newman (10/29/82)
To the person claiming that the sound of a piece of equipment is the only criterion on which to judge it: Sorry, but I don't agree. You may be one of those "golden ears" who I've seen claim in print they can identify a single type of capacitor in a critical circuit path by listening to an amp, and you may call me a "meter reader" if you like, but I strongly believe that all properties of any piece of audio equipment can be measured and reproduced by any one with the know how and test equipment. There may be qualities that haven't yet been successfully measured, but they will be. Therefore I feel the specs are certainly worthwhile if properly stated (very rare). I'm talking about sophisticated specs, not just x% THD at y watts RMS (yes, many companies still claim the existence of RMS watts). Besides, in my experience anyone with the gall to claim he/she can accurately tell the relative merits of a piece of equipment by listening to it for n minutes can be so easily made to contradict himself as to immediately trash the argument. (The case is somewhat different with speakers, which do exhibit rather large relative differences. I refer to electronic components).
rostain (11/01/82)
I disagree with the love of specs. The problem is that the technology that produces specs is usually at the same level as the technology that produces stereo equipment. This means that generally all equipment (disregarding) downright bad equipment) lies within the good to excellent range of a spec. I say judge things with your ears, and if you still can't decide, then use specs. Anyone agree?
jcw (11/01/82)
I understand the argument in favor of ears... I have, for example, A-B tested amplifiers with virtually identical specs which sounded quite different. I think the important word to note in the argument in favor of specs is *detailed* or *more detailed*. It's not that specs are inherently inadequate; it is just that specs as currently published do not appear to measure everything that affects the sound. I will stay on the 'spec' side of the argument and hope the specs become more detailed, accurate, and consistently applied.
ark (11/01/82)
So you want to pick equipment based on what sounds better? Well, be careful! For instance, it is farly well known that if you do an "A-B" comparison between two signals that are IDENTICAL, except that one is a tiny bit louder, almost everyone will say the louder one sounds better, withouth being aware that it is indeed louder.
death (11/05/82)
I definitely agree with Alain Rostain. Specs are fine, but it's the ear that really matters. The last time I bought a cartrige I got it through the mail (it was an Audio-Technica or something like that, and I was getting a group deal on it). I got the model I did because it had a better high-frequency response than the other available models. When I got it home, I found that it gave me a bit too much on the high end for the room I was in. It took me several minutes to puzzle out all these fancy dynamic range curves, frequency response, etc; but 30 seconds with my Sheffield Labs recording of Siegfried's Funeral Music told me everything I needed to know. ==dd