Absolutely Kevin.Quote:
Originally Posted by CageyH
Unfortunately some folk seem to be deaf to this idea.:) If it doesn't measure well it can't be good and if it has any distortion above 0.000000001 THD its not worth considering.:lol:
Printable View
Absolutely Kevin.Quote:
Originally Posted by CageyH
Unfortunately some folk seem to be deaf to this idea.:) If it doesn't measure well it can't be good and if it has any distortion above 0.000000001 THD its not worth considering.:lol:
My point was that just because some people prefer the skewed frequency response of a phono stage with inaccurate RIAA it doesn't follow that designing for good sound quality and designing for good measurements are mutually exclusive. It wouldn't be hard to find a lot of people who prefer the sound of the accurate one, and then where are we?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
(I'm not 100% sure that was what you were saying but that was the gist I got).
I agree you should try for both but designing for good SQ should be the first consideration and not so it just ticks the measurement boxes. I should say RIAA implementation should be as accurate as possible but I don't think my phono stage is and it sounds great.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Macca
Regarding RIAA curve, I wonder how many phono stages out there either have deviated from correct RIAA or have wandered out of spec due to ageing components?
You quoted the measured performance of the phono in your post about it. And now you get upset when people talk of measurements? Who is saying things are not worth considering? I am not. The iFi is a phono preamp with measured performance in level to it's price. Why do you get upset and rude? It is you that is deaf to the scientific evidence between performance and measurements. Putting smiley faces on posts is not disguising your intent to be rude.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
I am not upset at all. You are reading far too much into these posts especially ones that are not directed at you. I think some of your accusations regarding me being deaf to scientific evidence are very rude and miss the point. Technical performance and measurements are one thing, whether something sounds good because it measures well is another.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubi
zander, he was not being rude; you are! now get back to polite discussion please...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ubi
If i have the wrong context, i accept it. Speaking and reading English is not my first language, so i accept it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
I look at Croft measurements and they do not look good. https://www.stereophile.com/content/...r-measurements
The iFi is better in the tests so i am interested in what you think of it. Khz extend on iFi and may be too much after listening to Croft for a long time.
I don't think anyone with any understanding thinks that. There's a threshold to the point where measurements matter. If someone has 'good measurements' as one of their buying criteria then they might well buy the device with the best measurements (assuming all else is equal, like price) instead of the poorer measuring one even though they know it won't matter in real terms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo
They do tend to totally avoid equipment with measured performance so poor it is audible or potentially audible. Ironically that tends to be some of the really expensive stuff as well as lots of the really cheap stuff.
Synergy is your friend. Measurements are bollocks. It's what you hear and how it make you feel that really counts.