double-blind testing scenario. I even have a good friend w... | |
| Does it bother you? I view most recording engineers as a person just doing a job with very little(if any) passion(think of Homer Simpson sleeping on the job) regarding sound quality.That couldn't be further from the truth. Read any recording engineer's trade mag... r... | |
| IPC Energizers Have you set up any blind ABX tests with the devices? Perhaps you could organize one in your store, I'd love to attend, and I'm sure you'd have no issues with being a blind tester. I think an NYC Audiogon meetup is in order! | |
| Does it bother you? The only thing that might concern me is if Trent tried an alarm clock with a dot on it and heard something different (the alarm maybe??) :)I would be concerned, too! I would definitely love to see the results of double-blind ABX testing with devic... | |
| Does it bother you? The original assertion was: "many small ensemble jazz recordings in the late 1950's and early 1960's sound better (more realistic, so to speak)--- often by a wide margin --- then most recordings of today."...which I still maintain the musicianship... | |
| IPC Energizers Here's a list of the products that IPC Hong Kong markets with "proton vibration alignment." There are all the same IPC device, just rebranded: http://www.protonalignment.com/Have you noticed any improvements with your blood circulation, air condit... | |
| Does it bother you? When all is said and done when a studio/producer/engineer does adopt audiophile standards, I'm thinking Mapleshade, you do get better sounding recordings.Thanks for the reply, and it does accurately depict what goes on in a studio. It's controlled... | |
| Does it bother you? A reason for the better sounding recordings of the 50's and 60's may be that there is a lot less of all the little "problems" you mention in rant.That simply isn't something that's supported by fact.Equipment in the '50s and '60s was marked by its... | |
| Does it bother you? That's a silly statement.So equipment trumps talent? You really think they had a technological edge in the '50s that allowed them to make "better" recordings?I'm giving all of the credit to great musicians, and being accused of placing the "blame"... | |
| Does it bother you? LOL! It's always the other guys fault. Mechanics blame the Engineers, and vice versa. Thanks for the comic relief pancakes.Then what do you think it is? Do you think it was because they used more audiophile-grade equipment in the '50s? Silvered wi... | |
| Does it bother you? Robsker, the reason why those recordings sound better is because the musicians playing the music were better. It's that simple. In the recording world, it's all about performance over equipment. You want to catch lightning in a bottle, and these o... | |
| Does it bother you? This is just half of the signal path, and for one channel. Now imagine this happening across 24 tracks, and including the playback signal path through various stacks of effects units. No vibration damping on a single one of them! Every vacuum tube... |