AudioPhiles don't want NEUTRAL, Audiophiles Don't like NEUTRAL (Part Two)

You're not going to convince anyone of anything if you continue using fallacious arguments in an attempt to make your points.

I already addressed the point about the DAC but you ignored it. I know for a fact that I can't hear the difference between average DACs and the original analog signal. So there is no way that I'd be able to hear the difference between a high end DAC and the original analog.

So explain (NOT by using fallacious arguments) what is it about live vinyl playback that you find to be better than needledrops. And explain (NOT by using fallacious arguments) the difference between a needledrop from the same equipment (if I can't hear the difference in the DACs) and live playback.

An example of not using a fallacious argument would be - perhaps you can tell me what to listen for and maybe I will be able to hear it. Instead of using dismissal tactics and attacking my youth and alleged "inexperience".

You claim I refuse to audition a high end system. You don't know what I intend or don't intend to do, or what I have and haven't heard. Which means you are simply speculating and fabricating. Your facts are in error.

 

seriously? Time for you to get a new computer or something. here is a link to a google search on JJ Johnston euphonic colorations. There are multiple links from that search.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp....,cf.osb&fp=799dc676f220bf41&biw=1600&bih=626

And here is his personal web page. I found it by doing a simple google search on JJ Johnston.

http://home.comcast.net/~retired_old_jj/

Now you can email him yourself and ask him about euphonic colorations.

How did you find so many defenitions of ad hominem but not JJ Johnston?

 

Ive found the less experience one has with anything, the more polarized the opinion.

 

Thanks for your elitist, egotistical opinion. Once again, you accomplished nothing by sharing it.

 

I guess you missed the post about the ad hominem. I'll refer you to post #92.

You don't know what experience I have. You're fabricating.

 

Btw, what do you do for a living ACDC? The length of the posts suggest you have a lot of time on your hands..

 

Actually I think most people agree with me. I don't need to accomplish anything. I'm just tired of your infantile tirades.

 

Novel approach.. let the dude basque in the glow of his ignorance and stop replying to him. He's now arguing about argument technique!!

Back to the joys of great audio! (if you can't hear the difference, play somewhere else!)

 

Just for one example I know what experience you have with high end vinyl playback from your postings here. No need for me to fabricate anything.

 

Rules??? We don't need no 'stinkin' rules!

 

The words "dynamic" "range" "vinyl" "euphoric" "colorations" appear nowhere in your link.

Why would I do that? You're the one who brought up this theory that the "euphonic" colorations of vinyl supposedly increase the percevied dynamic range. The burden of proof is on you.

 

I've found the opposite to be true.

None of your business.

Depends on how you define "most people".

I disagree with your opinion that I engage in "infantile tirades".

 

Fallacious arguments are things which the inexperienced youth engage in. I wouldn't expect them from adults who proclaim themselves to be wise and experienced. Unfortunately this thread is riddled with adults that use them.

Or you could try explaining the differences with examples instead of telling those who disagree with your opinions to leave.

 

This is getting tiresome. Here are some actual quotes from JJ which I easily found using the links I provided you with.



"But LP can sound like it has more dynamic range, because of the distortion/loudness growth issues. Likewise, it can have a wider, more complex soundstage for the same reasons. Many LP playback systems do enhancement of the L-R part of the stereo signal due to both stylus beam pivot issues as well as cartridge design issues."


"An LP does, demonstrably, have distortions that sound good. This is not news, this is something long since documented."

To avoid making eroneous claims that suffer from negligent ignorance as an argument against well researched information.

The real question is why would you not seek out such research if you are so willing to put such an effort into this thread?

The burden of research is on anyone who is geniunely interested in finding things out rather than just making things up. I pretty much did all the foot work for you and you still chose to remain willfully ignorant.

And you call my arguments baseless.

 

Depends on how you define "frustrating".

Depends on how you define "conversation".

Depends on how you define "somebody".

Depends on how you define "fabrications".

 

Briefly explain what you listened to and on what gear.

 

Why thank you.. I don't berate anyone elses personal preferences like others in here. I never have nor will I.

 

Getting back to Steve's original post, I've been mulling over this since I bought my Nagaoka MP-110, last month. The 110 is, imo, fairly neutral -- definitely more so than my AT440Mla which is very bright in comparison. But I've mentioned before that I like bright -- no good or bad about it, it's just what I prefer.

But my issue is where to "add" that brightness? Should I use the MP-110 (which has its own benefits like reduced surface noise) and color it later via an EQ, or just let the AT440Mla do its thing? And remember that I also do needle drops so I can EQ at the editing process as well.

Not looking for a response per se, just something I have to work out for myself. Right now I drop with my HD600 headphones (which are fairly netural themselves) so I usually prefer my 440 at that part of the process, unless surface noise forces me to use the 110 instead. But at some point I might need to re-evaluate that. Genre is also a factor, as I defintely prefer bright in pop/rock, but not so much so in jazz/classical.

 

Actually its not uncommon that based on your location in the US you will get different google results based on the same keywords. This is for a verity of reasons, some of which is based on tailoring searches based on what the searcher has searched before, and can also be based on the fact that unknown to the user at the time of search they could be searching an older database index then another user, due to the decentralized nature of google's search index.

So it's always better to just give links to pages you are referring to, instead having them search on google for the topic, because there is no way to know if your google search is on the older database index or theirs. So the results could be very different.

--The Master

 

I have given him direct quotes from the researcher in question and a link to his personal web page that has his contact info.

If asked I will show someone where the bathroom is but I won't hold their junk for them while they pee. there comes a point where some effort has to be made by the other person. What next? Will I have to make a personal phone call and read the content aloud to him? Will JJ himself have to provide access to his proprietary research?

he had no trouble finding mulitple defenitions of ad hominem....

 

Befire I started posting in this forum heavily, I read reports elsewhere on the 'net that people got banned here for just daring to argue a little bit. LOL! This thread puts paid to those complaints. Wow.

Just goes to show that there's a lot of room for opinion here.

 

like i'm about to be. just sit back and watch;

true that. take myself, for instance; i've little-to-no experience whatsoever
with "True Hi-End Hi-Fi" and, as a result? i think semi-vintage PIONEER products are the Cat's total A$$...

 

This quote did not appear on any of the links you provided me with.
I agree that increased distortion at louder volumes causes a perceived increase in dynamic range. I disagree that this sounds "euphoric".

I disagree with this opinion for reasons previously stated.

I agree that it has been throughly documented for a long time that people have the opinion that LPs have distortions which sound good.

I see you modified my quote to make it appear that I said something which I didn't. You are now intentionally engaging in dishonorable debate tactics.

Because it doesn't tell me anything I don't know. All you did was post a quote from somebody who claimed that vinyl increases perceived dynamic range because it distorts more at louder volumes. Which I agree with.

What was there to find out? It seems to me all you're attempting to do at this point is prove that your opinions are factual. Which you are now resorting to doing by dishonestly modifying my quotes.

Prove that I have been "just making things up".

I do not choose to remain willfully ignorant. Why do you think I asked you to post links?

 

I doubt anybody got banned from here simply for arguing. Arguing by itself can be a good thing and often stimulates further discussion. If we all agreed on everything this forum would lose much of it's value to me.

I think what gets people in trouble here is not so much arguing but attitude and a lack of respect for the opinions of others.

 

It was intended to have the same meaning that you gave it in your previous post. So actually, it depends on how you define "frustrating".

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conversation?s=t

con·ver·sa·tion

   /ˌkɒnvərˈseɪʃən/ Show Spelled[kon-ver-sey-shuhn] Show IPA
noun

3.
association or social intercourse

"Somebody", as in, me.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fabrication?s=t
fab·ri·ca·tion

   /ˌfæbrɪˈkeɪʃən/ Show Spelled[fab-ri-key-shuhn] Show IPA
noun 2.
something fabricated, especially an untruthful statement