Audiophilia and the Playstation 1

[Haoleb]

The information encoded on a CD is not intended to be "interpreted". It is a specific signal that can only be correctly decoded in one way. If two CDPs sound different (all else being the same, of course), then at least one of them is doing something wrong. Indeed, since it is only the expensive players that claim a "distinctive" sound, it is those that must be artificially coloring the signal.

Thats like saying that speakers are all doing something wrong because they all sound different. Granted, Most speakers do more things wrong than they do right its basically the same idea. What i noticed as being the main differences between my Rega cd player vs the other less espensive ones ive had in the past and my sacd player or dvd player is that its smoother and more natural sounding. Certain instruments such as symbols and piano notes, Along with vocals sound more realistic and less electronic. I have an entirely analog system so of course I am hearing the differences between the DAC circurits in the players, But thats what seperates a 1k player from a 100 or so player. If I was going to be hooking the cd player up to a reciever or seperate high end DAC i wouldnt have invested so much into the source.

Lets just get one thing straight, If your using a players digital output will you notice an audible difference between a $100 player and a $10,000 player? Im not sure how. Of course your getting a superior player for alot more money though so its not a complete waste.

If your using the players analog outputs then there is no way you can honestly say that a cheap player will sound exactly the same as a high end one. If thats the case why dont we all just start powering our systems with some JVC Kaboom box pile of crap.

And i'll go back to my statement about dvd players. Visual aspects of things are easier to notice for most people rather than something they hear. At least this is my impression. There are obvious differences between video playback quality on different players... How is video different than audio. I mean really?

 

[Sheep]

btw, all of your products color the sound. The speakers as well as your speaker wire ("bendable tone controls").

Please, DO go on. I'm really interested with your claims. I'm sure you have some scientific evidence to back them up (seeing as how you like to preach proper methods).

While AB testing is nice to have, any audidible difference picked up by the human ear will DEFINITELY be picked up by a microphone. Plus, the AB testing needs to be blind for you to really know if there is a difference.

SheepStar

 

[jostenmeat]

Please, DO go on. I'm really interested with your claims. I'm sure you have some scientific evidence to back them up (seeing as how you like to preach proper methods).

I have no "scientific evidence". That quote is actually a dig at expensive speaker wire, btw. Whether or not you might believe it, I do think that speaker wire changes the sound. But not necessarily for the better. I think its a waste of money, unless some serious auditioning entailed for some personal tastes. Mine is mostly Monoprice and Home Depot. I do have some greatly discounted Tara Labs wire for my mains that I got cheap since they were "defective" (markings are all backwards). Surely still a waste of money, oh well.

While AB testing is nice to have, any audidible difference picked up by the human ear will DEFINITELY be picked up by a microphone. Plus, the AB testing needs to be blind for you to really know if there is a difference.

SheepStar

Welp. I've done a lot of listening. Not speakers though. Just music. And a lot of it was comparative, but never double blind. Whether comparing instruments or recordings. Shoot even changing strings on an instrument, or mixing strings, or changing the angle of dispersion of instrument, whatever. I guess old habits die hard, you will have to forgive me, as these habits might have been irreversibly solidified by three degrees in classical music performance between top flight US music school and Europe.

Anyways, any "data" needs to be interpreted. Is every 1080p signal better than every 720p signal? Is the comparative quality actually measured by devices, and not the eye? Curious, because I do not know. It seems that the eye is a pretty decent judge, no? Or would you prefer the measurements? I rather use my eyes, if only because its a hell of a lot easier.

You know, they took Heifetz's Guarnerius del Gesu, re-created it to a thousandth of an inch, chemically analyzed its varnish, microphone tested its sound, etc, but it still didn't "sound" the same, or so they said. Stupid story, but I do think the whole "measurable" thing can be over-emphasized. However, I am all for science.

 

[jostenmeat]

You know, they took Heifetz's Guarnerius del Gesu, re-created it to a thousandth of an inch, chemically analyzed its varnish, microphone tested its sound, etc, but it still didn't "sound" the same, or so they said. Stupid story, but I do think the whole "measurable" thing can be over-emphasized. However, I am all for science.

Man, I haven't told that story in a LONG time. Hah. My good friend gave a concert on that very instrument in SF nine years ago. Lucky lady. At least I got to try out a Strad once in LA....

 

[Sheep]

I have no "scientific evidence". That quote is actually a dig at expensive speaker wire, btw. Whether or not you might believe it, I do think that speaker wire changes the sound. But not necessarily for the better. I think its a waste of money, unless some serious auditioning entailed for some personal tastes. Mine is mostly Monoprice and Home Depot. I do have some greatly discounted Tara Labs wire for my mains that I got cheap since they were "defective" (markings are all backwards). Surely still a waste of money, oh well.

Oh, I didn't catch the sarcasm in that sentence. I never was good at baseball.

Welp. I've done a lot of listening. Not speakers though. Just music. And a lot of it was comparative, but never double blind. Whether comparing instruments or recordings. Shoot even changing strings on an instrument, or mixing strings, or changing the angle of dispersion of instrument, whatever. I guess old habits die hard, you will have to forgive me, as these habits might have been irreversibly solidified by three degrees in classical music performance between top flight US music school and Europe.

Anyways, any "data" needs to be interpreted. Is every 1080p signal better than every 720p signal? Is the comparative quality actually measured by devices, and not the eye? Curious, because I do not know. It seems that the eye is a pretty decent judge, no? Or would you prefer the measurements? I rather use my eyes, if only because its a hell of a lot easier.

You know, they took Heifetz's Guarnerius del Gesu, re-created it to a thousandth of an inch, chemically analyzed its varnish, microphone tested its sound, etc, but it still didn't "sound" the same, or so they said. Stupid story, but I do think the whole "measurable" thing can be over-emphasized. However, I am all for science.

Your opinion can be skewed when you know what you're listening to. I'm not saying it's useless... but you should state it as not being concrete. Congratulations on your music degrees, they have absolutely no bearing on my opinion.

The eye can lie. Not EVERY person sees green as green. Like the eye, the ear can lie, too! But the ear is a bad apple that grew up on the other side of the tracks, so he lies a lot. Only when the ear is in the police station, facing a life sentence, does he start to really tell the truth. By the way, the police station is a blind test. Here is what measurements can do. They can capture the ACTUAL performance of something, and then by doing the same measurements in the save environment with the same equipment, you can compare the data of the 2 separate measurements, seeing how each performed! Isn't that cool?!

I mean, science made the stereo equipment we listen to, why would you use anything other medium to show it's performance?
Good talkin,

SheepStar

 

[Thaedium]

Just as an aside, since this thread has already been derailed, I noticed someone mention something regarding speaker cables...

Interesting thing. I bought a set of silver speaker wire 16g, regularly $600 I paid 200 for, hooked them up to my Paradigms... they sounded no different then a set of old 24g speaker wire I punked off of an ancient kenwood system I had lying around in my basement. other then the advantage of bananna plugs, the new and expensive wire really showed me how dumb the designer wire industry is. All future wire I buy will be cheap, inexpensive 12g wire from monoprice or bluejeans, heh.

 

[jostenmeat]

Oh, I didn't catch the sarcasm in that sentence. I never was good at baseball.

me neither. great sport though.

Your opinion can be skewed when you know what you're listening to. I'm not saying it's useless... but you should state it as not being concrete.

I don't feel that I should state it as un-concrete. Do you always state anything that might be non-concrete as such? These forums would be pretty friggin annoying if we all did all the time. Call me naive, call me primitive, but I find some statements about measurements to be "just as non-concrete". I mean, c'mon, even with a very serious audiophile who likes to paste and copy graphs often-times does not know how to interpret it, right? And that is assuming that the measurements are the end-all. i myself have little clue, depending on the graph, but having seen quite a bit of back-and-forth between graph-lovers... If you ever make a strong "subjective" statement, are you expecting an immediate dig from a fellow AH?

Congratulations on your music degrees, they have absolutely no bearing on my opinion.

Just like engineering degrees have absolutely no bearing on my opinion about the best compromise towards the reproduction of music. What, it produces this test tone better than another? Who exactly is judging which comprises are more forgivable for the reproduction of music anyways? Oh ya.... they are using their ears, aren't they?.......

The eye can lie. Not EVERY person sees green as green. Like the eye, the ear can lie, too!

If you find your graphs are better for your instance, so be it. My eyes are all I need to please. I could not, for my life, tell how good a green is from a graph. Or, not yet at least! (What do these graphs look like? What are the variables?) And for future reference, anything I say is not meant as an end-all. This deal about sources comes from an individually strong experience that arises only because "everybody else" does not happen to agree. I am here because it is fun, and I am here to help (believe it or not). In specific regards to this thread, I did and do believe I was helping. Because I am one voice of many here, and if I didn't share what I honestly believed, I wasn't being a good member... not that I always am trying, etc...

So anyone who chose a certain HDTV due to its "better visual performance" by using the eyes only should state to begin with: "What I am saying is not concrete at all, as I do not have the graphs to back them up." ?

But the ear is a bad apple that grew up on the other side of the tracks, so he lies a lot. Only when the ear is in the police station, facing a life sentence, does he start to really tell the truth. By the way, the police station is a blind test. Here is what measurements can do. They can capture the ACTUAL performance of something, and then by doing the same measurements in the save environment with the same equipment, you can compare the data of the 2 separate measurements, seeing how each performed! Isn't that cool?!

how the heck do you possibly interpret that? Honestly. Obviously, we are assuming perfection of our artificial devices, but seriously... I mean... chicken or egg; graph or sound- which comes first? I guess my greatest difficulty is determining which measurement is supposed to be better? We musicians have to "re-finger" all of our music between live performance and recording, for hopefully obvious reasons. A live performance recorded near-field is almost always horrible sounding.

I mean, science made the stereo equipment we listen to, why would you use anything other medium to show it's performance?
Good talkin,

SheepStar

Because I don't listen to test tones for fun. I listen to music. Therefore, I happen to judge it this way. I am sorry you have such a problem with me calling a speaker wire a bendable tone control, and that I do not happen to blind test in comparative listening. Like aforementioned, I never thought I needed it since I never have before, for better or worse.

You know, I feel like I have helped at least just a fair amount here. Its amazing how often I get called out at Audioholics. You guys are all receivers-best, speaker-wire-stupid, cdp-stupid, center-channel-must, over 1k speaker-stupid, golden-ear-haters, forgetting something, etc, but I get called out here more than anywhere!!!! From my very first day here!! Those posts were deleted by mods in fact. First time saying that; I am slowly breedin into an A-Hole! Did you ask Joe Schmoe for his graphs? Did you ask fmw for his graphs? Can I please have your scientific data? You will be assimilated! Whew, g'nite.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

OK, I'm learning here. I take it that a DAC converts the digitally read signal into an ANALOG source for redirection to the cdp. It seems that since this analog recreation of the signal is absolutely everthing to the sound quality, it makes sense that a player with inferior DACs would sound a lot worse than one with superior DACs....that is unless the converter is bypassed by passing the signal out over a digital connection for the pre/pro's processor to deal with.

If I understand this correctly, there would theoretically be a LOT of difference in a particular player's analog outputs compared with another....right? This does not take into account power sources and transformers.

While there are differences in the specific algorithms used to implement it, all DACs are based on the same underlying mathematics (the sampling theorem.) This theorem proves that the resulting analog output will be identical to the original analog input at all frequencies up to 1/2 the sampling frequency, providing that the encoding and decoding are done correctly (as they are on all of today's equipment.) There is, in other words, no such thing as a "superior" DAC.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Thats like saying that speakers are all doing something wrong because they all sound different.

No, it is nothing at all like saying that.
Speakers are analog devices interpreting analog signals, and therefore accomodate infinite shades of grey. DACs, in stark contrast, decode digital signals. This is an all or nothing process (the output is either correct or incorrect, and it is extremely obvious if it is incorrect.)

 

[fmw]

You know, I feel like I have helped at least just a fair amount here. Its amazing how often I get called out at Audioholics. You guys are all receivers-best, speaker-wire-stupid, cdp-stupid, center-channel-must, over 1k speaker-stupid, golden-ear-haters, forgetting something, etc, but I get called out here more than anywhere!!!! From my very first day here!! Those posts were deleted by mods in fact. First time saying that; I am slowly breedin into an A-Hole! Did you ask Joe Schmoe for his graphs? Did you ask fmw for his graphs? Can I please have your scientific data? You will be assimilated! Whew, g'nite.

Since I'm mentioned, I guess I'd better respond. Understand that the purpose of blind testing isn't to listen to music or enjoy audio. It is to compare things sonically. We do it because comparing them in a sighted test isn't reliable for reasons I won't repeat here. If two CD players sound the same to a group of people who don't know which one they hear when they hear it, then that is valuable information. It says the CD players sound the same. It doesn't say anything else. It doesn't comment about value or preference or price or anything else.

A saturn will drive down the highway at 60 mph just like a Ferrari will. They travel at 60mph the same and cover a given distance in the same amount of time. Even common sense tells you that without measuring it. But traveling at 60 mph in a Ferrari and Saturn aren't the same experience. Operating a $3500 CD player and a $250 CD player aren't the same experience either even though they might produce the same sound just like the two cars would produce the same travel time. There are lots of priorities in audio besides the sound the equipment produces. I have very different priorities than I had 10 years ago. There shouldn't be anything wrong with that.

There are no graphs in blind testing. Just scores. We ask people to identify which product (A or B) they are hearing from hearing alone. We just total up the right and wrong responses. The correct scores can be anything from 50/50 random (the two things sound the same) to 100% (the two things don't sound the same) and anywhere inbetween.

Personally, I have no problem with the golden eared crowd (I was one of them once) until they make a claim about audibility that flies in the face of reason and is unsupported with any kind of objective testing. In other words when you rave about the "sound" of a digital cable or a power cord, I will tune out unless you can support it with a properly administered objective test. I assume the person needs to get a grip on placebo effect because my objective tests have never uncovered "sound" in either a digital cable or a power cord. I'm still waiting (17 years now) for someone to find it in some non-subjective way. Since common sense tells me they won't produce a sound, I think I'll be waiting for the duration.

By the way, my speakers cost over $1000 so I'm just as stupid as some others.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

But traveling at 60 mph in a Ferrari and Saturn aren't the same experience. Operating a $3500 CD player and a $250 CD player aren't the same experience either even though they might produce the same sound just like the two cars would produce the same travel time. There are lots of priorities in audio besides the sound the equipment produces. I have very different priorities than I had 10 years ago. There shouldn't be anything wrong with that.

Exactly, well put. There are lots of valid reasons for wanting an expensive CDP, "better" sound quality just doesn't happen to be one of them.

 

[Sheep]

I don't feel that I should state it as un-concrete. Do you always state anything that might be non-concrete as such? These forums would be pretty friggin annoying if we all did all the time. Call me naive, call me primitive, but I find some statements about measurements to be "just as non-concrete". I mean, c'mon, even with a very serious audiophile who likes to paste and copy graphs often-times does not know how to interpret it, right? And that is assuming that the measurements are the end-all. i myself have little clue, depending on the graph, but having seen quite a bit of back-and-forth between graph-lovers... If you ever make a strong "subjective" statement, are you expecting an immediate dig from a fellow AH?

The best way to state your opinion is to follow it with how your formed it. Or for characters sake, just say it's your subjective opinion. I only saying this because you seemed to adamant about using proper listening methods, yet you didn't even use the most proper method. That's kinda like getting driven to the super market only to shoot your knee's out before you get in the door. Graphs can pick up data the human ear cannot. If you want the be all END all performance of a product, you measure it. I'm not saying ALL opinions require a graph, but those who are firm in their belief should provide some sort of concrete data.

Just like engineering degrees have absolutely no bearing on my opinion about the best compromise towards the reproduction of music. What, it produces this test tone better than another? Who exactly is judging which comprises are more forgivable for the reproduction of music anyways? Oh ya.... they are using their ears, aren't they?.......

Well, you like music, which is many tones put together. Technically, you should care if it produces the best "tone".

If you find your graphs are better for your instance, so be it. My eyes are all I need to please. I could not, for my life, tell how good a green is from a graph. Or, not yet at least! (What do these graphs look like? What are the variables?) And for future reference, anything I say is not meant as an end-all. This deal about sources comes from an individually strong experience that arises only because "everybody else" does not happen to agree. I am here because it is fun, and I am here to help (believe it or not). In specific regards to this thread, I did and do believe I was helping. Because I am one voice of many here, and if I didn't share what I honestly believed, I wasn't being a good member... not that I always am trying, etc...

Whatever floats your dingy, just make sure it's heard as such. You way but satisfied with your subjective opinion, but if someone were to read that as objective review, they might just go purchase said product. If you don't state how you gathered your opinion, you could be wasting someone else's money (thought they should audition every product before buying). Besides, there's nothing better then a little review for a product that includes the system and room that went with it .

So anyone who chose a certain HDTV due to its "better visual performance" by using the eyes only should state to begin with: "What I am saying is not concrete at all, as I do not have the graphs to back them up." ?

Yep. Although it is a lot easier to AB a TV then speakers, as a TV's performance isn't affect by it's environment as much.

how the heck do you possibly interpret that? Honestly. Obviously, we are assuming perfection of our artificial devices, but seriously... I mean... chicken or egg; graph or sound- which comes first? I guess my greatest difficulty is determining which measurement is supposed to be better? We musicians have to "re-finger" all of our music between live performance and recording, for hopefully obvious reasons. A live performance recorded near-field is almost always horrible sounding.

Obviously sound... they didn't have graphs in the stone age. The measurement's quality will depend on how it was conducted. You could do a big blind test but if the person running it is a loser that skews the performance of one product, you have a flawed test. Any half decent measurer will tell how it was produced.

Because I don't listen to test tones for fun. I listen to music. Therefore, I happen to judge it this way. I am sorry you have such a problem with me calling a speaker wire a bendable tone control, and that I do not happen to blind test in comparative listening. Like aforementioned, I never thought I needed it since I never have before, for better or worse.

I think we covered this... music is tones. And if you own a subwoofer, you damn well have played some test tones through it. You know you did! I don't have a problem with that. If fact, I'm going to use that to make fun of people that think speaker wires affect sound in a good way.

You know, I feel like I have helped at least just a fair amount here. Its amazing how often I get called out at Audioholics. You guys are all receivers-best, speaker-wire-stupid, cdp-stupid, center-channel-must, over 1k speaker-stupid, golden-ear-haters, forgetting something, etc, but I get called out here more than anywhere!!!! From my very first day here!! Those posts were deleted by mods in fact. First time saying that; I am slowly breedin into an A-Hole! Did you ask Joe Schmoe for his graphs? Did you ask fmw for his graphs? Can I please have your scientific data? You will be assimilated! Whew, g'nite.

What do you want me to say? I'm not everything that AH is, but I do agree with some of their principles. The websites values are stated on the home page. Not everyone agrees with everyone, like you and me. The question is can you deal with it when others disagree? Or does it nag at your that someone out there doesn't share your opinion.

That is pretty much all I have to say, any more and we'd be repeating ourselves. If you want to continues this chat, I'd gladly go into PM war with you. We type a lot and take up real estate on the page.

SheepStar

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Serious long-winded alert! Both of you guys need to learn how to edit.

 

[jostenmeat]

The best way to state your opinion is to follow it with how your formed it. Or for characters sake, just say it's your subjective opinion. I only saying this because you seemed to adamant about using proper listening methods, yet you didn't even use the most proper method. That's kinda like getting driven to the super market only to shoot your knee's out before you get in the door. Graphs can pick up data the human ear cannot. If you want the be all END all performance of a product, you measure it. I'm not saying ALL opinions require a graph, but those who are firm in their belief should provide some sort of concrete data.

I seemed adamant since Joe was also as adamant in opining without mention of comparative listening. IIRC, I had to ask a couple of times, and as soon as he said yes, I said "Cool then, we just happened to have dissimialr experiences" or something like that. It just wasn't clear at first. I was never implying my methods were best, but if Joe had not swapped players... well, you could understand how that might be strange. Does that make sense?

Whatever floats your dingy, just make sure it's heard as such. You way but satisfied with your subjective opinion, but if someone were to read that as objective review, they might just go purchase said product. If you don't state how you gathered your opinion, you could be wasting someone else's money (thought they should audition every product before buying). Besides, there's nothing better then a little review for a product that includes the system and room that went with it .

Im not exactly sure what the paranthetical portion is implying, sorry. To be frank I have little idea what goes into a cdp. Slew rate, output stage, etc, whatever. I hear enormous differences with my two players. Thats it, and take it for what it is worth! As for the numerous opposite opinions, I could only guess, either the cdp's were truly all of the same quality in those tests, or perhaps the recordings were not extremely familiar with the testers; if one was to assume that any particular test did have different players whereas the results did not apply. Just a guess and not a flame war. Enough flame war all around me in SoCal as it is!

What do you want me to say? I'm not everything that AH is, but I do agree with some of their principles. The websites values are stated on the home page. Not everyone agrees with everyone, like you and me. The question is can you deal with it when others disagree? Or does it nag at your that someone out there doesn't share your opinion. That is pretty much all I have to say, any more and we'd be repeating ourselves. If you want to continues this chat, I'd gladly go into PM war with you. We type a lot and take up real estate on the page.

I don't care for PM wars. I deal with differing opinions all the time, especially here. You are not implying otherwise, or maybe you are. Have you noticed, that at least for almost entirely the most part, I do not take part in the call-out game? What do I want you to say? Nothing really, but perhaps have just a fleeting moment of empathy. I think I generally might deserve at least that; I am pretty polite here for the most part. Maybe you disagree. No sweat. Anyways, cheers, and "good talkin".

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Please refer to post #33!

 

[jostenmeat]

Since I'm mentioned, I guess I'd better respond. Understand that the purpose of blind testing isn't to listen to music or enjoy audio. It is to compare things sonically. We do it because comparing them in a sighted test isn't reliable for reasons I won't repeat here. If two CD players sound the same to a group of people who don't know which one they hear when they hear it, then that is valuable information. It says the CD players sound the same. It doesn't say anything else. It doesn't comment about value or preference or price or anything else.

A saturn will drive down the highway at 60 mph just like a Ferrari will. They travel at 60mph the same and cover a given distance in the same amount of time. Even common sense tells you that without measuring it. But traveling at 60 mph in a Ferrari and Saturn aren't the same experience. Operating a $3500 CD player and a $250 CD player aren't the same experience either even though they might produce the same sound just like the two cars would produce the same travel time. There are lots of priorities in audio besides the sound the equipment produces. I have very different priorities than I had 10 years ago. There shouldn't be anything wrong with that.

There are no graphs in blind testing. Just scores. We ask people to identify which product (A or B) they are hearing from hearing alone. We just total up the right and wrong responses. The correct scores can be anything from 50/50 random (the two things sound the same) to 100% (the two things don't sound the same) and anywhere inbetween.

Personally, I have no problem with the golden eared crowd (I was one of them once) until they make a claim about audibility that flies in the face of reason and is unsupported with any kind of objective testing. In other words when you rave about the "sound" of a digital cable or a power cord, I will tune out unless you can support it with a properly administered objective test. I assume the person needs to get a grip on placebo effect because my objective tests have never uncovered "sound" in either a digital cable or a power cord. I'm still waiting (17 years now) for someone to find it in some non-subjective way. Since common sense tells me they won't produce a sound, I think I'll be waiting for the duration.

By the way, my speakers cost over $1000 so I'm just as stupid as some others.

Man, Im glad my last post registered. Soon as I hit submit, electricity went out (again). Makes work (and pleasure) a real pain! Winds/fires have knocked some stuff out.

That's a good post fmw. The 1st paragraph, not to disagree necessarily, but that should depend on the testers themselves as well as the recordings they know, right? Well, I would think so. A lot of my recordings take multiple listenings just to know what the heck is going on only one disc. I myself was slightly tempted to also make a car analogy, but I resist! However, we do just disagree here. That's fine with me. The only real thing I was trying impart to the boards was not to believe anyone one really. Just to take the time yourself! Maybe you believe, maybe not, but it is true. Because, as aforemetioned, this opinion is very popular (and you would say for good reason). Does that (my purpose) sound plausible to people here? Just as a couple of you felt inclined to chime in, I did as well since Joe was pretty adamant about what happens to be your collective opinion. And hence the posts and threads grow...

I agree about digital cables and power cords. That is really just over the top.

I guess you guys must assume that I am very susceptible to the placebo effect!! lol. One day, one of you AH'ers will come over to my place and I will ruefully have you suffer the same!! hahaha

 

[jostenmeat]

Serious long-winded alert! Both of you guys need to learn how to edit.

Sorry. Sometimes it takes a lot of words to express what I want to convey. Call me verbose!

 

[Sheep]

Serious long-winded alert! Both of you guys need to learn how to edit.

Sure, as soon as you show me how to hack this website so I can get the edit feature back on my older posts, I'd gladly fix my typos. BTW, at the end of my last post I suggested it goes to PM.

SheepStar

 

[Sheep]

Last one, I promise.

Im not exactly sure what the paranthetical portion is implying, sorry. To be frank I have little idea what goes into a cdp. Slew rate, output stage, etc, whatever. I hear enormous differences with my two players. Thats it, and take it for what it is worth! As for the numerous opposite opinions, I could only guess, either the cdp's were truly all of the same quality in those tests, or perhaps the recordings were not extremely familiar with the testers; if one was to assume that any particular test did have different players whereas the results did not apply. Just a guess and not a flame war. Enough flame war all around me in SoCal as it is!

I think what Joe is saying is this; It doesn't take 1000 dollars to build a FLAT, true to the original CD, CD player. For the most part, I believe him. If you're hearing a change, and the 2 players have both measured true, it must be coming from something else, and if the room and other equipment hasn't changed... it's all in your head. For the record, I would probably hear a difference, because I would have to be CRAZY to spend $1000 CD player .

SheepStar

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Sure, as soon as you show me how to hack this website so I can get the edit feature back on my older posts, I'd gladly fix my typos.

I was referring to editing for length, not typos.