In Reply to: Re: Finally, someone who makes sense! posted by Ted Smith on April 8, 2007 at 18:15:11:
*** but the kind of changes from some mods are obvious to all and there is no question that short or long term listening agree that things are better ***Don't disagree that changes can be very obvious. For example, simply replacing the op amp used for the reconstruction filter causes a very audible change. And indeed it is possible to form a definite view that one sounds better, even after protacted listening.
But what is not clear is whether the "better" sounding op amp is truly better than the stock op amp. For example, the replacement op amp may have a faster slew rate, which may make the music sound more dynamic, but at the expense of higher distortion artefacts.
For example, I can process all the music I listen to via a set of mastering effects - adding harmonic excitement, doing some EQ, widening the sound image, and adding a bit of reverb.
Again there is no question the result may sound "better", even after protracted listening. But is the sound truly "better", or simply more euphonic? At the end of the day, are we interested in the actual sound that is recorded, or the "colour" added by the electronics?
I would be interested in a mod if the mod makes sense (from a technical perspective), and it yields objectively superior results. But I'm not willing just to trust a listening test, whether it's my ears or someone elses. I've learnt over the years my ears are very untrustworthy.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Finally, someone who makes sense! - Christine Tham 18:41:09 04/08/07 (2)
- Re: Finally, someone who makes sense! - Ted Smith 19:17:40 04/08/07 (1)
- Re: Finally, someone who makes sense! - Christine Tham 19:39:28 04/08/07 (0)