• Welcome to The Audio Annex! If you have any trouble logging in or signing up, please contact 'admin - at - theaudioannex.com'. Enjoy!
  • HTTPS (secure web browser connection) has been enabled - just add "https://" to the start of the URL in your address bar, e.g. "https://theaudioannex.com/forum/"
  • Congratulations! If you're seeing this notice, it means you're connected to the new server. Go ahead and post as usual, enjoy!
  • I've just upgraded the forum software to Xenforo 2.0. Please let me know if you have any problems with it. I'm still working on installing styles... coming soon.

Audiophools abound


Dog Faced Pony Soldier
Perhaps he’s wanting tactile response? You said the bass was overbearing but did it beat the shit out of you physically? I once left a demo of John Wick feeling like Mike Tyson pounded my ribs into hamburger because of a near field sub firing directly into the back of the MLP. But I’ve also experienced over-the-top bass that was loud but didn’t kick me in the chest...
Yes, it beat me physically! Even the sound of a an actor saying the word, "Preponderance" knocked the breath out of me. But it was nonstop death battering even when the movie was doing nothing.


Dog Faced Pony Soldier

Truth: The playback medium is reproducing the master recordings, and if the master recordings sound terrible, the playback cannot sound any better (this applies to all mediums including LP, CD, streaming, or reel-to-reel).

False Claim: If the original recordings are digital, they are inherently bad sounding even if the playback medium is LP.

This presupposition that all digital recordings are going to sound bad simply because they are digital is one of the most horrific failures of the audiophile community, press, and manufacturers. Nothing could be further from the truth. If the same recording, mixing, mastering, and reproduction principles and techniques from the best artists of the 1970s were used to make a modern recording with all digital technology, the result would be inherently BETTER because all of the analog formats past and present are more flawed than digital formats. All analog formats introduce more audible noise, they create more audible distortions, they experience losses in transfer, and they are simply inferior. Modern recordings tend to sound bad because of the choices the labels, recording teams, and artists make while creating a new recording - it isn't due to the format being used.


Dog Faced Pony Soldier

This is the most confusing answers to a simple issue. He dances all around the facts, like he is scared to death to state the truth.

The truth....

Every audio source worthy of being called Audiophile is VASTLY better than even the best speakers in every possible way. In other words, it is true the speakers can only reproduce whatever they are fed, but what they are fed in most like to be an order of magnitude higher quality than the speaker can handle.

Just look at the typical performance characteristics of two common sources versus typical speakers playing at reference levels in an average room:

Vinyl = 1.0 - 0.1% (depending on cartridge, frequency, and outer versus inner grooves)
CD < 0.001%
Speakers >1.0%

Vinyl = (audible, but far too much variance to summarize)
CD = Near or below audibility
Speakers = Audible in most cases

In-Room Frequency Response
Vinyl = 30 - 18,000 Hz +/- 3dB (effective)
CD = 5 - 20,000 Hz +/- 0.5dB
Speakers = 30 -20,000 Hz +/- 6dB

Effective Dynamic Range (assuming room noise floor of 45dB A-Weighted SPL)
Vinyl = 40 - 60dB (dependent on frequency, cartridge, and outer versus inner groove region)
CD = 96dB
Speakers < 60dB

Frequency Dependent Phase Shift
Vinyl = Measurable but minimal in the audible range
CD = Inaudible
Speakers > 480 degrees (typical two way system with cone/dome drivers)

Channel Inbalance
Vinyl < Approximately +/- 0.5dB depending on setup and outer versus inner groove region
CD = 0dB
Speakers = From 0.5dB to well over 6dB depending on speaker design, placement, room acoustics, and seating position

Added Resonance, Ringing, or Decay
Vinyl = Inaudible, if at all present
CD = None
Speakers = Massive! Speaker resonances and ringing, early reflections & room echo, and room reverb add significant resonance to the signal source

I could go on, but the point is pretty much made in these aspects of sound which obviously make music sound better or worse.

So, even an affordably average turntable setup is likely to be significantly higher fidelity than even the most high end speakers. Does improving the sources make a difference? Of course! But what makes more of an appreciable and enjoyable difference - slightly and audibly changing the clarity and dynamics by upgrading a turntable, or finding the perfect set of speakers for your tastes, room, and desired listening levels?


Dog Faced Pony Soldier
This guy is incredibly annoying to watch and listen to, but he makes a very good point. Loudness is incredibly important to how we perceive quality. That's why when we used to discuss doing listening tests between components or speakers in the past I would write long lectures on the importance of perfectly matching the gain of the two devices being compared.

He "discovered" what nearly all audio engineers have known all along - CD audio is pretty much as good as we can hear and any attempt to exceed it to get better sound is generally a waste of time.