Slaughter A Few Sacred Audiophile Cows

Oy, we have been over this before. It's not to hear signals better than 22khz so much as to hear 20hz-22khz better by improving the implementation of digital audio.

 

Yeah, I apologize for that. But I had to respond because it seems to also be derailing into a let's bash the 1200 thread as well. That's been done to death on this forum too.

 

Amarra 3.0.2 on 44khz files is noticeably better than iTunes. Not even close in fact.

 

The 1200 is just an obvious example with an active and enthusiastic following.

 

What do us silly audiophiles know?

 

OK. Apologies. A little earlier then.

 

A Mapleshade product?

 

Jerry Springer - Audiophile edition

 

That stereo integrated amps are always, always, like night and day better always, than AV amps. Happy to give that one a good kick.

 

That vinyl is always, always, like night and day better always, than digital. Happy to foot that one up the backside as well.

 

I have been contacted by the 'Sacred Cow Endowment Fund" which is going to send me free of charge several new sacred cows to replace the sacred cow coldly torn from my premises by unknown but probable 'sacred cow destroyer terrorists'.
The new sacred cows come pretrained in 'hoof to hoof combat' so they may also be taken.. but not without a big fight.

 

I have only a vague recollection of a discussion on that topic unfortunately. I do recall more clearly that some time ago you sent me a reference to an interesting study showing that subjects who heard gamelan music played back with super-tweeters for very high (literally supersonic) frequencies preferred that to playback limited to frequencies in audible range. That was definitely an interesting finding.

 

Every time I read through a thread like this, I am reminded of the FACT that every Forum needs an Emoticon for Sarcasm and strict enforcement from Moderators that they be used on all Sarcastic responses.

Too many people have no sense of humor on these things.

 

Is this an anti-audiophile sacred cow? I've seen it posted often enough, but what studies is it based on?

My CD of The Rolling Stones STEEL WHEELS sounds kinda dull on top, and I haven't listened to it in years. I just remember that it does. Contrarywise, my Warner CD of Black Sabbath is pretty bright on top. That's how I remember it, anyway.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the concept.

 

Nobody really believes that one, though -- it's just a made-up exaggeration that people who dismiss vinyl like to use.

 

Well, then why not just claim that there’s the famous “night and day” difference? I’m sure the binary data is dumped in a much more advanced, pronounced and airy way to the DAC than this really difficult and demanding task is performed by iTunes ;-)

I know that mentioning certain evil words is verboten in audiophile discussions, but did you ever perform a double blind test to verify Amarra’s advanced and sophisticated playback quality?