Naim Listing One CD Player - Sign Of The Times ?

[Marco]

And the moral of that story is?

Marco.

[Macca]

I
Well, as I've already said, it's simply about throwing ideas out into the open for others to discuss, and that approach will always be promoted here, over subjectivists being expected to shut up, simply because a hypothesis they've put forward to explain something they've heard may not be technically provable.

That, muchacho, is the way AoS is, and always will be!!

.

As I said previously it was not you who made the statement so I don't know why you are making it all about you (or me for that matter). I'm all for people speculating about the reasons for what they hear or think they hear. It's when they make a statement of fact with no foundation that I object.


And nowhere in my post does it mention blind testing. But in answer to your question do you see me making any statements of fact about the system I preferred at Cranage? No. I just said I preferred it. If I said that the reason it sounded so good was because it used expensive cable lifters I'd expect to be taken to task. And rightly so.

[Marco]

As I said previously it was not you who made the statement so I don't know why you are making it all about you (or me for that matter). I'm all for people speculating about the reasons for what they hear or think they hear. It's when they make a statement of fact with no foundation that I object.

Fair enough, but I was simply challenging some of the points you made, which don't reflect my personal experience. And as far as I can see, no-one has stated any facts here, including Russell, simply expressed their opinion and what they believe to be true.

You, as well as anyone here, should know that anything written on a forum should always be read as 'in the humble opinion' of the author, unless explicitly stated otherwise.

And nowhere in my post does it mention blind testing.

So what were you implying here then:

There is a big problem with drawing technical conclusions based purely on sighted listening tests. Sighted tests are useful only for determining what you personally prefer.

To me, that reads as: 'You can only propose a technical explanation for what you've heard, if what you've heard has been proven by blind testing'. If not, what did you mean instead, and what purpose was served by bringing "sighted" into the equation?

If you'd simply wrote: 'There is a big problem with drawing technical conclusions based purely on listening tests. Listening tests are useful only for determining what you personally prefer', it would've been different, and I'd have said nothing. The addition of "sighted" completely changes the context, which is why I responded as I did

But in answer to your question do you see me making any statements of fact about the system I preferred at Cranage? No. I just said I preferred it.

Again fair enough, but neither were Russell or I making any statements of fact about steamed files vs. CD playback. As I've said already, we were simply expressing an opinion.

In future, try superimposing 'IMHO' onto everyone's posts, unless they actually make a statement of fact, by stating: 'It is a fact that, blah, blah...."

Marco.

[Macca]

Again fair enough, but neither were Russell or I making any statements of fact about steamed files vs. CD playback. As I've said already, we were simply expressing an opinion.

In future, try superimposing 'IMHO' onto everyone's posts, unless they actually make a statement of fact, by saying 'It is a fact that, blah, blah...."

Marco.

Not meaning to have a go at you Russell or anything btw. I just don't like unsupported speculations and assumptions about what are to most of us are obscure and highly technical matters, it doesn't get us any further forward. If we are going to talk about what is technically better then lets have some links to facts and figures to back it up. The two are inseparable. A subjectivist forum should be principally about our subjective impressions, I think. No need for IMHO then.

[Marco]

Not meaning to have a go at you Russell or anything btw. I just don't like unsupported speculations and assumptions about what are to most of us are obscure and highly technical matters, it doesn't get us any further forward. If we are going to talk about what is technically better then lets have some links to facts and figures to back it up. The two are inseparable. A subjectivist forum should be principally about our subjective impressions, I think. No need for IMHO then.

No worries, I wasn't taking it as you having a go, and I'm sure Russell wasn't either. Just our usual robust style of debating, whenever you and I discuss subjects we're passionate about.

We'll have to agree to disagree on "unsupported speculations", as if I want to, I'll always put forward, technically or otherwise, what I think *might* explain what I'm hearing, and I have no problem with anyone else doing the same, or indeed being told I'm wrong (if that's the case) by someone qualified to do so.

For me, as long as the word 'fact' isn't used, when expressing what is purely a subjective opinion, then folks can write what they like, and others can (politely) challenge it!

Marco.

[DSJR]

I remember being told that one reason why a computer based audio file *might* be better is the error checking both in creating said file in the first place and also in the playing back of this file. I've also been told that fixing one 'issue' shows up others, but over the years I think most of not all have been dealt with now and even an iPhone makes a superb source (I think worelessly if streaming although I've never done this personally).

CD replay typically is on the fly and just maybe, reading of errors, insignificant or not, may just have an effect, I don't know. I now play music whatever the source and only worry if it's vinyl to be honest. If we move, a lot of the surplus gear will have to go, but my CD's, LP's and 12" singles are coming with me! Hard drive or cloud storage is so impersonal and playing records is something I remember fondly from toddlerhood, so I can't change sixty plus years of conditioning now..

[Macca]

Okay enough now. The simple problem is this: Technically better does not necessarily means sounds better. 'Sounds better' is an individual impression and we all know that our individual impressions can differ with regard to this, at least occasionally. And when you take psycho-acoustics into account, technically worse can be the reason it 'sounds better'.

The problem arises when we equate 'sounds better' with 'technically better'. If you prefer the sound from your streamer-DAC to that from your cd player it does not automatically mean it is technically better! It may be but the two things are completely unconnected.

What is happening here is that we are saying 'well my streaming system sounds better than my cd player so it must be technically better.' Then speculating on technical reasons why that might be (it's the read system, the storage medium, the error correction) without any technical basis or support whatsoever. I can't be the only one who finds that ridiculous?
,

[Marco]

Okay enough now.

Lol - who promoted you to having the last word? This debate is becoming pointlessly circular, Martin, but if you insist....

The simple problem is this: Technically better does not necessarily means sounds better. 'Sounds better' is an individual impression and we all know that our individual impressions can differ with regard to this, at least occasionally. And when you take psycho-acoustics into account, technically worse can be the reason it 'sounds better'.

I have no problem whatsoever with that statement. However, you're turning this into a technical argument, not me, and putting words into my mouth that I haven't used.

The problem arises when we equate 'sounds better' with 'technically better'. If you prefer the sound from your streamer-DAC to that from your cd player it does not automatically mean it is technically better! It may be but the two things are completely unconnected.

Case in point. I never said it was "automatically technically better". Those are YOUR words, not mine!

I simply proffered a possible explanation as to why I've found that, all else being equal, a streamed piece of music, TO ME, not a fact, but based on the comparisons I've conducted to date, sounds better than the same piece of music played on a CD player, both using the same DAC. And I'm sorry mate, but no matter how much it irks you, I'm entitled to that opinion.

What is happening here is that we are saying 'well my streaming system sounds better than my cd player so it must be technically better.'

No, that's not what WE are saying at all; that's what YOU are saying!

What you also seem to be saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, is if you're not technically informed on a specific matter, then don't attempt to discuss it, or don't attempt to assign a technical reason to anything you've subjectively heard, unless you know what you're talking about...

Well no, I won't do that, simply because one of the ways we learn (especially folk like me, who dislike learning from books, and prefer doing so from practical experience) is to say what we think might be happening, put it out there for consideration, as it were, and stand to be corrected, or otherwise, by someone who knows.

*THAT* is how I learn, and have always learned about almost anything.

Therefore, in that respect, if someone suitably informed comes here and tells me that any differences I've heard, with respect to the issue we're discussing, is not down to the effects of a transport mechanism, and can show me evidence which proves it, then I'll happily accept I'm wrong, and that something else instead is responsible for creating the very REAL differences I've heard in that area.

But I will not have the discussion shut down simply because you think there should be the presence of some form of technical proof to support my argument.

You either accept it or you don't, which is fine by me, but you won't stop me from expressing my legitimate non-technical opinion, or anyone else from doing the same, on ANY matter relating to audio, as it goes fundamentally against the staunchly subjectivist nature of AoS.

To be quite honest, I'm surprised you've reacted this way and have such a bee in your bonnet about this. However, I really think we should leave it there now, as we're never going to agree

Marco.

[Macca]

We'll have to remember to discuss this further next time we meet up. Sorry for de-railing the thread everyone.

[Joe]

What is happening here is that we are saying 'well my streaming system sounds better than my cd player so it must be technically better.' Then speculating on technical reasons why that might be (it's the read system, the storage medium, the error correction) without any technical basis or support whatsoever. I can't be the only one who finds that ridiculous?

No. An analogy might be someone with no technical knowledge of cars test-driving two different models, and much preferring one over the other, then theorising as to the technical reasons for their preference, which might be completely wrong. Personal preferences don't need justification, still less any technical explanations.