Happy April Fools Day!! That is if you're reading this on the first day of publication. To show my age, I still look fondly back this time of year to a magazine from yesteryear named Audio which, every April, would have a wonderfully written equipment review from a Professor Lirpa. Lirpa was supposedly from some true-sounding European university and wrote articles about a piece of equipment or some new theory which almost sounded real, but did some amazing thing or worked in such a way that was impossible. Like all great satire, it had enough logic in it to almost be taken as truth.
For the next few months, there would be replies in the Letters column debating the relative possibilities of the instrument. After a couple of years, most readers finally caught on but still the letters would come in debating the merits of the piece or even asking where to obtain it. Believe it or not, not one was a harsh condemnation about the wasted ink or pages not given to appropriate reviews. Imagine if one of these articles appeared today. Certain nameless and nearly useless 'crazed' discussion board would be filled with naysayers condemning or debating the article, or calling for the immediate execution of the author or the inventor of the product. Such are the times we live in.
One such product that time and again brings out the naysayers, or the schizoid psychopaths, is digital disc playback improvements. No matter how many individuals who've tried the product and given their endorsement as to its effectiveness, there are always some who either have supposedly tried it or found no discernible difference, or more frequently, those who without trying it claim that the effect is impossible. They claim those hearing the difference are duping themselves, just like the poor fools of yore who bought snake oil and other herbal remedies from traveling salesmen. They won't even accept endorsements from engineers, scientists, or high end CD companies, always screaming that double blinded test were not performed, or it's scientifically impossible, or digital is perfect and cannot be improved upon.
But even the recording engineers will tell you that CDs pressed in different plants from the same master will sound different and that a $100 CD player cannot compare to the $6000 high-end unit, although the nabobs will even debate that. On the other hand if they do agree that different players sound different, they'll say its secondary to the analog side rather than the digital, as long as the unit is picking up all of the information. Digital is perfect, and therefore cannot be improved upon.
The poor wretches. Let them wallow in their ignorance. For those high-enders with ears that are willing to listen and take the time to experiment, there are many way of improving on digital reproduction of both audio and video that will work on just about any machine except for possibly the worst or best caliber. Surprisingly even the best of the best can have their playback be improved by tweaks.
For the next few months, there would be replies in the Letters column debating the relative possibilities of the instrument. After a couple of years, most readers finally caught on but still the letters would come in debating the merits of the piece or even asking where to obtain it. Believe it or not, not one was a harsh condemnation about the wasted ink or pages not given to appropriate reviews. Imagine if one of these articles appeared today. Certain nameless and nearly useless 'crazed' discussion board would be filled with naysayers condemning or debating the article, or calling for the immediate execution of the author or the inventor of the product. Such are the times we live in.
One such product that time and again brings out the naysayers, or the schizoid psychopaths, is digital disc playback improvements. No matter how many individuals who've tried the product and given their endorsement as to its effectiveness, there are always some who either have supposedly tried it or found no discernible difference, or more frequently, those who without trying it claim that the effect is impossible. They claim those hearing the difference are duping themselves, just like the poor fools of yore who bought snake oil and other herbal remedies from traveling salesmen. They won't even accept endorsements from engineers, scientists, or high end CD companies, always screaming that double blinded test were not performed, or it's scientifically impossible, or digital is perfect and cannot be improved upon.
But even the recording engineers will tell you that CDs pressed in different plants from the same master will sound different and that a $100 CD player cannot compare to the $6000 high-end unit, although the nabobs will even debate that. On the other hand if they do agree that different players sound different, they'll say its secondary to the analog side rather than the digital, as long as the unit is picking up all of the information. Digital is perfect, and therefore cannot be improved upon.
The poor wretches. Let them wallow in their ignorance. For those high-enders with ears that are willing to listen and take the time to experiment, there are many way of improving on digital reproduction of both audio and video that will work on just about any machine except for possibly the worst or best caliber. Surprisingly even the best of the best can have their playback be improved by tweaks.
No comments:
Post a Comment