ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
Jeff:Solipsism generally is incompatible with logic and rationality it seems.
But your arguments generally use those traits that you find wrong in others. It's hard to take it seriously. You come off as it is the most important mission in life to prove others wrong, and your opinions are the absolute facts that all must adhere to. At least that is how it comes off to some of us. The above quote just seems to enforce this.
Well, give me a break, it's hard to be humble when you're as awesome as I am!
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.
Jeff: Well, give me a break, it's hard to be humble when you're as awesome as I am!
Well I wish I was you, but since I can't I will just have to enjoy higher resolution music. It will be tough!
Mark-N: Jeff: Well, give me a break, it's hard to be humble when you're as awesome as I am! Well I wish I was you, but since I can't I will just have to enjoy higher resolution music. It will be tough!
Well, I'm sure you'll manage, I have confidence in you! And I hope you (and razlaw for that matter) enjoy whatever you want to listen to, that's the point, as I always said.
Robert Heinlein's character Lazarus Long once said "Delusions aren't necessarily a bad thing...a mother's delusions about her child's wit, grace intelligence, etc. probably keeps her from drowning it at birth."
Jeff:Robert Heinlein's character Lazarus Long once said "Delusions aren't necessarily a bad thing...a mother's delusions about her child's wit, grace intelligence, etc. probably keeps her from drowning it at birth."
Which is one of my points. This delusion can be easily apply to your position! My "delusion" is removing 80-90% of the music will have an audible effect. Your "delusion" is removing 80-90% of the music has no audible effect.
Jeff: Mark-N: Jeff: Well, give me a break, it's hard to be humble when you're as awesome as I am! Well I wish I was you, but since I can't I will just have to enjoy higher resolution music. It will be tough! Well, I'm sure you'll manage, I have confidence in you! And I hope you (and razlaw for that matter) enjoy whatever you want to listen to, that's the point, as I always said. Robert Heinlein's character Lazarus Long once said "Delusions aren't necessarily a bad thing...a mother's delusions about her child's wit, grace intelligence, etc. probably keeps her from drowning it at birth."
Even after all that has been said here, you resort to insults by suggesting those who disagree with you are delusional. A few posts ago you said you were going to bow out of this conversation. And yet here you are still being insulting. Yet still no study has been produced by you. I am guessing that is because the same lack of veracity in your statement about bowing out, is present in your claims of studies.
Beolab 28s Beolab 9s Beolab 12-3s Beolab 1s Beolab 6000s 2 pairs Beolab 4000s Beovision 7-55 Beovision 10-40 Beoplay V1 32 inch Beovision Avant 32 inch Beosound 1 (CD player) Beosound 3000 Beosound 5 Core Essence MKII Beoplay M5
Equating your belief that it matters with the tests I've personally observed is an example of the solipsism I spoke of. If only one of the golden ears had been able to demonstrate the ability to hear a difference, I'd say my belief was just that, a belief not a fact. You apparently are either lacking in the level of curiosity to test this, or don't have the ability to do so, as in don't have the s/w or such to assemble such a test. That's fine, but it does not make the two sides of our discussion equal.
Have you ever read up on psychoacoustic masking? It's a fascinating field, and in the tests I did I was able to pick musical selections that were much more sensitive to showing the differences where they existed, although it was at pretty low bit rates compared with the standard these days of 256kbs VBR AAC, because knowing what I do about masking I know what's most likely to trip up the encoder. It is just about never what most people think it is. Most people will automatically choose completely the opposite kind of music than what will trip up the encoders.
But, whatever you want to believe, on whatever subject, have a it. This is somewhat like trying to teach calculus to a cat, it wastes your time and makes the cat irritable.
Even if a said study was referred to, it doesn't mean there is any credibility exists that it should be universally accepted. This is the internet... there is a study that can prove any side of any topic!
Jeff:Equating your belief that it matters with the tests I've personally observed is an example of the solipsism I spoke of. If only one of the golden ears had been able to demonstrate the ability to hear a difference, I'd say my belief was just that, a belief not a fact. You apparently are either lacking in the level of curiosity to test this, or don't have the ability to do so, as in don't have the s/w or such to assemble such a test. That's fine, but it does not make the two sides of our discussion equal. Have you ever read up on psychoacoustic masking? It's a fascinating field, and in the tests I did I was able to pick musical selections that were much more sensitive to showing the differences where they existed, although it was at pretty low bit rates compared with the standard these days of 256kbs VBR AAC, because knowing what I do about masking I know what's most likely to trip up the encoder. It is just about never what most people think it is. Most people will automatically choose completely the opposite kind of music than what will trip up the encoders. But, whatever you want to believe, on whatever subject, have a it. This is somewhat like trying to teach calculus to a cat, it wastes your time and makes the cat irritable. Jeff Beovirus victim, it's gotten to be too much to list!
Jeff:But, whatever you want to believe, on whatever subject, have a it. This is somewhat like trying to teach calculus to a cat, it wastes your time and makes the cat irritable.
But this evidently bothers you alot that you can't convince people to see it the way you see it! You say you can believe what you want to believe but it ends with an insult! It's a shame that a high-end audio site can't be more respectful to all the members, no matter what they listen to.
At the risk of getting my eyes poked out by sticking my nose in here... I'm going to share a story...
A few year ago there was a similar argument about HiDef vs. standard CD vs lossy compression on this forum. I was on the fence (initial logic said "more bits = better", but I also read some of the scientific literature which made me doubt this initial assumption). Puncher offered to down-sample a HiDef recording of a particular classical music track that I gave him. Similar to Jeff's test, I mixed the files up in a BS5 folder and tried to guess which was which. I was not successful. This convinced me that bit-rate is way overrated. If anyone wants these files, I would be happy to share them.
Having said this, I can also sometimes pick out Spotify vs a lossless rip of a CD on the same BS5 + BL1 (certain songs, I wouldn't say I can do this consistently across all music). I haven't done any level setting or more sophisticated testing because I really don't care. When I'm really listening (vs background), I'll usually play the CD or lossless copy vs. Spotify and this works for me - why dig deeper? As an aside, I'm disappointed in the sound quality of satellite radio (Sirius/XM), and I'm guessing this has everything to do with the bit-rates used.
How can this be? I don't buy into the bit-rate hype, but I still think there can be audible differences? I'll reiterate the comment about there being other things that contribute (new mastering, equalization, etc.) that have nothing to do with bit-rate. To me, some songs sound less dynamic, but I'm convinced it's not the bit-rate causing this because of the above test. Look at the well done (e.g. the Beatles) vs poorly done (e.g. many Rush albums) CD remasters (and people even argue about these). It's the same bit-rate, but some sound better than the original, some sound worse. Both sides of this argument can be right if you're willing to look beyond bit-rate. I don't doubt that some Deezer+ tracks sound better than Spotify (but it's not because of bit-rate).
While there are a lot of shady practices that have been documented in the world of HiDef downloads (mostly upsampling CDs and and charging a premium because they're "HiDef"), I'm sure some producers are not completely sleazy and actually have put a some effort into making their HiDef masters sound better (perhaps master toward being played on higher end equipment vs. a cheap car radio), and this is (hopefully) what Deezer+ is delivering.
Stan
Here is a comparison test I found online for anyone who wants to try it.
http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality
Razlaw: Here is a comparison test I found online for anyone who wants to try it. http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality
Ban boring signatures!
Well, this is a problem for everyone.
I have to use Deezer having Essence in all link rooms and on the Moment. Then I have Multi-room music.
I Deezer could open up for Elite to B&O everything would be fine - and I don't know why - I can not get an answer directly from B&O - does anyone know for sure why (not speculations...)
Then I have a HIFI subscription at Tidal, as they can support flac streaming. This is for my music listning using my Beolab 5 and in my car (having B&O installed).
Well, one issue is the money per month, but more to sync the playlists and keep this update....
So, B&O ...read this and fine a solution with Deezer having Elite support....Send Henrik Clausen (the new CEO).. he is a tuff negotiator - I sold network to him when he was in Cybercity in Denmark ;-)
We need this !
BR Rudi