10 Biggest Lies in Audio

[matbhuvi]

The article 10 Biggest Lies in Audio is a nice read from theaudiocritic. Read it if you haven't read before.

1. The cable lie
2. The Vacuum tube lie
3. The Antidigital lie
4. The listening test lie
5. The feedback lie
6. The Burn-in lie
7. The Biwiring lie
8. The Power Conditioner lie
9. The CD treatment lie
10. The Golden ear lie

 

[ajay124]

From the article:

Todays best digital recordings are the best recordings ever made

I agree.

 

[entsurgeon]

READ JUST ONE PARA SO FAR.... IN 30 SECS.
last point says:
"Thus, if a loudspeaker has a huge
dip at 3 kHz, it will not sound like
one with flat response to any ear,
golden or tin, but only the experienced ear will quickly identify the
problem."
Well.... he just beutifully convinced us that theres no black color in the world, only the stuff that absorbs all the colors of visible spectrum and reflect none are percieved as black.

 

[ranjeetrain]

There is no such thing as a BIG lie. All lies are lies. Only how often you use them and to what effect makes them bigger or smaller. Hifi industry is full of lies. Some are used less often and some more often. Some result in robbing you of less money, others rob you of lots.

Cables are the worst offenders. Burn-in is next. People charging ridiculous amounts to 'condition' cable. Now those are the kinds of things that make it a sad affair, that people can actually take you for such a fool that you would pay them for such a service. Sadly, a large number of us get bought in by these thugs.

 

[murali]

Better keep the following (written by Charles Hansen of Ayre, a well-respected figure in audio circles) also in mind:

"The thing that you are forgetting is that there were essentially *two* different versions of "The Audio Critic".

When Peter first founded it, it was probably the best magazine around because it combined critical listening with critical technical and design analysis. Sort of like a concise and readable IAR (instead of those boringly long and repetitive articles, and without the self-congratulatory undertones).

It was only after his speaker manufacturing fiasco that he lost his hearing. (Maybe he took too much oxycontin, like Rush Limbaugh!) After a hiatus (it seems like it was around a year or so), the reborn "Audio Critic" was a completely different animal -- tedious, irrelevant, and pompous to the point of absurdity.

When I read Messenger's column I simply assumed that he was referring to the original "Audio Critic". I can't imagine that they are planning to introduce a tedious, irrelevant, and pompous magazine. The only problem is that it will cost US subscribers $140 or so to find out..."
cheers.
murali

 

[sbg]

The article 10 Biggest Lies in Audio is a nice read from theaudiocritic. Read it if you haven't read before.

1. The cable lie
2. The Vacuum tube lie
3. The Antidigital lie
4. The listening test lie
5. The feedback lie
6. The Burn-in lie
7. The Biwiring lie
8. The Power Conditioner lie
9. The CD treatment lie
10. The Golden ear lie

Yes matbhuvi, this has been discussed earlier in here, let me consolidate some of the threads on this subject - a simple search got me these links

http://www.hifivision.com/av-lounge/1607-interesting-read.html

http://www.hifivision.com/introductions/1700-ten-biggest-lies-audio.html

http://www.hifivision.com/av-lounge/4674-ten-biggest-lies-audio-industry.html

http://www.hifivision.com/av-lounge/311-have-you-read.html

Intersting Read! indeed.

 

[Audiodoc]

I agree to most are lies except that I believe in "burn in of speakers" as they are electromechanical devices and it takes some time to make the diaphragm move optimally. Electronics esp. capacitors may show some change but I don't think that it is quite subtle.

 

[srinisundar]

So everybody posted here are going to use only cheapo cables that is technically listed in the spec in the catalog.

Let me explain where the lie started "in the catalog" itself. The man wrote it by sitting in the wall and named it "Cato-log". If any mistake happen he will jump on to other side and will tell there is printing mistake... If any praise happen he will jump in and take all the showers and money poured in.. So all cables are hit and run.

 

[matbhuvi]

I agree to most are lies except that I believe in "burn in of speakers" as they are electromechanical devices and it takes some time to make the diaphragm move optimally. Electronics esp. capacitors may show some change but I don't think that it is quite subtle.

the article agrees with burn in of speakers. It doesn't agree with burn in of cables, electronic devices (like CD player, amps etc)

 

[jls001]

Aren' there middle grounds in audio? This article reads like an extended rant, making clever use of language - over which the writer seems to have a great command - to bolster his points of view.

 

[doors666]

There is no such thing as a BIG lie. All lies are lies. Only how often you use them and to what effect makes them bigger or smaller. Hifi industry is full of lies. Some are used less often and some more often. Some result in robbing you of less money, others rob you of lots.

sure there is... tomato is a vegetable is a small lie. A raja is an honest man is a big lie:lol:

 

[matbhuvi]

Yes matbhuvi, this has been discussed earlier in here, let me consolidate some of the threads on this subject - a simple search got me these links

http://www.hifivision.com/av-lounge/1607-interesting-read.html

http://www.hifivision.com/introductions/1700-ten-biggest-lies-audio.html

http://www.hifivision.com/av-lounge/4674-ten-biggest-lies-audio-industry.html

http://www.hifivision.com/av-lounge/311-have-you-read.html

Intersting Read! indeed.

Aghh..the topic has been discussed in 2007, 2008 and 2009. No one has discussed in last 2010, 2011 and 2012 :indifferent14:

..kidding..thanks for pointing my mistake.

 

[koushik]

I agree to most are lies except that I believe in "burn in of speakers" as they are electromechanical devices and it takes some time to make the diaphragm move optimally. Electronics esp. capacitors may show some change but I don't think that it is quite subtle.

I agree with this. The speaker burn-in is not a myth by any means. The diaphragm does free-up after some time. They stay factory stiff for a couple of days or longer and cone starts moving more thus producing better sound.

Being an engineer I can assure you this goes same with capacitor's di-electric material which change their characteristic to some extent after some charges flow through them

 

[haisaikat]

and this one on tubes.. I think some of the trube owners should comment, I am not taking this on face value

Whats wrong with tubes?
Nothing, really. Theres nothing wrong
with gold teeth, either, even for upper
incisors (that Mideastern grin); its just
that modern dentistry offers more attractive
options. Whatever vacuum
tubes can do in a piece of audio equipment,
solid-state devices can do better,
at lower cost, with greater reliability.
Even the worlds best-designed tube
amplifier will have higher distortion
than an equally well-designed transistor
amplifier and will almost certainly need
more servicing (tube replacements,
rebiasing, etc.) during its lifetime. (Idiotic
designs such as 8-watt single-ended
triode amplifiers are of course exempt,
by default, from such comparisons since
they have no solid-state counterpart.)

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

No 11, the jitter lie.

But all this stuff is like presenting the religious with a perfectly-reasoned document saying that there is no god*. It will have no effect whatsoever.

Do not try to teach a hippopotamus to sing. It is a waste of time, and only annoys the hippopotamus.




*Or, of course, the other way around

 

[ajay124]

Aren't there middle grounds in audio? This article reads like an extended rant, making clever use of language - over which the writer seems to have a great command - to bolster his points of view.

Joshua

A balanced and rational argument should be able to portray both sides of the picture. Unfortunately it rarely happens as our ego's and hardened opinions come in the way. It is so difficult to admit that we may be wrong about something.

This article is the personal opinion of the writer and not a universal truth. But readers tend to pick and highlight facts which coincide with their beliefs and ignore those which contradict them. I read the article and highlighted the writers 'opinion' that modern digital recordings are better than analogue recordings. Because I opted for compact discs. But folks who prefer vinyl would reject the writers opinion. Truth is subjective. It varies from person to person

 

[doors666]

No 11, the jitter lie.

But all this stuff is like presenting the religious with a perfectly-reasoned document saying that there is no god*. It will have no effect whatsoever.

Do not try to teach a hippopotamus to sing. It is a waste of time, and only annoys the hippopotamus.




*Or, of course, the other way around

Hmmm... hippo too... I thought it was the pig who couldnt sing:lol:

 

[jls001]

Whats wrong with tubes?

The foremost thing that is wrong with tubes is the prodigious amount of heat they generate.

Second probably is that the tubes need replacement after some 2000-3000 hours of usage. And they better be matched pairs! And some implementations need careful biasing, though there definitely are those that have auto biasing.

Whatever vacuum tubes can do in a piece of audio equipment, solid-state devices can do better, at lower cost, with greater reliability.

Agreed with lower cost part. Agreed if greater reliability means longer life. So if solid state devices are so great, why is it that a well-made solid state device is often compared to a tubed device? Why does tube gear remain the standard bearer in midrange palpability, musicality and warmth?

Even the worlds best-designed tube amplifier will have higher distortion than an equally well-designed transistor amplifier and will almost certainly need more servicing (tube replacements, rebiasing, etc.) during its lifetime. (Idiotic designs such as 8-watt single-ended triode amplifiers are of course exempt, by default, from such comparisons since they have no solid-state counterpart.)

Agreed that generally tubed gears have higher distortions compared to solid state gear. Consider the Audio Note Jinro integrated tubed amp costing more than $28K with a published distortion figure >5%.

I think the more relevant question to answer is whether the absence of distortion, or its presence in vanishingly low quantity, measurable only in parts per million (as some well made solid state amps and preamps are), makes the solid state equipped device superior. Does excellent measured performance translate to musicality?

Why the rant about 8W SETs? I have heard 3W ones and they sound really beautiful.

 

[ranjeetrain]

<editing out>

 

[Hiten]

The article 10 Biggest Lies in Audio is a nice read from theaudiocritic. Read it if you haven't read before.

1. The cable lie
2. The Vacuum tube lie
3. The Antidigital lie
4. The listening test lie
5. The feedback lie
6. The Burn-in lie
7. The Biwiring lie
8. The Power Conditioner lie
9. The CD treatment lie
10. The Golden ear lie

matbhuvi - Its twelve years old article. And who are we to oppose if someone says I rubbed the snake oil on the 75,648 Rs. cable and it made difference. No point in discussing any 10 points. The biggest lies would be the one we tell ourselves.

Aren' there middle grounds in audio?

Ofcourse there is middle ground. Which is called basics.
But few people venture there either for being too technical -or- impedance matching is no fun discussing as soundstage improvement of non vibrating solid state amplifier.
Regards