|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: yes, your happiness shines through via your sniping... posted by rick5 on March 23, 2004 at 12:06:41:
They amount to, "Some 1-bit converters are/have been of poor quality, therefore SACD sucks." and "DSD requires noise-shaping to work, therefore SACD sucks." Also, "There aren't enough original DSD recordings, therefore SACD sucks." That was the extent of his sophisticated argument. I react to these the same way you might to the 'DVD-A needs a TV' complaint. He would have been better off confining his comments to sound quality.I don't show disdain towards someone who can't distinguish SACD and CD, only those who insist that their subjective experience is objective truth for the rest of us. :-)
Follow Ups:
"I don't show disdain towards someone who can't distinguish SACD and CD, only those who insist that their subjective experience is objective truth for the rest of us. :-)"yes of course, yet can you really say you have explored enough to say with full satisfaction your position is right? I mean, have you tried DVD-A and rejected it or have you merely dismissed it outright as a competing format? That is what most of the SACD brigade has done. I see you as making a judgement about something you haven't even explored. I have DVD-a discs, I purchase them I am evaluating it as a format, just like I am SACD. I find good and bad with both.
This should and needs to be discussed further, not dismissed outright as it often is, actually, as you have espoused in your above posts. "Some old coot that trots out the same old arguments". Easy to attack and hide rather than engage and discuss. Regardless of the technology, I hear what I hear and not every SACD is incredible, not every DVD-a is incredible. Actual critical discussion is needed versus blind obsequience. Uriah Heep is more than just a rock band.
...just that when I was looking to get into hi-rez in early 2001, SACD seemed to have more to offer in both hardware and software. That's still true for me where the software is concerned, although the DVD-A /universal hardware situation has moved closer to the SACD selection.
where in this line: "He also apparently dislikes MC, so at best you folks can have a love/hate relationship with this coot." you slammed his arguments.Frank
but didn't anwer my question.PS old arguments can be very true.
Yes, old arguments can be very true...or NOT. I merely pointed out in the first post, that most DVD-A supporters will have to pick and choose what they like amongst Manley's opinions. I will say though, as a hi-rez digital 'expert'...he sure makes a nice phono stage! :-)
The man has his opinions about stereo and multichannel and about dsd versus pcm.I can keep those two different issues apart. Can you?
We may well both think that he's fairly stodgy and conservative, just in different areas. He makes a great phono stage, all the same! :-)
nt
.
Mitch Margolis designed the Steelhead. I have never been anybody's daughter-in-law.
Clarification and other history lessons here
and here .
I wondered what you were talking about. I don't think he's had much to do with Manley Labs since EveAnna Manley started running it in 1993; according to his bio he retired in 1996. The Steelhead is way newer than that - came out in 2001. I believe Mitch Margolis was the chief designer.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: