In Reply to: What Constitutes Accurate Musical Replication? posted by thetubeguy1954 on April 19, 2007 at 12:10:31:
These are not two different beliefs, simply two different definitions.One is indicated by the image of a straight wire with gain, that the amplified signal is so very similar to the input signal that no difference can be heard.
The other is that the final result should sound like the real thing, and it really does take more to do that at home than a mere amplifier and a stereo system.
TG54
"Finally for Pat D who seems to need the blatantly obvious explained to him, when listening to amps it is required that a source, wires and speakers be used. I cannot believe anyone needs to be told this, but sadly Pat D does, or else he'll comment on how can an amp make a sound by itself!"Well, why not just say that? Attributing pyschoacoustic accuracy to a mere power amplifier just confuses communication. The recording, the speakers, the room acoustics, and signal processing are more critical than which amplifier is used, as long as the amplifier is suitable.
I have linked to an article by Wes Philips on a system worked up by jj when he was with AT & T.
____________________________________________________
"Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."
------Heraclitus of Ephesis (fl. 504-500 BC), trans. Wheelwright.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Technical vs. psychoacoustic accuracy - Pat D 14:18:17 04/19/07 (26)
- Re: Technical vs. psychoacoustic accuracy - morricab 14:12:44 04/21/07 (1)
- No such thing as accuracy... - mkuller 12:00:40 04/23/07 (0)
- My $0.02..... - Todd Krieger 12:20:31 04/20/07 (1)
- Re: My $0.02..... - Pat D 20:14:09 04/20/07 (0)
- Isn't the amplifier - E-Stat 14:43:02 04/19/07 (21)
- Re: Isn't the amplifier - Pat D 14:59:39 04/19/07 (20)
- Amplifier accuracy... - mkuller 10:22:55 04/20/07 (10)
- Insufficient data. (nt) - Pat D 10:25:28 04/20/07 (9)
- Ahh, that's the slippery PatD we're used to... - mkuller 10:27:54 04/20/07 (8)
- In your example, amps with 3% and 5% distortion ain't accurate. (nt) - Pat D 19:33:59 04/20/07 (5)
- It was merely.... - mkuller 10:32:33 04/21/07 (4)
- On your changed question, again, insufficient data. - Pat D 10:57:20 04/21/07 (3)
- Exactly my point... - mkuller 10:08:25 04/23/07 (1)
- Not really. - Pat D 16:30:43 04/23/07 (0)
- Amplifying or Clarifying A Question Is Changing It To Pat D (nt) - thetubeguy1954 09:05:06 04/23/07 (0)
- Found his teflon pills (nt) - E-Stat 11:23:14 04/20/07 (0)
- How True... - thetubeguy1954 10:47:39 04/20/07 (0)
- I am at once agog, baffled, befuddled, surprised, and utterly amazed !!! - E-Stat 15:44:23 04/19/07 (8)
- Re: I am at once agog, baffled, befuddled, surprised, and utterly amazed !!! - thetubeguy1954 09:37:20 04/20/07 (7)
- Re: I am at once agog, baffled, befuddled, surprised, and utterly amazed !!! - Pat D 10:22:39 04/20/07 (6)
- Dang! - kerr 11:43:58 04/20/07 (0)
- Teflon Pat D Is Back Tracking From What He's Said Yet Once Again! - thetubeguy1954 11:34:39 04/20/07 (4)
- The answers are pretty simple: why do you avoid them? - Pat D 15:01:17 04/20/07 (3)
- Pat D The Teflon King Continues To Avoid Answering 2 Simple Questions... - thetubeguy1954 17:37:46 04/20/07 (2)
- Which questions am I supposed to take from your rambling posts? - Pat D 20:04:14 04/20/07 (1)
- More Teflon Responses From Slippery Pat D - thetubeguy1954 08:57:42 04/23/07 (0)