10 biggest lies / Audio

[Dude111]

Quite interesting!

http://web.archive.org/web/200402012...nAudioLies.pdf

[Kamakiri]

That would start a riot on AK

[Celt]

I'm sure it already has in the past.

[Sandy G]

Never would load for me...This super fantastic Winblows 8 Puter don't do PDFs, for some reason...And DON'T try to offer me fixes, I'm too stupid-And stubborn-to try & use 'em..

[rpm1200]

I have been a Peter Aczel / The Audio Critic fan for many years. He is still at it here: http://www.theaudiocritic.com/plog/

[Dangler]

Originally Posted by Sandy G

Never would load for me...This super fantastic Winblows 8 Puter don't do PDFs, for some reason...And DON'T try to offer me fixes, I'm too stupid-And stubborn-to try & use 'em..

Same here, Sandy. Oh well.

[zenith2134]

Woah, woah woah--So burn-in is not real?!

[snelson903]

i see nothing ! no load

[Username1]

Its pretty entertaining, I had often visited the ultra high end shops of yesteryear (1980's & 1990's), I use to really love the names Carver attached to their amplifiers and tuners. I think one had a Asymmetrical Charge Coupled Turbo Encabulator enabled Differential Ratio FM detector in the tuner.... Since it was not rebuffed in the list, I assume It surely was real, and very effective. I almost wanted to trade in my Pioneer 50 watt'er for one of those fancy Carver 500 Watters.


It does list the "lies" that tubes are better, and, analog is better, so can you apply all that to tv too....? I know my Black Plastic Sanyo 25" tv makes a better picture than my CTC5 ever could hope to do ever..... But then that's not the point, is it? Its just having an operational antique. Just like no one is going to argue a model T is a better car than a '95 LTD, Its just cool to own a "T".



Sandy, you need the Turbo Encabulator PDF adaptator plugin...... Fer windows 8, naturally.

[Jon A.]

That'll show up any tube-demanding audio snobs.

[Username1]

Originally Posted by KV-1926R

That'll show up any tube-demanding audio snobs.

Well, its all in the eye, ear, mind of the beholder.... A while ago on here, there was a posted color test, most of us took it, and we found either our eyes were off, or, and our monitors were off, or both were off..... Some were lucky and were spot-on. Of course those who were spot-on, had a job where it didn't matter if they had perfect color vision..... I imagine those with absolutely perfect flat hearing just listen to am radio, and those who don't have perfect hearing, have tube stereos claiming they sound best..... Strange how this world works...

[ChrisW6ATV]

Dude111, that you for posting that! I always knew I could terrorize a "golden-ear"-type with the simple phrase "double-blind", but I had not seen their "logic" for not doing such tests! Really laughable.

Originally Posted by snelson903

i see nothing ! no load

Right-click on the link in the first post and pick "Save as", or it might be "Save target as" or something else if you do not use the Firefox browser. That should let you save the file. Then, read it in SumatraPDF or any other PDF program. (I finally gave up on "Adobe Reader" a while back.)

[Dude111]

Originally Posted by Username1

It does list the "lies" that tubes are better, and, analog is better, so can you apply all that to tv too....?

Thats one thing I disagree with: ANALOG IS BETTER AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN

[Jon A.]

I especially like the part in #4 about the "special insights" gained by not matching levels and peeking at nameplates.

[zenith2134]

Evaluating Hi-Fi gear is never going to be an objective thing. MAYBE if you had a specially-commissioned production runs of preamps, amps, and speakers which were identical to the last degree in terms of component matching & build. We all know how hard it is to produce this in reality. On paper the theory holds up but there will be miniscule differences in the resistances, soldering quality, capacitor leakage rates, semiconductor current draws and operator misadjustment.

Not to mention room treatments or speaker positioning criteria.