Ex-"audio consultant" just has to put in 2¢


Interesting range of opinions thus far.. and *yes* there's a
relationship to scopes in all of this, IMhO. At least re test
equipment operation, there are physics-laws + state of the
'mensuration art' which together define what you may expect to "see"
-- and how much of that CRT picture you "believe". (But even there!
re risetime artifacts, delay-line aberrations and such: it is never a
*perfect* representation: just "close".)

As a Marantz, Crown, etc. mini-dealer in the '60s - early '70s, I
imagine I've heard most of the philosophical arguments too: the
physics (not so precise as an engineer-mentation wants to suppose) --
not so fuzzy as an artist might want to argue. (sigh) To me the
final arbiter ever was:

The AR (Acoustic Research) "Live VS Recorded" concerts in these times
of great audio strides. Here the "listenien room" WAS the same exact
site as the live performers inhabited. It was classical music; never
mind one's taste: all the difficult instruments of the orchestra had
to be re-produced! Musicians would play then secretly [cackle]
switch to "pretend mode" as the speakers + electronics took the next

Bottom line: where no one (?) or a very few in audience could come
close to IDing the transitions *correctly* -- THAT is "good
enough". Period.

Now about that chirping 485 I have to do the ESR- capacitor-dance
over; it's a PITA to work on compared to a trusy 545B.. I don't have
anymore :[ (There: scope related, for the CPAs and other Content
Cops™ clucking in the techno-correct peanut gallery.)

Ashton - - a mime is a terrible thing to waste -