In Reply to: Another Sample Of An Audio Component That Doesn't Measure Well, But Sounds Great. posted by thetubeguy1954 on November 7, 2006 at 09:17:55:
Several of us have posted comments on finding "good sound" from low priced CD players that don't imploy the latest up/over sampling technologies and have been scorned for such a preference by none other than yourself - ridiculed in fact.Apparently you've found an expensive player the eschews the more recent upsampling/oversampling technologies and now you feel embolden to make the same pronouncements many of us had made in the past.
Good for you!!!!!!!!!!!
Secondly you must be just as confused as what "measures well" means as are the rest of them. Because if you had a clue you'ld know it's the definition of what "measures well" and what is measured that defines how a system is designed/intended to work
The fact that some chose to evaluate a systems performance based on a set of parameters that may or may not correlate with what you hear or what the designer intended shouldn't be worthy of your ire.
But no matter how you chose to slice this cake there does exist a set of measurements that defines the performance of the systems you like best. And the truth is that those measurements that define your preferences are an objective truth. The fact that you can't define or understand them makes no difference.
These are MY beliefs,
Welcome to the club most of us audiophiles have been using our own ears to chose are components for years.I don't require or ask that anyone else agree with them.
LOL! What do you think this makes you special or different amongst audiophiles? Hardly.I'm postive scientists will one day prove me correct!
One day you may be learn to correlate your preferences with measurements and then you can ride the same high horse of the objectivists you clearly despise.Does your "envy" of those you label as objectivists drive you into these insane missives. Clearly, given the comments you've made in this rant, you want to be them.
Give me rhythm or give me death!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I don't get it Tom? - Don T 13:45:35 11/11/06 (10)
- I'll Attempt To Explain - thetubeguy1954 11:09:38 11/13/06 (9)
- Look..... - Don T 19:07:23 11/13/06 (8)
- This is stated perfectly - kerr 09:34:07 11/14/06 (1)
- I Still Disagree... - thetubeguy1954 13:33:14 11/14/06 (0)
- OK, But... - thetubeguy1954 08:55:07 11/14/06 (5)
- Re: OK, But... - Don T 14:48:13 11/14/06 (4)
- I'll Try Once Again - thetubeguy1954 07:39:20 11/15/06 (3)
- Re: I'll Try Once Again - Don T 17:59:46 11/15/06 (2)
- Bye-Bye Don - thetubeguy1954 10:44:14 11/16/06 (1)
- Tom, Tom, Tom....... - Don T 07:56:23 11/17/06 (0)