jj@rabbit.UUCP (02/06/84)
Listen, Buckley, I HAVE heard state of the art systems. I have heard a NUMBER of such, each different, each with its strengths and weaknesses. If you can't admit anyone besides you (and maybe Phil R) has ANY experience, then you aren't being honest. Then again, maybe you can't deal with anyone who disagrees with you. I don't understand at all how you can take something SO incredibly sensitive and complex as the human auditory system and make NON-DOUBLE BLIND tests with DIFFERENT MATERIAL on each system, and claim that you are testing anything. I don't see how you can take a poorly recorded CD <Yes, dimwit, MOST of them are recorded with mike techniques and mixing techniques that I'm not willing to describe in the vernacular on netnews.> and claim that there is ANYTHING wrong with the CD system, when you couldn't hear the differences through the awful recording techniques. <Which are reproduced in living color, so to speak.> Unless you listen to LIVE performances twice a week, I don't know how you can claim to have ANY handle on what sounds realistic. I do know that you can get accustomed to your own system, and begin to use IT for your standard of reference. I'm not going to sit here and swap qualifications, working on digital signal processing and doing critical listening are what I do for a living, and I don't feel a need to explain my credentials to anyone. <Frankly, in a morass of superstition like net.audio, I don't think most people would know what to think of them.> I'm NOT going to sit here and be slandered. I DO (most of the time) sit here and watch superstition flow past my terminal, because I'm not willing (nor do I feel a need) to try to tell the rest of the world what to do. <In that respect I clearly differ from you, Mr. B.> Enough already! I suggest that you set up a reasonably controlled double blind test, ensure matched levels, loads, presentation, etc, and THEN listen for a while. Unfortunately, I don't (at the minute) know where to get an analog signal good enough <maybe a Telarc, but...> to not be recognizibly analog. (Maybe the trick is to take a digitization of an analog disc and then play both, but that still has it's problems.) I've heard enough BAD compact discs that were clearly recorded and/or mixed so poorly that they don't represent a good test. I have heard a VERY FEW discs that were recorded well enough to compare with audiophile recordings, but I don't blame that on the CD player <or the system> I blame THAT on the desire of the CD manufacturer to make money, first and foremost. Please, Mr. Buckley, in the future would you restrict your opinions to things that you know about, such as your OWN reactions to a CD player, your OWN system, etc. Showing your prejudices against anyone who disagrees with you is both pointless and insulting, both to those who are insulted, and those who have to read your articles. If you like, I'll send you the netequette section on ad-hominem articles to help you out. =============== James Johnston Acoustics Research Department AT&T Bell Laboritories, Murray Hill, NJ