Ken Kessler Retired
- Thread starter dcathro
- Start date
Dynamic Turtle
The Bydo Destroyer
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 935
- Reaction score
- 0
Personally, I didn't mind KK, as he was a fairly interesting read and tried his best to be an opinionated Clarkson-esque journo (i.e. fun, rather than informative). At the end of the day, "Hi-Fi journalism" can't be considered the most interesting or important thing in the world. Anything to spice-up what is very dull subject matter is a good thing IMHO.
He also bought the Audio Research PH5 and Denon 2900, so he can't be that stupid
I'm surprised he has a nice sideline in "watch journalism", as 99% of it is utter drivel, and even more marketing/advertising led than Hi-Fi. Why anyone would pay KK so much to write some lines about Rolex's latest piece of overpriced tin is beyond me. AFAIK most Rolex owners/aspirers can barely read....
He also bought the Audio Research PH5 and Denon 2900, so he can't be that stupid
I'm surprised he has a nice sideline in "watch journalism", as 99% of it is utter drivel, and even more marketing/advertising led than Hi-Fi. Why anyone would pay KK so much to write some lines about Rolex's latest piece of overpriced tin is beyond me. AFAIK most Rolex owners/aspirers can barely read....
Which is why he writes little about them.
Have you ever read his watch articles?
As someone in the trade i have. They are well written and less Clarkson-esque as his Hi-Fi writing.
I have never seen him write about Rolex (modern crud ones that is) but he has written some good articles on true high end brands and watch makers (individuals not companies).
Have you ever read his watch articles?
As someone in the trade i have. They are well written and less Clarkson-esque as his Hi-Fi writing.
I have never seen him write about Rolex (modern crud ones that is) but he has written some good articles on true high end brands and watch makers (individuals not companies).
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2006
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 0
Clarkson-esque neatly sums him up, an entertaining read if you could discount his almost incestuous relationship with Absolute Sounds
Not unlike RG's with Nordost
Also if you really wanted opinionated rant corey greenberg was your man
Not unlike RG's with Nordost
Also if you really wanted opinionated rant corey greenberg was your man
oedipus said:
Yes it is, why?
I only ask because if jitter is not audible then I wonder what the reason is for the transports I tried to sound pretty different. I can assure you it was not me simply imagining it.
Tenson said:
I am trying to determine what the weather is like in Britain. From what you've told me, it is constantly raining in Britain, and there is no need for further experimentation or data samples.
True or false?
Last edited by a moderator:
oedipus said:
Why? Either way, it shouldn't stop you sharing your knowledge about what makes a good transport.
All I know is that it should have low jitter, but you are saying that is not important. So, I wonder if there are some other factors you know of - as there definitely can be an audible difference between them. For example, you may say that it needs to have an extremely stable transport mech so the data gets read off the disc accurately in the first place. Or maybe you will say that the £300 Sony does that perfectly already.
Basically if you can't give some reason other than 'it was your subconscious' for transports to sound different I will have to continue to put my experience down to jitter performance despite your knowledgeable self saying it doesn't make an audible difference.
RobHolt
Moderator
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2004
- Messages
- 4,126
- Reaction score
- 12
What happens if the signal from the transport is poor and therefore the DAC cannot determine a 1 from a 0 ?
Also, if the transport servos and error correction circuits are in use, does that not add to noise on the PSU lines?
A better transport (or better callibrated transport) that can read with less reliance on correction circuits is surely likely to perform better, if only because of the PSU related issues?
What about mechanical stability and isolation. Surely if the laser is less disturbed by outside forces, again there is less reliance on correction?
It is perfectly possible that the Cambridge transport, despite costing far less than the Chord was better in those areas. Cost is no guarantee of performance.
Just a few ideas to add into the pot.
<though WTF this has to do with Kessler.....>
Also, if the transport servos and error correction circuits are in use, does that not add to noise on the PSU lines?
A better transport (or better callibrated transport) that can read with less reliance on correction circuits is surely likely to perform better, if only because of the PSU related issues?
What about mechanical stability and isolation. Surely if the laser is less disturbed by outside forces, again there is less reliance on correction?
It is perfectly possible that the Cambridge transport, despite costing far less than the Chord was better in those areas. Cost is no guarantee of performance.
Just a few ideas to add into the pot.
<though WTF this has to do with Kessler.....>
Tenson said:
If, through not being diligent in your experimentation, you're going to form opinions then don't try to treat those opinions as facts in a line of inductive reasoning in a search for the underlying culrpit (ie jitter). It's a pointless exercise. Just accept that you have an opinion and you don't know the reason why. This will save you considerable trouble (with other folks) and thinking about hard technical stuff.
To take a "hypothetical" situation (which seems entirely plausible): what will you say should someone join in this thread with the opposite observations to yours?
PeteH
Natural Blue
I think what oedipus is pointing you towards - in his inimitable wayTenson said:
- is this statement you've made right here; specifically, on precisely what basis you feel able to make it.Someone saying the opposite to me - they have never heard a difference between transports so therefore there can not ever be one, is very different to me saying I have heard a difference therefore there CAN be one, under the right circumstances. Mine does not exclude people not hearing a difference, or indeed there actually not being a difference in some (or most) cases.
The difference I heard (whatever the cause) was obvious enough for me to be happy treating it as 'real' in my little investigation. If you simply do not believe what I heard was 'real' and that because of this you are not willing to continue the discussion then say so.
If you are willing to accept that there was a difference for the sake of this discussion then, since you have ruled out my main theory on what the cause was (jitter) I would appreciate some ideas from you, about what could have been the cause - just as Rob has.
The difference I heard (whatever the cause) was obvious enough for me to be happy treating it as 'real' in my little investigation. If you simply do not believe what I heard was 'real' and that because of this you are not willing to continue the discussion then say so.
If you are willing to accept that there was a difference for the sake of this discussion then, since you have ruled out my main theory on what the cause was (jitter) I would appreciate some ideas from you, about what could have been the cause - just as Rob has.
Tenson said:
I think that's exactly what Oedipus is trying to say. He doesn't believe what you heard was real, because he has no convincing reason to, and (at least according to him), neither does the rest of the "serious" scientific community. Why should they waste their valuable time and effort on an effect that can't even be shown to be "real" via the best tools science has for weeding out strange effects of suggestion and subconsiousness (namely the double-blind ABX test)?
This then is the difference between "scientists" and "tweakers" - the latter is happy to go on his own subjective impression and nothing more. Personally, I feel hifi (and other fields) benefit from both the rigorous "scientific" approach, and the more subjective "tweakey" approach. Each comes at a problem from the opposite side - the scientist starts with the reductivist tools for explaining phenomena, and must use these to come to a conclusion as to whether some effect exists or not. The tweaker does the opposite - starts satisfied that an effect exists and, through theory and experimentation (rigorous or not), attempts to explain it. In my humble opinion, the latter approach may well occasionally be more successful than the former in an area as subjective and complex as audio electronics, audio transducers, and auditory perception (or just "audio" for short
).Dunc
Dynamic Turtle
The Bydo Destroyer
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 935
- Reaction score
- 0
Dom_ said:
TBH Dom, I simpy don't think it's worth paying good money for glorified advertising brochures like IW or QP. There is the occasional good article (which may or may not be KK), but the other 99% simply doesn't justify the outlay.
In the trade huh? Are you on the manufacturing/design or marketing/sales side?
DT
oedipus - I have heard that if jitter is bad enough, you effectively are not capable of even resolving the full 16 bit resolution off the CD? (I had a conversation with Isaac about it ages ago, for the sake of discussion its a shame he's on holiday, but I think what he said was that it was something like 700ps jitter means you're only getting 13-14bits off the disk)
How could that sort of thing be inaudible - or are you saying that all 'competently designed' cd player (i.e. ones with a clock circuit good enough to keep jitter low enough to avoid this happening) sounds the same, rather than all cd players, period?
How could that sort of thing be inaudible - or are you saying that all 'competently designed' cd player (i.e. ones with a clock circuit good enough to keep jitter low enough to avoid this happening) sounds the same, rather than all cd players, period?
Well lets all go down to tesco and buy there latest £29.99 dvd player with a digital out and use that as a transport...... I think not
sorry if you can't hear the difference between two transports your in the wrong game. I suggest you take up knitting.
Seriously there is a reason and it should be obvious, the better transport is transfereing a more accurate "digital picture " of the disc so that the off board dac is presenting you with a more accurate, better if you like, sound.
This is a simple matter ...I've at leats 4 cdp all with digital outs the cheapest sounds the worst and the most expensive sound the best ....this its totally repeatable and if any of you doubters are in the area, pm and I'll be delighted to show you.
sorry if you can't hear the difference between two transports your in the wrong game. I suggest you take up knitting.
Seriously there is a reason and it should be obvious, the better transport is transfereing a more accurate "digital picture " of the disc so that the off board dac is presenting you with a more accurate, better if you like, sound.
This is a simple matter ...I've at leats 4 cdp all with digital outs the cheapest sounds the worst and the most expensive sound the best ....this its totally repeatable and if any of you doubters are in the area, pm and I'll be delighted to show you.
