Elementary audio quality article

[Dude111]

www.sstage.com/noisy07.htm

Quite a good article and IS QUITE STRONG when telling about HI END audio equiptment!!

I think the earlier stuff IS BETTER for producing better audio (Especially analog) Im very partial to analogue for sure....... The nicest sound ever.... Natural,warm,etc.........


A very good writeup!!

 

[greenhorn]

....not necessarily. There seem to be a few gross oversimplifications in the article

For example, the author says that paper is used only in the cheaper speakers, and all the good ones use exotic stuff. I disagree - the best speakers I've heard all used paper , or some sort of treated paper. I'm not a fan of exotic material speakers for anything but the tweeter - and even for them, I'm quite happy with silk.

Unfortunately, highs, mids and lows each travel at different speeds through networks like crossovers.

What is that supposed to mean?

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Briefly, what 'high end' should mean to you is better sound. Many people also think it means more expensive. Well, there is no denying high end audio can be expensive. But it doesn't have to be.

I guess he's redefining "hifi" ---High Fidelity--- as High End. Probably that is justified, as the word hifi has become degraded to just mean something that produces some sort of music. Many users of the word don't even know its origin, thinking that it means a music-playing machine, rather than something that is designed to reproduce the recorded material accurately.

It's a good, refreshing article about looking beyond the fancy chassis/boxes and the price tags. Or, rather, listening beyond them.

<Crossposted>

There seem to be a few gross oversimplifications in the article

Probably. But it is only short, and that often happens in short articles.