Dear me! jjj. Have you been smoking something again??
It's widely recognised, if there is any credence to the benefits of oxygen-free copper interconnects, and other exotic formulations that cost an obscene amount of money, the audible improvements in sound quality are very, very subtle indeed.
Says the man who argues endlessly about differences in minute amounts of differences between various sensors and the like. And pointlessly as it'll make no difference to your output from what I've seen of it.
Widely recognized! By whom?
Anecdotal evidence such as you've provided above is basically worthless without full details of the circumstances. People who specialise in getting objective assessments of the audible differences between hi fi equipment, arrange the listening environment very carefully. The comparisons have to be made within a small time frame, to avoid as much as possible changes in mood of the listener. It also helps to use a recording with which the listener is very familiar, is aware of every nuance. It is also essential of course that the listener is not aware of which equipment is in use at any given time.
Do you simply assume every one else on the planet is a complete moron? And that no-one is as informed as you seem to think you are.
Visiting your friend on one occasion and listening to a piece of music whilst in a particular mood, and having smoked a certain number of joints, then visiting your friend a few days or a few weeks later, and listening to a different (or even the same) piece of music, having smoked a different number of joints and being in a different mood, and declaring that the music sounds better, is fine. I'm happy for you.
Your repeated and tedious insinuations that I post or experience things as I do due to my drug addled nature is beginning to piss me off. I don't even drink alchohol or smoke legal cigarettes and I find drug users incredibly boring.
Also my friend and I shared a house, so I saw him every day whether I wanted to or not. And immediately after admitting his new purchase he swapped back between the old and new leads and we listened again. And I believe I turned my back, so I didn't know which he was using. I have a bacground in science and understand how good experiment protocol. I also have a selection of tunes that are specifically chosen to test various attributes of hi-fi kit. And the difference in sound quality between equipment is most certainly noticable. I've listened to tracks on high end kit that I've heard on merely expensive kit and you can hear so much more information. It's like using a higher MP camera and seeing more detail due to the extra resolution.
You talk such an an awful lot of shit at times and presume even more nonsense that has no basis in reality and then have the audacity to accuse others of drug use! Maybe you are simply describing your own experiences and projecting onto others. Guess what? Making assumptions only mades you look stupid.
But to declare that difference is due to the upgraded phono cables is just farcical .
No it's not. I seem to be sensitive to sound quality and will often notice there is an issue when other are oblivious. Same thing with visual quality and partly why I'm good at my job. I thought it seemed a bit far fetched, that changing cables could make any difference, but I certainly noticed it.
Never heard that before. Where did you see that? On this forum? I know that Michael did a comparison between the Canon G10 and the Phase P45+ and made A3+ size prints which he showed to a number of experienced photographers who couldn't tell the difference. Is this what you are referring to?
No!
Try reading posts more carefully. I'm talking about the average person who cannot tell the difference between a 50D's shots and a Phase65+. Not professional photographers.
Something I find very annoying is when people who cannot discern differences, will never admit it may be them who cannot tell the difference and will insist through all sorts of dreadful reasoning, that there is on fact no difference.
I've DJed Latin music and it's very tedious when ignorant people bang on about how all Latin music sounds the same. Just like all dance music , all european music, all Blues and all hip hop sounds the same, when it's obvious to anyone with half a brain, that that cannot possibly be true. If I wander around Beijing everyone will sound the same to me, no matter if they are discussing the weather or how to do open heart surgery. Even if they may be speaking Hokkian, Mandarin or Cantonese I won't know and local accents will certainly not be discernable when I cannot even tell languages apart.
To many Americans, all Brits sound much the same though they may notice a stong Welsh, Irish or Scottish accent. Yet many people can tell exactly what town people are from in their local area, as the differences in even the various Yorkshire or Welsh accents are very noticable to the trained ear. By trained, I mean having heard them a lot through simply living in area.
I think we all understand that at a size larger than A3+, the P45+ would identify itself, and if the nature of the subject were different, the smoother tonality of the P45 would have probably been apparent even at the the A3+ size, with icebergs at the Antartic, for example, or creamy smooth-skinned models.
Most of the population would simply not notice any difference. Doesn't mean there isn't any. Most people don't even notice if a film is shown out of focus at the cinema.
Michael just ordered a 65+, despite owning a 45+, because even at that silly high level of quality there is a noticable difference to those who care.
