James Randi extends the million dollar challenge

ka7niq

dorokusai wrote: »

Yea, RCA vs DIN worked out great as I see a huge DIN market. Do you have a link to Mr. Walkers' comments?

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/vol0303/vol0303.html#Cable%20Tales

ka7niq

treitz3 wrote: »

You'll convince us one day! :rolleyes:

Who else do you know? Where else have you been? You are our Daddy, please show us the way.

Treitz, I have been instructed to report any verbally abusive posts right to Polk.
This makes number 4 for you in one day, since I have been back.
I have NOT reported anyone yet, but if this keeps up I will.
This goes for you, or anyone else, moderators included.
Contrary to what you might believe, this is not you and your friends personal forum.
It is a Polk Forum for all Polk customers and fans, even those you do not like or agree with.

treitz3

Sorry Daddy.

I was just referring to the other posts you have made [verbally abusive or not, in this thread and others.....] and responding with my point of view. How 'bout looking up the topic of the thread and staying on it? That cool?

ka7niq

treitz3 wrote: »

Sorry Daddy.

I was just referring to the other posts you have made [verbally abusive or not, in this thread and others.....] and responding with my point of view. How 'bout looking up the topic of the thread and staying on it? That cool?

You can disagree with someone w/o a personal attack and name calling.
Just stop, and all will be well.

hearingimpared

ka7niq wrote: »

You can disagree with someone w/o a personal attack and name calling.
Just stop, and all will be well.

This from a guy who has made it a personal career here to stir up **** storms using both monikers.

F1nut

Can't you feel the love?

XOXO,
Your huckleberry

shadowofnight

hearingimpared wrote: »

This from a guy who has made it a personal career here to stir up **** storms using both monikers.

Cmon Joe, quit using them there big fancy words in these threads...we have all been to the zoo a time or two and seen them there monikers.

F1nut

ka7niq wrote: »

Treitz, I have been instructed to report any verbally abusive posts right to Polk.
This makes number 4 for you in one day, since I have been back.
I have NOT reported anyone yet, but if this keeps up I will.
This goes for you, or anyone else, moderators included.
Contrary to what you might believe, this is not you and your friends personal forum.
It is a Polk Forum for all Polk customers and fans, even those you do not like or agree with.

You mean verbally abusive posts like these?

ka7niq wrote: »

You are SUCH a dumb ****.
My kids car stereo amp is RATED at 3000 watts.
Crowns specs are very conservative, worse case, because they deal with pro sound people, not dumb **** gullible "audiophiles" like you.
Hey dumbass, go buy a Harman Kardon reciever, they have "45 amps current" sometimes more.

http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showpost.php?p=708021&postcount=94

ka7niq wrote: »

I stick up for a local guy named Jesse today.
Someone said he LIKED **** sandwiches :eek:
I said "That is not true, he is allergic to bread" :

Ricardo

ka7niq wrote: »

You can disagree with someone w/o a personal attack and name calling.
Just stop, and all will be well.

I said at some point that everyone deserves a second chance. I take it back.
So you now think you have some kind of power over the rest of us, and now go posting things such as "I am counting, one more and I'll report you..."

Nice strategy to make people like you.

shack

Will someone please post something "verbally abusive" to me? I would like the oppportunity to report something "right to Polk" as well. I don't like to be left out.

Ricardo

Shack, you stink.

steveinaz

...BLAH, BLAH, BLAH....

which is better, Ford or Chevy?

RuSsMaN

Dodge.

Shack, you sir are an ****!

hearingimpared

Shack your are a grey haired, big fat, boogie, take that!

shack

Ricardo wrote:

Shack, you stink.

RuSsMaN wrote:

Shack, you sir are an ****!

hearingimpared wrote:

Shack your are a grey haired, big fat, boogie, take that!

Thanks! You Guys are the GREATEST! Report sent!

F1nut

Did someone mention cookies?

heiney9

shack wrote: »

Will someone please post something "verbally abusive" to me? I would like the oppportunity to report something "right to Polk" as well. I don't like to be left out.

Where do I apply to be a list tattler? Do I get paid? Do I get some kind of special uniform and a taser? I'm only available certain hours as I do have another full time job.............................and oh yeah,,,,,,,,a life.

H9

bikezappa

Just to change the subject from cookies.

I am pasting the latest article from the Audio Critic from the Audio Engineering Society.


Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats

Incontrovertible double-blind listening tests prove that the original 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard yields exactly the same two-channel sound quality as the SACD and DVD-A technologies.



In the September 2007 issue of the Journal of the Audio Engineering Society (Volume 55, Number 9), two veteran audio journalists who aren’t professional engineers, E. Brad Meyer and David R. Moran, present a breakthrough paper that contradicts all previous inputs by the engineering community. They prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, with literally hundreds of double-blind listening tests at matched levels, conducted over a period of more than a year, that the two-channel analog output of a high-end SACD/DVD-A player undergoes no audible change when passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz A/D/A processor. That means there’s no audible difference between the original CD standard (“Red Book”) and 24-bit/192-kHz PCM or 1-bit/2.8442-MHz DSD.

Please note that this is not just a disagreement with the cloud-cuckoo-land audiophiles but also with the highest engineering authorities, such as the formidable J. Robert Stuart of England’s Meridian Audio and others with similar credentials. That the Meyer-Moran tests leave no room for continued disagreements is an occasion for the most delicious Schadenfreude on the part of electronic soundalike advocates like yours truly. I stated my suspicions that SACD was no improvement over CD seven years ago, in my review of the first Sony SACD player, the SCD-1, in Issue No. 26 of The Audio Critic (downloadable from this website). I could hear no difference between the CD and SACD layers of the same disc when stopping the player and switching over, instant toggling between the two layers being impossible.

Now, Meyer and Moran are careful to point out that the new hi-rez formats generally sound better than standard CDs, but not because the processing technology is superior. The hi-rez discs are aimed at a more sophisticated market, and therefore the recording sessions and production techniques tend to be more sophisticated, more puristic, in terms of microphoning, compression, editing, etc. The use of a standard 16-bit/44.1-kHz processor as a “bottleneck” in the Meyer-Moran tests eliminated this concern. Comparing the CD and SACD layers of the same disc also eliminates it.

It should also be pointed out that more bits and a higher sampling rate in recording are still a good thing because they permit a little bit of unavoidable sloppiness, so that you can still comfortably end up with 16-bit dynamics and 20 kHz bandwidth. Meyer and Moran do not say that 14 or 15 bits in a truncated CD are just as good as 20. What they say is that spot-on 16-bit/44.1-kHz processing is as good as it gets, audibly.

Finally, let’s not confuse the Meyer-Moran tests with stereo vs. surround sound comparisons. All of the above has to do with the two channels, left and right, of stereo recordings, nothing else. The musical value of additional surround channels is something I have been wondering about lately, but that’s an altogether different subject.

—Peter Aczel

shack

I stated my suspicions that SACD was no improvement over CD seven years ago, in my review of the first Sony SACD player, the SCD-1, in Issue No. 26 of The Audio Critic (downloadable from this website). I could hear no difference between the CD and SACD layers of the same disc when stopping the player and switching over, instant toggling between the two layers being impossible.

He found an article that supports what he already believed and now it " proves beyond a shadow of a doubt" his position. :rolleyes:

hearingimpared

Whoever was holding the ABX must have been using an Oppo and deaf people as subjects. Anyone who can't hear the difference between straight up redbook and its SACD needs the potatoes cleaned out of their ears. It is like night and day. That's not to say that there are not some excellent redbook CDs out there. They are there but the majority of SACD I've heard kicks the daylight out of redbook.

Now someone come in and say its my imagination or I just want to hear the difference.:rolleyes:

F1nut

....that the two-channel analog output of a high-end SACD/DVD-A player undergoes no audible change when passed through a 16-bit/44.1-kHz A/D/A processor. That means there’s no audible difference between the original CD standard (“Red Book”) and 24-bit/192-kHz PCM or 1-bit/2.8442-MHz DSD.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but what I'm reading is they downconverted DSD to PCM via an PCM only DAC. Yeah, no wonder they sounded the same.

Now, Meyer and Moran are careful to point out that the new hi-rez formats generally sound better than standard CDs, but not because the processing technology is superior. The hi-rez discs are aimed at a more sophisticated market, and therefore the recording sessions and production techniques tend to be more sophisticated, more puristic, in terms of microphoning, compression, editing, etc. The use of a standard 16-bit/44.1-kHz processor as a “bottleneck” in the Meyer-Moran tests eliminated this concern. Comparing the CD and SACD layers of the same disc also eliminates it.

I've got news for those boys. Most SACD's are made from the original analog master tapes, done years before DSD came about, using old technology.

Bottleneck is right. The only thing they have proven is that downconverting DSD to PCM is a no-no for sound quality. As for the last sentence, that's laughable.

My conclusion is that the entire article and it findings should be dismissed outright as the basis of their tests are flawed.

madmax

bikezappa wrote: »

Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats

Incontrovertible double-blind listening tests prove that the original 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard yields exactly the same two-channel sound quality as the SACD and DVD-A technologies.

Well then, I guess that proves it.
madmax

heiney9

Meyer and Moran do not say that 14 or 15 bits in a truncated CD are just as good as 20. What they say is that spot-on 16-bit/44.1-kHz processing is as good as it gets, audibly.

The hi-rez discs are aimed at a more sophisticated market, and therefore the recording sessions and production techniques tend to be more sophisticated, more puristic, in terms of microphoning, compression, editing, etc. The use of a standard 16-bit/44.1-kHz processor as a “bottleneck” in the Meyer-Moran tests eliminated this concern.

This is certainly plausible and does make some sense to a point. This is sort of what I've been saying all along. Stellar redbook sounds damn good and can be the same or even superior to mediocre SACD.

Problem is there are too many variables to make an absolute statement that one is absolutely better than the other everytime.

H9

treitz3

bikezappa wrote:

Proven: Good Old Redbook CD Sounds the Same as the Hi-Rez Formats

Incontrovertible double-blind listening tests prove that the original 16-bit/44.1-kHz CD standard yields exactly the same two-channel sound quality as the SACD and DVD-A technologies.

Already dismissing other things they have said, even though there experience may be impressive, this has got to be the most incredibly ridiculous and misleading statement I have heard lately in the audio world.

They can [and the folks that might agree with this statement] make up any excuse, reason, situation, whatever they want. It simply is not true.

I don't understand why some folks, especially when in the world of audio reproduction make such BS statements. Why? Are they getting money for it? WTF is the advantage of announcing a lie? What is the benefit to them?

If anybody buys into this crap, your audiophile card will be immediately revoked, never to be returned again. What a crock.

Somebody inform them that I have a bridge for sale.

F1nut

Sona wrote: »

Shall I send some over to the penthouse suite at the Mars?

OK

mrbigbluelight

ka7niq wrote: »

Treitz, I have been instructed to report any verbally abusive posts right to Polk.
This makes number 4 for you in one day, since I have been back.
I have NOT reported anyone yet, but if this keeps up I will.
This goes for you, or anyone else, moderators included.
Contrary to what you might believe, this is not you and your friends personal forum.
It is a Polk Forum for all Polk customers and fans, even those you do not like or agree with.

My post of a few days ago:
http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showpost.php?p=712111&postcount=35

"I went back and read some of his posts and, from what I read, his posts weren't that bad.
I sure didn't read all of them, or even a majority of them, but they didn't seem too bad.
As long as his posts didn't fall into the basement (more suited for Bensbargains than Club Polk) and he wasn't threatening anyone, than I have to admit that, within reason, the loose cannon character can be pretty entertaining.
But than I'm the guy who thinks Eddie Haskell would make a good friend.
"

Well ....... ........ uhm ....... ....... I guess the only thing I can say is:

I watched Eddie Haskell, I listened to Eddie Haskell, and you, sir, are no Eddie Haskell !!

I strictly mean that in a constructive, non-abusive, forward-looking, constructive way.
Not in a bad, you-can-chew-the-elastic-out-of-my-skivies-with-your-threats, regressive, negative way.

No, don't think that.

But, as for Shack ! Well, he ...... uh ..... he ...... picks his nose !

And eats his boogars !!!

:eek: :eek: :eek:

reeltrouble1

Why does the word social misfit keep rolling through my mind?????

RT1