Re: Audiophilia (was Re: Do Microsoft’s Copilot+ PCs Require Linux?)

On 2024-05-25, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On Fri, 24 May 2024 23:45:36 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>

On 24 May 2024 22:56:10 GMT, rbowman wrote:
 

I remember audiophiles from back in the day. They could hook up an o-

scope

and prove their system was reproducing 22000 Hz signals flawlessly. I
suppose dogs appreciated it.

 
So the ones you met would actually *trust* oscilloscopes? Because the
“true” audiophile didn’t like CDs because they could “hear the gaps
between the samples”. You could hook an oscilloscope up to the audio
outputs from your CD or DVD player and show that it was producing
flawless continuous waveforms, but that wasn’t enough for them: their
ears were hearing things that no mere electrical signal could reproduce!

>
CDs? Who said anything about that digital crap? I'm talking about an era
with 20 lb turntables with built in strobe rings so you could get the
speed exactly right. Styli cut from diamonds mined by virgins in South
Africa. Tone arms with verniers on the counterweights so you could get the
tracking force exactly right. Built in spirit levels in case the world was
tilting.  Pure analog, baby. 

>
People tell me you can't tell the difference between analog and digital, but
I don't necessarily believe them. To me (at least when I had ears) analog
seemed more "full." (If that makes any sense.)
>

https://www.audio-technica.com/en-us/at-lp7
>
That's a modern day version. Even those new-fangled cassette things had to
prove their worth.
>
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/749019831/the-voice-that-shattered-glass

>
I had a nice Technics turn table in the day with a decent quality Shure
stylus. Along with with my mid-to-lower end Panasonic stereo system it
sounded pretty dang good.