Slaughter A Few Sacred Audiophile Cows

Creek rocks on sale for $300, quartz half price for $100. Sound reproduction reorganization via telephone only $1000. Vacated wallet free.

 

Well maybe you did learn something. Just not what you thought you were going to learn

 

Not true. iTunes plays hi-rez just fine. The issue for some people is that sample rate conversion doesn't happen automatically.

 

Of course, everyone should be happy in its own way. Anyway, I’m convinced that 16 bit/44.1 kHz digital audio really is more than just good enough, and I think 99.9 percent of even “critical” listeners won’t be able to distinguish between redbook audio and higher bit depth and sampling rates.

In case you’re really interested: 24 bit vs 16 bit, the myth exploded! (head-fi.org)

BTW: iTunes has no problem with playback of non-redbook “hi-rez” files, one just has to manually change the bit depth and the sampling rate via Audio MIDI Setup before playback starts.

 

You have no clue what you are missing and, frankly, you aren't all that interested.

 

I'm a member of Head-Fi and I've seen that thread. Let's just say I disagree. I wouldn't even classify myself as "golden eared" and the differences are audible to me.

 

Well, furniture will reduce reverb time and absorb in the high through upper mid frequencies, but it's not typically effective in the low frequencies at all and typical rectangular rooms have all kinds of room modes in the 20-150 Hz region that corner traps and bass traps will work on but that furniture will not.

If you haven't actually measured the frequency response in your room at your listening position, you'll probably be surprised at the nulls and resonances you find down there, and how much smoother and cleaner frequency response through the bottom three octaves can potentially be with proper room treatment and changes of equipment and listening location positioning, etc.

 

Fair enough, but I definitely remember a time when you could not play 192khz sample rates on iTunes.

 

What a terrible loss! I’m sure your pet bats were very unhappy at that time ;-)

 

Interesting opening post in that thread which I hadn't seen before; thanks for reposting it here. But holy cow -- the discussion goes on for 129 pages! Any chance you could provide a summary of how things turned out?

 

Here's a quick summary video from the two opposing viewpoints.

 

Well, to keep it short and placative:

• 24 bit depth equals a dynamic range of 144 dB. No DAC currently on the market, no speaker or any other part of a playback chain is able to reproduce a dynamic range that huge.
• The maximum dynamic range to be found on typical commercial recordings is approximately 60 dB.
• The highest audio frequency available in redbook audio equals half of the sampling rate, 22 kHz. Which human ear is able to hear frequencies that high?

If you’re curious try a blind test to find out if you’re able to detect a difference between standard redbook and “hi-rez” material. Keep in mind that the audio memory our brain is able to “store” does not last for longer than two seconds.

But by all means: Listen to whatever you think sounds better to your ears and makes you really happy!

 

I would argue that we learn a lot from threads like these... maybe not what you were hoping to learn, but learning nonetheless.

 

It's a debate about audiophile practices, and whether spending vast amounts of money on components and numerous accessories is worthwhile, when there are many more economically viable options available that arguably do the same thing, or even do it better.

Shak

 

Ha ha, I was ready to assume that at least 100 pages or so would amount to no more than that! That's why I was hoping someone else would do the reading for me.

Oh, I've already tried and failed -- a couple years ago or so I compared free tracks available for download from hyperion-records.co.uk, the site for one of my favorite labels. I was at a complete loss trying to distinguish 16/44 from 24/88 and thus concluded paying extra for the high-res files would not be worth it, in my own case. In any event I am interested in understanding what bit depth actually implies, and whether there was any rebuttal to the opening argument. I have some familiarity with the implications of the Nyquist theorem, so I do not consider a higher sampling rate to be significant, in view of (1) the fact that I don't think I can hear anything above around 15kHz, and (2) the frequency range of my speakers (which go up to about 22kHz, I think).

Thanks for the reply.

 

And watch out for pigs on the wing.

 

"More bass than you would expect from a cabinet this size."

 

All true, but don't forget that the Technics SL-1200 was originally sold as an audiophile turntable when it first appeared back in 1972, long before DJs started using them as a club deck, mostly for their build quality and reliability. But Technics wasn't just concerned with speed accuracy, they also did considerable research on damping vibrations, controlling resonances, and isolation of motor noise and vibration from the playback. All of those things are handled very well, and my SL-1200 has a very quiet presentation, nearly as good as my Pro-Ject 2 Xperience Classic. I've had the Pro-Ject long enough now that I consider it broken in, and I intend to have a shoot-out between the two in the not too distant future, just for my own satisfaction. In truth, I really like both turntables very well; I'm not a BD vs. DD guy at all, I think all drive systems have their merits, heck, I even have a vintage Dual 1229Q (idler drive), which gets used about 4-5 hours a week (it's in the room where I workout, and I don't want to have to handle the tonearm too much when I'm dripping with sweat, so an automatic turntable is called for.)

 

The Law of Diminishing Returns--complete rubbish.

 

I can understand your confusion. It's about Audiophile Cows.

 

If I thought the Technics 1200 was all that great I would buy two. It's ok, nothing really wrong with it. I have heard quite a few of them in many different systems. I don't know of any currently presiding over high end systems. If they were the best I'm sure S.H. himself would have it in his playback chain.

 

I'm not saying the SL1200 is a bad deck and it is more inert in terms of plinth and platter than typical competing Japanese home DD decks of the time. In fact I've been looking for one for my daughter to give her something really easy to use to spin records -- I dunno if she'll ever be dealing with a sprung suspension table, or futzing with periphery clamping or anything like that on my Merrill when I pop off. But the cult status its developed and the notion that it can deliver any and everything vinyl has to deliver, the notion that there's no sense to spending more on a deck, or using a different sort of deck, or trying to improve or mod the SL1200,....well, in a thread about killing sacred cows, I think that's a big of cultish received wisdom at the moment that could use a little puncturing especially in these days of much more inert platter and plinth materials being commonly used, better CLD approaches and materials, and with the greater attention we pay to getting sources of EMF radiation away from carts, etc.

 

Oh, not to worry, it gets punctured continually on this forum. But I'd largely agree with you, and I've never said it was the best, but that it is/was very good for it's price point. The biggest reason I own one is that I like to swap cartridges out, and the removable headshell makes doing that a snap. I can change cartridges in less than 5 minutes, as the alignment doesn't have to be re-done; all I have to do is re-balance the arm, reset VTF, VTA and anti-skating, and I'm playing records. I haven't had the occasion to change on one my Pro-Ject, and to be honest when the time comes, I'll face that task with a fair amount of trepidation.

 

The toe-tapping factor.

Nothing says this $400 dollar record is better than this $10 record of the same title or this $5,000 amp is better than this $500 amp like a little toe tapping.

I get it on one level, it's a sign of enjoyment and engagement, but sometimes I'll see an analysis that roughly comes down to the things in comparison being similar, but the toe was tapping just a little more during the bridge so they feel justified spending whatever the huge amount of money it was.

This might not fit into this thread, but I've noticed this on several occasions and found it funny. Besides, the thread seems to be derailing into the reasons you are using a technics 1200 series turntable thread.

 

I have to agree...at a minimum the point of diminishing returns kicks in way later at a higher price than one would believe.