Cassette's Not Dead, Apparently!

[Marco]

In short, Timmy boy!

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Anthony,

reading through this thread and seeing where it has ended up yet again, i am at a loss,,, i have spent most of my life surounded by music, and electronics, but i have never, ever come close to thinking that i know everything there is to know about either,and even though i have my own views as to what makes a good system i hope i have been and always will be open minded enough to listen and learn by others experiences no matter what my initial thoughts are on the matter before hand...

This is testament to your qualities as a person and a professional in your field of expertise

Speaking from experience regarding what you've written, one thing I've noticed with older guys (Tim Farney here in his 60s, Ashley James of AVI in his late 60s, and some others I could mention of a similar 'vintage') is that they all appear to be stuck in their ways and seemingly unwilling to adapt or change. Dave (DSJR) refers to it rather quaintly as being "aspergic", even though I doubt he means it in the literal sense

These guys appear to think that they know it all in terms of audio: the journey's over - there is nothing new to learn. Solid-state and digital are measurably more 'accurate' - end of, that's it - and anyone who thinks differently is a fool who believes in 'magic'; at least that's how they come across. This demonstrates in my opinion, at best, serious closed-mindedness, and at worst, quite staggering arrogance. I find this particularly true with people of a staunchly scientific bent: there is a belligerent and stubborn refusal to see validity in anyone's opinion other than their own, especially when the opposing viewpoint is contrary to their deeply-ingrained belief mechanism.

Why are some people so blinkered and inflexible?

You're certainly not like that and neither are most of the people on this forum. Me? I'm not either. I believe what I believe in with hi-fi at this current moment in time until such times as I'm presented with new evidence (via my ears) which shows that my current beliefs are flawed. If or when that happens, I will simply absorb the requisite new information and alter my opinions accordingly.

At the moment, valves & vinyl rule because that's what my ears tell me reproduces music most faithfully; ergo it is my current 'benchmark'. However, if someone were able to demonstrate to me a digital solid-state based system which significantly outperformed my current set-up then I would admit its superiority and embrace the necessary change accordingly. I am not wedded to vinyl & valves for eternity, so nothing for me is ever written in stone.

This is rational behaviour, surely, so why can't others be like that?

Tim touched on some stuff earlier which I think is important to address. He said:

I came home late last night, to find that a friend had sent me a file: Joni Mitchell singing "Summertime" on Herbie Hancock's album, "Gershwin's World." A file. Sent by email. I have no idea what the compression rate was, but it was obviously compressed. I played it back from my bog-standard Apple laptop through an untweaked Wolfson DAC and a pair of active speakers, bi-amped by big class A/B solid state amps. In other words, a system that is exactly the opposite of what is revered here, a system one would expect, according to the prevailing AOS rhetoric, to be not much better than an ipod and a pair of earbuds.

I don't doubt that what he heard was excellent, as is dictated by his current benchmark. Computer-based solid-state systems like Tim's can indeed be good - I've heard them, so no argument there - but experience tells me that a top-notch T/T playing mint condition audiophile quality vinyl (of music worth listening to) through the best valve amps (and I mean the punchy, dynamic variety, not the syrupy sleepy-sounding stuff), into huge, high-efficiency speakers like vintage Tannoys, makes the former, good though it is, sound like a very poor relation. I'm sure others here have similar experiences.

However, the question I would ask is this: when was the last time Tim heard a genuine top-notch vinyl & valves set-up - last week, last month, last year - or perhaps longer than that? He doesn't own a turntable or a valve amp, as far as I know.

The point I'm making is that you can't make valid comparisons of equipment solely from memory.

The advantage I have (and I'm sure I'm not alone here) is that I own four different sources: one digital (high-end CDP/DAC), and three analogue (T/T, cassette deck and tuner). That last one is interesting - I'd love to see Tim argue that DAB tuners sound better than high quality analogue ones! If he did then, I'm sorry, he is truly deaf!

Anyway, what I'm able to do therefore is make frequent and valid comparisons between all four sources in my own system, thereby getting a proper handle of what all are capable of. Now I'm not anti-digital - far from it - in fact, I love the sound of my modified Sony CDP & DAC, as it really does sound stunning...for digital.

It's only when I play the best vinyl recordings on my (heavily-modified) SL-1210 (or CR7) that the limitations of even the best digital sources and recordings are ruthlessly revealed. This is the point that Tim should remember - I'm not saying that digital sources and media aren't excellent; just that the best analogue ones are in my experience in an altogether different league.

Tim also said:

I am required to believe that the compromises of digital are glaring and unbearable and that inner groove distortion, tape hiss, surface noise, clipping valves, the RIAA curve and honking horns are the natural sound of music and that what I heard last night was crap. And i know this is not a popular point in these parts, but I am required to believe it in spite of the fact that the preponderance of measurement and data supports what I hear rather than what I am required to believe. To make matters worse, I am required to believe it by people who declare subjectivism as they dismiss my experience in the most absolute terms.

First of all he is not "required to believe" anything here; merely to respect other people's valid contrary opinions. That's hardly too much to ask, I wouldn't have thought.

Secondly, there is no audible "inner groove distortion" on a properly set-up turntable, arm and cartridge. There is also virtually no surface noise, providing records are kept in tip-top condition and spotlessly clean. It does take much more effort to get the best from vinyl, but the rewards are well worth it.

Thirdly, properly designed high quality valve amps, used within their optimal operating range, do not clip when partnered with suitable speakers. It is quite simply a non-issue. If it was an issue, I would not use valves. It's as simple as that.

Also, Tannoy horn-loaded drivers (I presume that's what Tim's referring to) do not "honk" (in any way I can detect) when used with high quality modern crossovers and fitted in suitably designed large cabinets. All speakers have some degree of coloration, but that exhibited by large high quality Tannoys is the most musically benign I've heard.

Lastly, and I do hope you're reading this Tim, no-one is dismissing your experience - I'm afraid that is only in your head.

What we are asking you to do is leave all your old, stereotypical, preconceptions about vinyl and valves behind and open your mind (and ears) to the possibility that things may be different now to what you think. We are all on a constant learning curve with our passion for audio and our love of music - and that includes you...

Marco.

[Steve Toy]

Indeed. I only discovered the virtues of valves in terms of linearity, tunefulness, texture, dynamics and 3D soundstaging early last year, around the time this forum was born as it happens, at the Manchester show.

Before then I was as dismissive of the glowing bottles as Tim.

My system is digital-only but I nevertheless acknowledge the superiority of analogue sources in many cases.

Most real scientists in hi-fi are open-minded empiricists looking for a logical explanation for observed phenomena. They hear something and seek out the mechanism behind it. Then you get the pseudo-scientists, the technical jobsworths, if you like, who often troll on hi-fi forums to pour scorn and ridicule on those who have discovered audible phenomena that do not fit into their compartmentalised world of pre-ordained criteria for easy measurement.

Scientific explanations (and by that I mean those within the realms of physics as well as how the ear/brain interprets sound waves) will always exist to explain such observed (i.e. heard) phenomena; there is no magic, fairy dust or foo. We sometimes just need to dig a little deeper for our scientific explanations than afforded by the hasty reductionism of the so-called objectivists.

[Marco]

Another gem from the repertoire of factoids from Mr Toy!

This bit is especially significant:

Scientific explanations (and by that I mean those within the realms of physics as well as how the ear/brain interprets sound waves) will always exist to explain such observed (i.e. heard) phenomena; there is no magic, fairy dust or foo. We sometimes just need to dig a little deeper for our scientific explanations than afforded by the hasty reductionism of the so-called objectivists.

Absolutely true. It is the pseudo-scientists and blinkered disciples of reductionism* that I have the problem with, not the genuine guys, who like you say, are "open-minded empiricists looking for a logical explanation for observed phenomena." I couldn't have put it any better myself

*Reductionism (from the Encarta English dictionary, for the benefit of anyone who may not know):

the oversimplifying of something complex, or the misguided belief that everything can be explained in simple terms

Oh how this approach is often so wrongly applied to audio by dogmatic pseudo-scientists...

Nothing we genuinely hear in audio, such as the subjective experiences often related on this forum, are scientifically unprovable - we just need to dig deeper with the right apparatus, and an open mind, to find the responsible mechanism(s).

However, it can unquestionably be unsettling to leave the comfort zone of our deeply-ingrained, long-held belief system, and embrace an alternative methodology with our approach to audio.

It is also no guarantee that longevity of experience correlates directly with genuine accumulated knowledge - one could have simply spent many years mostly learning the wrong things; or at least *some* wrong things... It happens. It's natural; it's human. Bad habits are so easily formed. But the question is, do we have the gumption or humility to admit our mistakes?

It is very easy with audio to fall into the trap of that which is scientifically provable being unquestionably correct, but as we know already, with hi-fi, it is rarely as simple as that. Indeed, if only it were, we could simply look at the specifications of equipment, buy on that basis, and be done and dusted. Life would be a whole lot simpler!

But in reality, how many genuinely superb sounding systems are successfully assembled solely on the basis of 'accurate' measurements? Do we simply settle for 'adequate' or go the extra mile and strive for excellence? In my experience, the latter is only possible by thinking outside of the box.

Undoubtedly, the prospect of perhaps rethinking, in Tim's case, around 40 years of accumulated bias is a bitter pill to swallow, but perhaps that's the price one has to pay to achieve true objectivity in this sometimes thorny hobby of ours...

Marco.

[The Grand Wazoo]

Here's a little tale about the blindness & lack of logic in the scientific world.

Two engineering students were asked to measure the height of a tree as a class assignment. They went out to the woods and found the biggest tree in the forest.

They decided the best way to approach the task was for one to hold the tape while the other climbed the tree with the other end. Much to their disappointment, the student climbing the tree kept snapping branches & falling, never being able to reach the top.

A forestry worker on his way home after a long day in the woods has been observing the fun and games from a distance & asks them if they need some help. The engineers, thinking this must surely be a man who knows how to climb a tree, willingly accept his kind offer.

Much to their horror, he starts up his chainsaw & fells the tree. As it falls to the ground with an almighty crash and splintering of branches, the woodsman looks up only to see his two new friends crying. He explains that the felling of trees is a way of managing the forest because it was planted as a crop, much like a farm crop and that soon the whole area will be replanted with vigorously growing fresh young trees, so they shouldn’t feel bad about the loss of this one. He then goes on to point out that now it will be easy for them to measure the tree & they’ll get top marks for their homework.

One of the two engineers, enraged by this suggestion yells out "You stupid moronic bastard, you obviously don’t have a scientific molecule in your body, and that’s why you’ll never be a success in life. You’ll always carry out menial labour, risking your life every day for a minimum wage!”

The woodsman explains patiently that he is happy with his simple life, working outdoors in the beautiful woodland and feels privileged that he has a job without the worries and stresses that many people endure in the rat-race of life. He goes on to explain that life has been so much better for him since he gave up his old job as a lawyer because of the stress of that profession. He then asks them to explain the reason for the attack on his intelligence.

The two engineers both shout in unison: “We wanted to know how tall the tree was, not how long it is you idiot"

[Marco]

A rather nice (and effective) analogy there, Chris!

Marco.

[DSJR]

Marco, it's not always as cut and dried as your lengthy post above makes out. In fact, you seem to be more fixed in your beliefs than I am in the above content anyway..

I suspect that many "fanbois" have Aspergic tendancies, your lengthy post above Marco shows an incredible fixed attitude and rigid belief structure, with a defiance when your rigid opinions/belief structures are challenged. Why does discovering new things (such as a possible ss amp solution one day in the future?) need to be such a big deal. For example, rather than writing an old small Crown amp off as being total crap (I heard one once and it was crap so they're all crap), I've been genuinely surprised by how good it still is. Not once have I ever said it's a "top end" amp, but I'd much rather have it (the two bridged ones cost me nothing except a set of new supply caps) to a typical Arcam, budget Cambridge or Rotel or Nait of any age...

let me give one example that we've joked about - the M3D. I remember it as a punchy but dull (mis) tracker with a roughly finished nail crudely glued to a massive cantilever. You told me otherwise, so I set about finding one. Unwilling and unable (frankly) to buy one for £80 on eBay, I was given one by a kindly dealer sorting out his remaining "junk" and another friendly forum owner sent me a new pattern N21 stylus for it, which seemed a little more delicate than the Shure origina and with a much better finished diamond chip. I tried it and was very pleasantly surprised by what I've heard and have waxed lyrical about this ever since!

Regarding valve amps, my education as to their undoubted qualities started in 1975. I've blown hot and cold about their benefits and drawbacks ever since and was badly burned emotionally and financially by two models twenty years ago - one of these was made personally by Glenn too and gave me a great firework display one evening!!!!! Interestingly, the boring, grey and "horrid" AVI amps I replaced them with just disappeared, working with utter reliability and never once appearing to get in the way of my musical enjoyment. I was still single then, living on my own by this time and played the system every single day for hours on end.

I attended many HiFi shows back then as well and could always tell which room was playing records by the blowsy bass coming into the corridor outside (turntables have improved a bit since those days I'll grant you). The Audio Note rooms that many here seem to love, sounded truly awful to me and no-one seemed to notice the horrendous tracing distortion and surface noice emanating from the records being played. Bringing this up to date on another forum, one regular poster there has just spent a small fortune buying the expensive motor/supply combo for his beloved LP12 and went to the trouble of recording (at 24/96) his efforts before and after mod. I found the differences woefully small (could have been the ADC at fault) and all I could hear was mis-tracing of sibilance, which could have been record wear (another area the M3D/N21 gains for me).

I'm trying Marco, with no money to spend but with a motley collection of cartridges and a restored turntable to use, I've hardly touched a CD in weeks. It's frustrating and I have severe domestic limitations too, but I'm giving it a go and enjoying the experience as I would with a good vintage car - I make allowances for what my system can't do well yet enjoy the positive aspects, which are growing as I learn more about the stuff I'm using.

A clumsy post - apologies, but I've always tried to wear my heart on my sleeve and it still gets me up sh*t creek without a paddle. maybe when we meet over a pint or glass or two of fine wine we may be able to share more experiences, but at the moment, like Tim, I'm finding things a bit difficult on here.

College work calls (and some job applications too...).. TTFN

[niklasthedolphin]

Nothing we genuinely hear in audio, such as the subjective experiences often related on this forum, are scientifically unprovable - we just need to dig deeper with the right apparatus, and an open mind, to find the responsible mechanism(s).

I will question that.

An experience listening to music is percepted through our senses and adapted to the brain through the filter of whatever experiences we might already have had in life.
Memory, subcontiousness and whatever you have ever learned will influence on your acknowledgement of this listening experience.

How will any scientist analyze that?

If you really meant that we have to "Dig deeper with the right aparatus", I will have to supplement: We have to dig so deep into the human soul and mind that we are far beyond 2001: A Space Odyssey, so far beyond robotizing human beings that existing anymore is a non-attractive event.

Decades ago, in science, there was a trend of relating to the theory where everything would be possible to put into equations and formulars. This Superstring Theory was dumped many years ago and replaced first by Super Dynamic Hypothesis and others even later.
We realized that objectivism is unattainable and were only to aim for.
Therefor scientists started, with the Super Dynamic Hypothesis, to include their own influence on what ever was examined and measured.
Even when having an eye on the microscope, the microinvironment was behaving different than when the eye was not on the microscope.
In psychology this wisdom was implimented, as social workers realized that the behaviour of the people they were trying to help acted different and with other intentions when left alone (but observed with a camera).
Systematic Family Therapy.

Now back to our own level:
Many a home brewed technician, as mayority are, and even some of the engineers on all these hifi fora are still hanging stuck in the Superstring theory and this is making it very much into a religious fundamentalistic point of view, since everybody else, scientists, HR's and even us normal people, long time ago moved on into the world of realizing the necessity of subjectivistic points of views.

So I would guess not.
Digging deeper is not the answer.
The answer is:
Accept it. Live with it. Enjoy it. You're a part of the experience.

"dolph"

[Mr. C]

This is most entertaining and good to see

[Marco]

Wow, great post, Dolph. I am in complete agreement!



I especially agree with this:

If you really meant that we have to "Dig deeper with the right aparatus", I will have to supplement: We have to dig so deep into the human soul and mind that we are far beyond 2001: A Space Odyssey, so far beyond robotizing human beings that existing anymore is a non-attractive event.

And this:

Digging deeper is not the answer.
The answer is:
Accept it. Live with it. Enjoy it. You're a part of the experience.

However, the question I would ask is this: can staunchly dogmatic pseudo-scientist types who simply don't have the required faith in their God-given senses (hearing acuity), and who thus always insist on the presence of empirical 'evidence' before believing in certain effects with audio, ever have the self-confidence to do as you have suggested (highlighted in bold)?

There comes a time in hi-fi, surely, when you must put measurements aside, trust your ears, and go with your gut instincts, or forever drown in a quagmire of uncertainty - and the psychological distress this must surely bring when presented with alternative viewpoints that deep-down you know have merit, but which your cynical mind won't allow to compute...

Unfortunately I have met quite a few people like this on forums!

Marco.

P.S This is what I like about AOS - we get to the 'nitty-gritty' of the matter. I do find discussions elsewhere sometimes somewhat lacking in substance!!