So you think old or retired or deaf guys are worse than porno-spammers.Perhaps you might consider re-reading what I wrote.
porno-spammer is the group of participants that find it necessary to spendThe only thing more irritating to read on this board than the occasional
whole threads making jokes about audiophiles. An informative discussion re:
black beauty caps and the comment that Stan sold them to some audiophile
starts the whole yuk yuk about oxygen free copper yuk yuk etc. etc. I feel
like I'm on a board with a bunch of old retired deaf guys debating if there
there really is such a thing as sound.
My complaint (which I now regret) is against the practice of making jokes
about audiophiles. Perhaps I was not clear in my analogy which was really
not intended to disparage the age, the work status, or the hearing accuity
of anyone on this board. The point was that just because someone is not able
to perceive something himself (deaf) does not necessarily mean that it
doesn't exist (sound). My sincere apologies go out to every member of this
group who was hurt my my post. I should have been more careful and
Let me again clarify: There was nothing offensive whatsoever about Stan's
original post about unloading the black beauty caps on some
audiophile --Caveat Emptor (I would never consider using such a junky cap in
any piece of audio gear, but that's another story). My complaint was the
round of jokes that followed about the oxygen free wire etc. all of which
have been told many times before and seem to me to happen any time the word
"audiophile" appears in any post in any context. The reason those jokes
bugged me is because of the underlying viewpoint that everything
"audiophile" is bunk and unscientific and medicine show etc. Some of it
is-- some of it isn't.
I love a good joke too, the one about the vacuum-tube life support machine
had me doubled over laughing for 5 minutes. I will have to leave
instructions not to put me on one, though, in case it were to develop a
heater to cathode short and take me blissfully away.
ehsjr wrote:You assume wrong. Although my latest hearing test shows I have no
significant hearing losses other than those that naturally occur with age (I
am 51), I would not consider myself an "Audiophile". I was serious that
the only working "stereo" I own is my boombox. I do, however, design and
build and service and modify equipment that is used to make "audiophile"
quality recordings that my "audiophile" clients enjoy. (Cobbler's children
have no shoes.)
Many of my clients listen for a living. They own private high-end recording
studios and they work really hard to make recordings that are
I can usually hear the differences that my circuit modifications make, but
they ALWAYS can.
What kind (and cost) of instrumentationI have read these two questions about 10 times and I still am not sure what
you are asking, but I will try to give some insight from my point of view.
I can tell a lot about a piece of analog gear by looking at its square wave
response on a scope. It shows low frequency rolloffs, high frequency
bandwith, overshoot and ringing of circuits and transformers, group delay
problems. Fixing the circuitry so it passes clean square waves is my first
start to making equipment sound better. Cost is that of a decent square
wave generator and a good scope.
Audio Precision System One or System 2 are the industry standard audio
measurement tools for thd, intermod distortion and a host of other
measurements. Cost depends on options, but figure between 10 and 20 thousand
dollars. I don't have one.
Some of the problems that people hear turn out to be dynamic problems like
overload recovery latch-ups, power amp current limiting weirdnesses and
other things that are really hard to find with any kind of conventional
Jitter is a serious problem in Digital audio. Measuring and mimimizing it
goes a long way to making the sound better. There are various ways to
measure jitter and the people on this board have much more knowledge about
it than I do.