Post by ArchimagoYes Mr. Ralph, indeed the depth of Minoeall-san's words of wisdom
suggest truth incarnate and have made humble many a fellow. The years of
meditation have obviously produced a gentleman of great intellect and
transcendence.
I suggest you also visit and experience the achievements of his cousin
http://www.sakurasystems.com/
Best regards on your journey,
Keaton I G-E III, Esq.
Thank you Keaton for your kind words and the link to Sakura Systems. The
money in my wallet needs to find a new home.
Post by ArchimagoOver the years I have never seen any audiophile magazine publish the
graphs I've shown - ie. exactly identical graphs for various digital
cables - has anyone? Maybe an independent publication like 'The Audio
Critic' may have.
It's of course not in the interest of advertisers / manufacturers but I
assume also the readership hasn't been demanding for it either... I
wonder do most people accept the idea that measurements are worthless,
or that the "sound of music is too complex" to be correlated to
measurements, or maybe most audiophiles just know intuitively the truth
and just don't want to know.
Sorry to hear about your experience with high-priced-defective-by-design
cables. Just terrible. And I assume the reviewers must have just loved
those cables.
Exactly +1 don't fel sorry for me :)
These Magazines are spreading the idea that measurements are worthless
( go figure ) .
There is a kernel of truth in this as always but widely overused by
audiophiles.
In the 70's there was a "spec" war focusing on certain aspect but
neglecting others . This have giving rise to the myth the negative
feedback is bad and that certain details would dissapear ? Of course by
unknown mechanism that no audiophile has to explain because it just is
so ;)
There is sometimes not a very clear correlation to what some
measurements tells us vs audibility . But something's are clear and
proved ,like with modern well designed equipment with very tiny amount
of distortion and noise ,no one can tell them apart .
A fact that Audio critic used to piont out , very good magazine btw .
But in the case of these digital cables you have a situation where there
is *no* difference , if the magazines did these kind of measurement they
would give away mathematical proof that they are lying , and it would be
possible to sue them .
If they claim that a more perky midrange and firmer bottom is the case
on the latest forgettable jazz Muzak girl record .
That don't stop audiophiles , must be the ether or flogiston that
transports these signals directly to,the brain as they electro
acoustically don't happen at all :)
I beg to differ. Remember it was the measurement of higher jitter in
non-asynchronous USB that directly lead to the recent asynchronous USB
DAC craze. So it's not that the clowns in the audio press don't use
measurements but rather that they gladly cherry pick among measurements
and use only those measurements that prove most beneficial to their
puppet masters. oops, I mean advertisers. Amazingly in the course of a
single review you will read about how measurements show how "bad" the
jitter is in non-asynchronous USB and also how a $500 USB cable (from
one of the magazine's major advertisers) is way better than a $10 USB
cable, in spite of the fact that tehy measure EXACTLY the same. And
that's why I call them CLOWNS. But I really should be calling them
LIARS. They are, quite simply, disgraceful and never to be believed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98620