An interesting read

Hi All,

I have come across an interesting article in Audio Critic magazine and sharing the link for you.

Article Name: The 10 biggest lies in Audio

Regards,
Muthusami. S

Hi Muthusamy

Read the article , but i couldnt agree with most of the points , the guy who has written the article should be a novice in the audio field , Many people here will agree that their system sounds great after the burn in time , and after good quality cables etc etc., i dont know how the author of this article is making such a comment.,

thanks for the article.

david.

I choose to ignore any such articles. Anyone who can't hear the difference between tubes and solid state is either tone deaf or has a gun pointed at his forehead.

About cables... if anyone doubts that cables make a difference, please come visit my place sometime and I'll give you a demo .

HAHAHA MUthuswamy these kind of articles generally lead to some fireworks!!

Sadly most of the fiery delhi guys are no longer active else we would have had some explosive arguments about cables, power cords, conditioners, biwiring ............ etc.

Interesting read though.
Regards

a deaf person has written an article so we should not take this seriously.,

mohan

My first post on this forum, so hello to all as a starting line....

Actually, I found most of the article quite practical. The language was harsh at times but I certainly would not call the author deaf. I think he comes across more as someone frustrated with the state of things in audio, rather than someone not well-informed.
It would be informative (if we're interested) to go through each of his sections one by one and see where all our opinions differ. For e.g. Section 9 on CD treatment makes sense to me. Digital information needs a simple RC filter to decipher the 0's and 1's. Cleaning a very dirty CD surface may help the lens pick out the dents better. But there is no effect on a clean, pristine CD that has been cared for well.
I also think that us listeners get used to the sound of our equipment, rather than the equipment 'breaking in' and we mistake that for improvement in quality. However, as the author points out, loudspeaker drivers do sound different, since mechanical parameters change over use considerably more than electrical ones.
The section on biwiring is something I can comment on after analysing a typical crossover network later. However, no RLC network is truly linear (even in its operating conditions) so effects of biwiring have to be seen in that light as well...

Hi Ajinkya
First welcome to the forum. You have put across a few valid points about the author such as break in and CD media which I partially agree to. Break in can make a bad speaker good but the effect is much more subtle on other equipment. I also agree to his point that CDs are better than analog atleast in the low-mid end of the market. I'm not sure of 10000$+ cd players or record players as I haven't heard any.

Coming to the point of biwiring - most people notice a difference not because of any special magic of two pairs of wires. The basic reason is the poor quality of the connector between the binding posts. This can cause a negative effect to the sound.

Cables do make a difference to the sound and changing the interconnect between the CD Player/DAC and the preamplifier makes a dramatic difference. This is so large on a revealing system that even some of my non audiophile friends were absolutely convinced by what they heard. A cheap interconnect caused hard clipping of the signal that was completely absent in a high end interconnect.

Finally I was laughing my guts out at the logic the writer presented on the tube vs solid state argument. Anyone who's heard tube electronics will know that tubes sound different from solid state. What someone likes is personal preference though 9 out of 10 people would prefer tube over solid state especially at the preamplifier stage.

Again the reason to tubes sounding better is simple. Surely tubes have way higher distortion figures than solid state electronics. However the thing to note is that almost all of tube distortion is second order while solid state electronics typically have larger higher order distortion. The human ear can't distinguish second order distortion over the actual signal while it is very very sensitive to higher order distortion. This is the basic reason that atleast the low distortion tubes such as 12AX7, 12AU7, 6SN7 are better preamplifier components than solid state. As a power amp, I'd prefer solid state over tube any day as I'm still to hear a tube power amp that I like. The distortion figures of a tube power amp are way higher compared to a solid state power amp. The above theory doesn't hold true.

Hmm...I still dont know what to believe and what to reject; maybe some of them are true lies!

BTW ReignofC -- How are the Ushers doing in your system? I've been on the lookout for monitors with better bass (like the Totem Mani 2 signature) without a compromise on the quality and detail of midrange and treble. Do the Ushers handle all kinds of music well ?

Dear Friends,

I understand most of your points are valid. Since I am a novice to the audio concepts, I was confused after reading that article. That's why shared the link and wanted to know your view points. No offense meant. Thank you very much.

Regards,
Muthusami. S

guys cables make a huge difference .... i dun't agree with that article ..

Kaushik