 |
| |
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
Ok - you really need an education. Throwing up numbers as proof of audio quality is what those people who don't understand audio quality do. It's like those dumbasses who insist on having the amp with the highest wattage. |
Give me a f*cking break, Agathon.
SNR is a widely accepted statistical indicator of audio quality. You are not going to dismiss it as being irrelevant and insisting the iPods is somehow superior because people pay more money for them.
Apple doesn't exactly have, or use, any high-end DSP chips. Creative and Yamaha work together for the ones in the Zen, and that's why it has better SnR, harmonic distortion, and channel separation.
And unless you have something to disprove the audio quality and spec statistics, don't bother making an ass out of yourself further.
quote:
As I said, you as a teenybopper, wouldn't know audio quality if it bit you in the ass.
Let me guess, you have some sort of flashing-lights mini system in the corner of your bedroom? |
And you're a f*cking philosophy guy.
Who's liable to know more about technology?
And for the record, I listen to my music on the $5,000 home theatre downstairs that I researched and picked out.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Give me a f*cking break, Agathon.
SNR is a widely accepted statistical indicator of audio quality. You are not going to dismiss it as being irrelevant and insisting the iPods is somehow superior because people pay more money for them. |
I'm telling you that among people who know hi-fi merely cranking out numbers is a waste of time. If I wanted to tell the difference between the Zen and the ipod I'd need both handy, which I don't. Anyone who buys audio equipment based on numbers is an idiot pure and simple.
quote:
Apple doesn't exactly have, or use, any high-end DSP chips. Creative and Yamaha work together for the ones in the Zen, and that's why it has better SnR, harmonic distortion, and channel separation. |
Blah blah blah. You are such a twit. This is the way that people who hate music buy their audio equipment.
quote:
And unless you have something to disprove the audio quality and spec statistics, don't bother making an ass out of yourself further. |
In audio price matters. Not always, but it's a good indicator.
quote:
And you're a f*cking philosophy guy.
Who's liable to know more about technology? |
Not you apparently. I'm sorry Asher good hi-fi is an art not a science.
quote:
And for the record, I listen to my music on the $5,000 home theatre downstairs that I researched and picked out. |
And this marks you out as a total newbie. No real audio enthusiast would listen to his music on a home theatre system. They are good for movies and loud bangs and explosions but lousy for high quality reproduction of music.
Real hi fi requires two well grounded speakers, good cables, a good amplifier or pre-amp power amp setup [preferably with an "on" button; a volume knob; and nothing else] and a good CD player (or two piece transport DAC combo).
Let me guess:
It's made by Sony or some other mass-market company - or (slightly better) by some reputable company stooping to home theatre.
It has piles of speakers.
It has a graphic equalizer or tone control buttons.
It has some sort of "super sound" option.
The speakers aren't biwired.
It has a multidisc CD changer.
It has flashing lights.
And let me ask:
What does the system sit on?
What do the speakers sit on?
Are they secured to the floor.
What shape is the room?
[all these would matter to a real hi-fi nut]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:29
|
|
I would say that when someone starts hyping features like a calendar and games and whatnot in an MP3 player, they've already conceded that its an inferior product. Who needs that garbage, after all, that's what a cell phone is for.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
I think the idea is to end up with something you can carry anywhere which will do all of these things.
I don't like the idea, but that's where it seems to be going. Meanwhile I'll stick with a Discman as the sound quality is better. On the other hand, I'm one of the poor boobs who walked through the 80s with a walkman and a huge bag full of cassettes, so an ipod looks pretty tempting (even though the 30 gig version wouldn't come close to holding my collection). |
I'm like some of the other posters, the price on ipods is just prohibitive. Too bad. And when they are sold for less, such as at Dell, they are on back order for months. They are a bit sexier, but for the price differential?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
Anyone who buys audio equipment based on numbers is an idiot pure and simple. |
How many strawmen can you pull a day?
I'm not buying solely on numbers. But just to make sure, do you know where the SNR figure comes from?
You're basing your argument on quality based on price alone. And then you called me a twit. You're the kind of people companies like Nuance make their money off of -- crap speakers set artificially high (hello, Apple) that tricks the not-so-bright consumers into thinking they're paying money for something of really high quality, when they're paying huge profit margins is all.
quote:
Blah blah blah. You are such a twit. This is the way that people who hate music buy their audio equipment. |
You made your case for buying the iPod based on "originality" and the fact that it has a calendar, game, and contact list.
Do not talk to me about how "people who hate music" buy their audio equipment, you've answered that one by example.
quote:
:lo
l:
And this marks you out as a total newbie. No real audio enthusiast would listen to his music on a home theatre system. They are good for movies and loud bangs and explosions but lousy for high quality reproduction of music. |
When did I claim to be a "real audio enthusiast"? Secondly, the term is audiophile. Thirdly, you're way offbase...
quote:
Real hi fi requires two well grounded speakers, good cables, a good amplifier or pre-amp power amp setup [preferably with an "on" button; a volume knob; and nothing else] and a good CD player (or two piece transport DAC combo). |
Get with the times...a real audiophile has at least a 5.1 system to make use of DVD-Audio. 
I've got 5 well-grounded high-quality speakers, 1 high-quality sub, superb cables (hundreds of dollars), and the amplifier is built into the $1200 audio receiver & decoder... 
quote:
Let me guess:
It's made by Sony or some other mass-market company - or (slightly better) by some reputable company stooping to home theatre. |
The receiver is a Pioneer Elite.
quote:
It has piles of speakers. |
2 large (front-left, front-right), 3 satellite, 1 sub. No other way to listen to DVD-Audio, my friend.
quote:
It has a graphic equalizer or tone control buttons.
It has some sort of "super sound" option. |
It has a DSP mode for things such as "midnight mode" which can bring together the highs and lows if that's whast you're talking about?
quote:
The speakers aren't biwired. |
They aren't biwired, and if you have biwired speakers on your system I'm apt to smack you for wasting sooooo much money. Should've bought a car or big-screen, man.
quote:
It has a multidisc CD changer. |
Nope.
quote:
It has flashing lights. |
Nope.
quote:
[all these would matter to a real hi-fi nut] |
A real "hi-fi" nut would know the term is audiophile...so would anyone who's not the least bit ignorant.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
While you've definitely demostrated your knowledge of hi-fi, Agathon, don't think for a second that Asher has gone away. He never goes away, never admits defeat. He's like a Terminator, only skinny and gay. |
Drake is right, I never admit defeat when I'm right.
Plus I was too busy getting laid to answer your laughable posts devoid of any argument whatsoever.
What you've done is assumed I've said I'm an audiophile, said that price is a better indictator of quality over statistics like signal-to-noise ratio, and insisted that having a calendar, contact list, and games (which you yourself say is a silly way to go) somehow defeats longer battery life, more storage, more DSP options, and cheaper price.
And I'm not skinny -- I'm toned and smack-dab in the middle of the BMI.
Ask Zylka.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
|
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
You made your case for buying the iPod based on "originality" and the fact that it has a calendar, game, and contact list. |
I didn't make a case for buying an ipod at all. You need to read more carefully. I just responded to some of your silly plagiarised claims.
quote:
Do not talk to me about how "people who hate music" buy their audio equipment, you've answered that one by example. |
I can because you don't know what you are talking about. You're just a silly little techno-teenybopper. I've seen people like you at hi fi shops. Rabbiting on for hours about frequencies and buying expensive gadget laden rubbish which they proceed to play Rod Stewart on.
quote:
When did I claim to be a "real audio enthusiast"? |
Then admit you don't know what you're talking about and go back and play with your "stereo".
quote:
Secondly, the term is audiophile. |
That's one term. "hi-fi nut" is another. But who cares what word you use. You are no audiophile.
quote:
Get with the times...a real audiophile has at least a 5.1 system to make use of DVD-Audio. |
A waste of money. If you have a proper dedicated stereo system you don't need all that crap. This stuff is just for tossers who listen to terrible music. And the whole DVD Audio/SACD thing has been ruined by home theatre losers - real music lovers have lost out to the gadget lovers with no taste.
There's no point to surround sound anyway. Get a pair of ESL 63s and a decent room and you'll see why.
Anyway, give me fresh vinyl and a Linn Sondek any day. 
quote:
I've got 5 well-grounded high-quality speakers, 1 high-quality sub, superb cables (hundreds of dollars), and the amplifier is built into the $1200 audio receiver & decoder.. |
In other words, you have a home theatre system, not a music system. The kind of thing that people with lots of money but no real interest in music buy to watch Steven Seagal movies. The kind of overpriced crap that dopes get snookered into buying as a "home entertainment system".
quote:
The receiver is a Pioneer Elite. |
Pioneer.
quote:
2 large (front-left, front-right), 3 satellite, 1 sub. No other way to listen to DVD-Audio, my friend. |
I wouldn't want to. Hi fi has basically been wrecked by the home theatre crowd - the people who think more speakers = better sound.
At least some companies still produce proper stuff. When Quad stoop to this (they hadn't last time I looked) we will know that the barbarians have stormed the building.
quote:
It has a DSP mode for things such as "midnight mode" which can bring together the highs and lows if that's whast you're talking about? |
So it's not hi-fi. The point of hi-fi is to recapture exactly what was recorded. Graphic equalizers DSPs and all the rest of that crap just get in the way of the signal. No real hi fi nut wants that trash. It's just for gadget lovers. And the whole thing is compromised as a music system by having to share duties as a movie sound system.
No real hi fi nut would be seen dead with a DSP. What a joke.
quote:
They aren't biwired, and if you have biwired speakers on your system I'm apt to smack you for wasting sooooo much money. Should've bought a car or big-screen, man. |
It works and there is a definite improvement. Same goes for isolation pads, spikes, etc.
quote:
A real "hi-fi" nut would know the term is audiophile...so would anyone who's not the least bit ignorant. |
Is that the best you can do? Argue about words. lollollol
Just admit you've been seduced by gadgetry into purchasing a system that butchers the music.
Well that's enough from me. Thanks for a good laugh.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
I didn't make a case for buying an ipod at all. You need to read more carefully. I just responded to some of your silly plagiarised claims. |
In Philosophy you've surely discovered what an "implication is", or is your field a bit behind on that concept?
quote:
I can because you don't know what you are talking about. You're just a silly little techno-teenybopper. I've seen people like you at hi fi shops. Rabbiting on for hours about frequencies and buying expensive gadget laden rubbish which they proceed to play Rod Stewart on.
Then admit you don't know what you're talking about and go back and play with your "stereo". |
I know what I'm talking about, Agathon.
A higher SNR ratio is better.
End of story.
You can argue that it's not the only determinant of sound quality, and I agree -- it's best to compare the two. Unfortunately, we don't have that liberty online here.
And my sound measurements trump your "higher price is better" argument.
quote:
That's one term. "hi-fi nut" is another. But who cares what word you use. You are no audiophile. |
Of course not, I'm too smart to be an audiophile.
Audiophiles are pretentious *******s too scared to do double-blind tests because they don't want to see their $5000 cables sound the same as $100 ones...
quote:
A waste of money. If you have a proper dedicated stereo system you don't need all that crap. This stuff is just for tossers who listen to terrible music. And the whole DVD Audio/SACD thing has been ruined by home theatre losers - real music lovers have lost out to the gadget lovers with no taste. |
"Real music lovers listen only to vinyl"
Can everyone hear that? That's the sound of the quicksand underneath Agathon's scurrying little feat...
I'm going to explain something to you. Perhaps this will be overly complex for you, but it's something I'm well-versed in. CDs and DVDs are digital media. DVD-Audio is like CDs, except it records more information in 6 channels rather than two.
There is no way, whatsoever, one can argue that CD audio is better than DVD-audio. Those hard of hearing can successfully argue that they can't tell the difference, but they're entirely not the same thing.
quote:
In other words, you have a home theatre system, not a music system. |
Didn't I say "home theatre" several times now? Darn, I think I did? Weird.
quote:
The kind of thing that people with lots of money but no real interest in music buy to watch Steven Seagal movies. The kind of overpriced crap that dopes get snookered into buying as a "home entertainment system". |
I dunno, bigscreen HDTV with a thunderous, crystal clear sound system, progressive scan DVD player, and 400 channels of digital TV seems pretty damn cool to me.
I'm sorry if it doesn't interest you, but because the music quality is also simply stunning on it, I believe it's quite awesome.
But keep digging...
quote:
Pioneer. |
Guess who makes most of the actual chips inside those expensive audiophile amps?
Yamaha and Pioneer are the main ones. Branding is so nifty, isn't it?? It's like buying a Dell printer, only finding out it's actually a Lexmark...
quote:
So it's not hi-fi. The point of hi-fi is to recapture exactly what was recorded. |
Exactly -- which is why it's utterly retarded for you to reject a medium like DVD-Audio which is actually 24-bit and the same bitrate the music was recorded at, rather than downsampled like CDs.
Surely as a "hi-tech" nut you knew that, right?
quote:
Graphic equalizers DSPs and all the rest of that crap just get in the way of the signal. No real hi fi nut wants that trash. It's just for gadget lovers. And the whole thing is compromised as a music system by having to share duties as a movie sound system.
No real hi fi nut would be seen dead with a DSP. What a joke. |
WHAT A JOKE!
HOW DARE THEY INCLUDE A DSP FUNCTIONALITY!!!!!!
THIS IS DISGUSTING!
DSPs SHOULD BE BANNED!
(Hint: Don't want DSP? Turn it off.)
quote:
Well that's enough from me. Thanks for a good laugh. |
I assure you, everyone is laughing at you.
Your argument in this thread is pathetic, at best.
You've posted absolutely nothing of content, simply condescending rhetoric about what "real hi-fi nuts" use into a threadjack blasting me for listening to music on an expensive "home theatre' because clearly your 16-bit, 1.4Mbps CDs are of higher quality and therefore I am somehow shamed. 
Whatever, I'm bookmarking this thread for future fodder against Philosophy departments in universities.
If a professor at a supposedly good university in the West argues like this, there is no hope for that faculty.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
That's not what I said, silly. I said that you never admit defeat, regardless of whether you're right or not. |
I know what you said, Drake. Nevermind, I suppose I was too subtle.
quote:
If your endless rebutting was only limited to times when you were right, you would be an enjoyable poster. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. |
It certainly is every time I've debated you.
Whether it be about how much Nebraska sucks, how Apple rips people off, or why Nintendo is going to be the next Apple of the video game market. 
I mean, take this thread: Even you can probably see how silly Agathon is being, no?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
|
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:29
|
|
Well I looked at what you wrote Asher, but it has very little merit. You obviously don't know very much about hi-fi. And your arguments about claimed signal to noise don't prove anything. As I said, that's the idiot's way to buy audio, and it's apparently yours, so you make the inference.
Hi fi is about accurately reproducing the original source. Digital signal processors and the like get in the way. The best hi fi is as minimalist as possible. Turning it off makes things better, but you still have the switch which is unnecessary interference. That's a particularly stupid remark, even from you.
Pioneer? Yamaha? Crap. Give me Quad or Audiolab (or whatever they're calling themselves these days)/
And you have me arguing that CDs are somehow superior to DVD Audio/SACD when that's not what I said. When it comes to sound quality, they aren't. However, that's not the whole story: the problem with DVD/SACD is the mass of channels. With a good system you only need two - this 5+1 business is pure overkill. It's good for playing movie soundtracks where you want to imagine yourself in the middle of a jungle, but lousy for recreating a decent sound picture of an orchestra. I'm saddened that DVD/SACD have been wrecked for audiophiles to pander to people who don't really like music or hi-fi. They're just the crowd who thinks that more speakers or higher wattage means better sound.
And as for your remarks about vinyl, it just shows how utterly ignorant of high end audio you are. A high quality turntable like a Linn LP12 produces a more pleasing sound than CD. That's why there are still vinyl junkies and why Linn and Rega still make turntables. Of course vinyl has its problems, but many people are prepared to put up with them. Similarly, high end audio companies like Quad still make valve amplication for the wonderful warm sound it produces.
Anyway, with comments like this it's obvious you are out of your depth on this one.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-07-2003 01:45
|