killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Field Marshall
Thank you for this link, this is a great lecture. I enjoyed it and watched it back and forth for a couple of times.

I don't find anything I contest in this video clip. It is about what gets certified as high resolution audio in today's market, but I don't hear him say all hi-res is snake oil. Even he thinks there IS such a thing as hi-res, but there's less of it than one might hope and, as he says, "true to the source" is not hi-res, it is just true no matter how good or bad the source might have been. Also, the benefits are minute, but they are not nonexistent.

Furthermore, I never thought I was listening hi-res, I don't even know how good I can hear. Maybe I'm below average?

I see hi-res as a safety format. I don't want anything to get lost even if it can't be reproduced with today's technology. If we have the technology, let's do it the way he says; if it came out of an instrument it should be found in the recording. I'm fine with that. I'm completely fine with the fact that LP's are not hi-res, it just doesn't bother me.

I'm not for surround music, though. That's simply virtual reality in my book (I stress "my book"), so I don't care if it's better, I don't want to be in the middle of a band or "standing" where the conductor is.

Perhaps this deserves a topic of its own and I'll be happy to join in if you start it.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
...

I see hi-res as a safety format. I don't want anything to get lost even if it can't be reproduced with today's technology. If we have the technology, let's do it the way he says; if it came out of an instrument it should be found in the recording. I'm fine with that. I'm completely fine with the fact that LP's are not hi-res, it just doesn't bother me.

....
One must remember psychoacoustics of human hearing capability and limits.
Masking is one part that brought about the the perceptual codings: DD, DTS.
A good bit of the audio information from experiments showed that is masked and not audible. Perceptual coding eliminated those.
One cannot hear a loud and soft signal at the same time withing certain frequency spacings so the soft tones were discarded as well.

While it may be worthwhile to record everything at a performance, it is like paying for something one will never hear. But, it is a fix for an itch. ;) :)
 
killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Field Marshall
One cannot hear a loud and soft signal at the same time withing certain frequency spacings so the soft tones were discarded as well.
But now with ambiophonics... He, who knows?! (don't answer to this :D)

As I said, I don't even think my ears need hi-res. I'm not so enthralled with myself and my supposed "absolute", "special", "pure", "analytical" "above average" etc hearing. Hell, I'm not <eargiant. I come from another place. It's still mainly about content for me. The way subject matter from music relates to all aspects of life. One might draw me into buying expensive equipment if one could demonstrate that his deeper and broader understanding of the motifs the artist sings about come from that one nuance of difference in sound that can only be achieved with at least 8k amp (or Cd or whatever).

For me, there is something perverse in listening to Tracy Chapman via a cable which coasts more than what she owed before becoming famous.

And there is absolutely something perverse in a notion that there's something I'm not getting because I have a 2.0 stereo with relatively neutral speakers.

In the end, to try and stop this thread from sidetracking, no, an alarm clock wouldn't suffice then. Communication through music gets encoded in several ways (using the word "encoded" here as one might in linguistics like i.e. McLuhan). You have lyrics with semantics, rhythm, rhyme, phonetic properties and so on and you have music which also bears an emotional property and one should understand that reducing some or many of those frequencies is like cutting out few lyrics. A piece of message gets lost because a piece of emotional charge gets lost.

This is why I'm about flat response, no sound signatures or as few as possible, no coloring... I want to hear something as close as what the artist agreed upon when he heard the master. Mark Walter actually describes me when he says "sonic documentaries", although he says he is not about that. I might say I am. That's why he doesn't mind surround and I do.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
Okay, I'm heading off now to levitate my speaker cables into the air using superconducting mag-lev cable supports, after which I need to set up the the de-gaussing system needed to negate the em effects of the mag-lev supports. You won't believe how levitating speaker wires off the ground imparts a tonal smoothing yet more precise imaging. Its like a veil has been lifted. night and day!

Of course ALL these supports need to be supported themselves by semi-fossilized teak wood from an endangered Peruvian rain forest, harvested by virgin Yamamamo tribe people -- because everyone knows that the Yamamamo harvesting technique imparts special properties into the wood grain which really helps open up the sound. Virgins help impart a tonal purity to the second order harmonics. No cheap Chinese supports for me!

Though I do find Chinese Virgins make the best green pigment for my bespoke CD edge painting instrument -- I heard about the amazing differences in sound produced by coloring the edge of CDs with a sharpie. I could not believe a cheap marker would perform as well as a custom made pigment applied with a the feather from the extinct Dodo bird. Boy was I right. The $15,000 I spent on milling the machine out of solid basalt, taxidermied Dodo specimen and Chinese virgin pigment was immediately worth it. Those poorly mastered CDs from the mid-1990s suddenly sounded amazing!

then I will be evacuating the room of "air" so that the sound can be transmitted with the utmost purity and zero interaction....

oh...wait....
Uh, mag-lev speaker cable supports? The supports will cause all kinds of problems with the signal since the field caused by the signal isn't isolated from the field from the levitation system. Geez!

The green magical marker thing was from the late-'80s- by the mid-'90s, DDD was a common SPARS code.

Teak? Any died in the wool audiophile knows petrified wood is the only worthwhile material for this.
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Warlord
Seriously, do these folks sit around talking about:
"What can we try to sell next?"
"Dude, rocks. I'll bet we can convince at least some folks that rocks work. Cant just call 'em rocks tho'"
"How about pebbles?"
"That's Brilliant!"

Brilliant Pebbles
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
...

As I said, I don't even think my ears need hi-res. ....
I totally understand your position. Just a few points I posted that many may don't even know about.
When Floyd signs onto 96k sampling and passing it to consumers I will accept it. ;) :D
 
killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Field Marshall
:D:D:D HA HA HA HA... I can't believe this; Jitter Spray??!?
upload_2017-9-7_8-59-46.jpeg


And the founder's last name appears to be Sprey.
 
killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Field Marshall
And money back?! What, how? How do you make claim against jitter spray?
 
slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Spartan
Machina Dynamica has that covered too. You don't get much more 2st century than Dark Matter!
Wow, pseudo-science scattered with enough real science terms to confuse the uneducated! A real scientist deals with these concepts routinely with analytical instrumentation.

1) How much of the laser source actually gets scatttered? (small %)
2) Guess what, once the light is scattered, those photons can't directly hit the detector--by definition, the light was "scattered off of the original path"! If you want to use light scattering in a useful way (i.e. for analytical chemistry lab techniques), then you must use what is called a photo-diode-array detector! Basically it is an array of detectors to see how far the light is scattered and what the intensity is at each geographic location--then that information can provide insight to particle size, location, etc.
3) So, in order for scattered light to hit the detector for a CD player, it will have to be reflected back off of some surface. Scattered/reflected/hit the detector! We are talking about the possibility for noise that is several orders of magnitude below the signal (i.e. this will have negligible affect on the S/N).
4) CDs store data in the digital domain. Digi domain is extremely effective at eliminating the problems associated with noise--that is one of the main huge advantages of working in the digi domain.
5) It's not like light "gets scattered randomly". It's all very well predictable.
 
Last edited:
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Warlord
How about 20k for 1m? :eek: And at $720 for each additional .5m we're getting into luxury car money! Those are new to me. I stumbled across a different set, same company, for sale at Audiogon (how I found them to begin with). Dude's (or dudette's) asking almost 7k for a used set.

Wouldn't that be the way to go though? Somebody else has already burned them in for you. That will mellow the sound by taking the sharp edginess off. They just need a little time to adapt to your amp's electromagnetic signature (to tighten phase and polarity) then you're on your way to audio bliss!

*Edit: I should have clicked on the "Pro Series". Those are for when any and all forms of common sense have evacuated your brain cave...
 
Last edited:
<eargiant

<eargiant

Senior Audioholic
But now with ambiophonics... He, who knows?! (don't answer to this :D)

As I said, I don't even think my ears need hi-res. I'm not so enthralled with myself and my supposed "absolute", "special", "pure", "analytical" "above average" etc hearing. Hell, I'm not <eargiant. I come from another place. It's still mainly about content for me. The way subject matter from music relates to all aspects of life. One might draw me into buying expensive equipment if one could demonstrate that his deeper and broader understanding of the motifs the artist sings about come from that one nuance of difference in sound that can only be achieved with at least 8k amp (or Cd or whatever).

For me, there is something perverse in listening to Tracy Chapman via a cable which coasts more than what she owed before becoming famous.

And there is absolutely something perverse in a notion that there's something I'm not getting because I have a 2.0 stereo with relatively neutral speakers.

In the end, to try and stop this thread from sidetracking, no, an alarm clock wouldn't suffice then. Communication through music gets encoded in several ways (using the word "encoded" here as one might in linguistics like i.e. McLuhan). You have lyrics with semantics, rhythm, rhyme, phonetic properties and so on and you have music which also bears an emotional property and one should understand that reducing some or many of those frequencies is like cutting out few lyrics. A piece of message gets lost because a piece of emotional charge gets lost.

This is why I'm about flat response, no sound signatures or as few as possible, no coloring... I want to hear something as close as what the artist agreed upon when he heard the master. Mark Walter actually describes me when he says "sonic documentaries", although he says he is not about that. I might say I am. That's why he doesn't mind surround and I do.
Thank you killdozzer, I’m flattered, really flattered (and I'm not being sarcastic) that I came to mind and you mentioned me after watching a presentation by Dr. Waldrep. He’s the real deal, a consummate experienced professional.

A while back, he went after Audioquest so aggressively for their cable shenanigans that he had to back off due to pressure.

You’d think a guy like that would fit right in here but unfortunately, I think if he ever anonymously came to Audioholics he’d be ridiculed and driven out of here by the pharmacists and butchers that are the real experts.

http://www.realhd-audio.com/
 
Last edited:
<eargiant

<eargiant

Senior Audioholic
@killdozzer, what part of the post did you disagree with?

A) He’s the real deal, a consummate experienced professional

or

B) You’d think a guy like that would fit right in here

or

C) Unfortunately, I think if he ever anonymously came to Audioholics he’d be ridiculed and driven out by the pharmacists and butchers that are the real experts.
 
Last edited:
Bucknekked

Bucknekked

Audioholic Field Marshall
@killdozzer, what part of the post did you disagree with?

A) He’s the real deal, a consummate experienced professional

or

B) You’d think a guy like that would fit right in here

or

C) Unfortunately, I think if he ever anonymously came to Audioholics he’d be ridiculed and driven out by the pharmacists and butchers that are the real experts.
I can't speak for @killdozzer , but I can speak for myself.
I would hope that if Dr Waldrep came here, anonymously or not, he would find a welcome bunch of enthusiasts that appreciate a knowledgeable opinion. Nobody will agree with him, or anybody else, 100% and some of those difference of opinion might be strong. That's no different than anyone else that wants to be an "expert opinion".

I looked at the website you included when you first mentioned his name. If you think he might get an unwelcome reception based on some of his items of interest, I am not so sure he would. Lots of people here on the AH share HD audio as an interest, multi channel immersive audio as an interest, and other areas on his pages.

I differ in what I listen to and how I choose to listen to it from many of his articles, but I find no fault or need to be critical. He likes different stuff than I do, but many of the AH folks I trade posts with every day also like their music or formats different from mine.

I would hope Dr Waldrep and anybody else that comes to the AH will have a great experience and exchange of ideas and interests. That can be challenging for some. Most people would find it worthwhile I hope.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
I have to wonder if anyone ever sits back and thinks "I really like the sound from my audio system".

Note that I didn't use 'sound of'.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top