32
by tmidgett_Archive
>>Fair enough on the ballerina advantages, I can see your point. My NAD LP player came with kinda-pointy rubber ones, but I just thought it would be silly on a CD player component, since it's digital data being read from a pretty forgiving source rather than an analog vibration-based signal which is easily altered by me walking around in my heavy shoes Smile
stewie, you are correct in your thinking
the argument in favor of doing this kind of jazz is that vibration causes the laser in the cd player to mistrack, introducing errors into the datastream, which corrupt the audio qual, blah blah
personally, i think it's a bunch of crap
something like a quarter of the bits written to a cd are redundant information, used specifically to repair the (many) errors any old cd has in its data
to get into interpolation of data, the cd has to either be scratched, or the mechanism has to be mistracking pretty significantly for some other reason
if you actually put the cd player on the floor, you might get into this territory
but if it's on a shelf, save your money
no one EVER carefully A/Bs this shit
>>Does it really make that much of a difference, or is it one of those "teeny tweaks"? Now I'm interested. Maybe I shouldn't scoff at wealthy audiophiles after all...I guess it was his claim that he could "really hear the difference" that made me a little suspicious.
he should do a blind ABX test
i like these a lot
here's an audio sample of A, here's a sample of B
now here's X. is this A or B? you can listen to A and/or B again, compared to X, at this point.
here's another X. A or B?
do that about 20 times, and you get an idea of what you can and cannot hear
they aren't simple tests to set up, and someone is bound to complain that one cord is 1/10 of an inch longer or ten days older than another, so who knows how easy it is to convince this way
