Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site rabbit.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!exodus!mhtsa!mh3bs!eagle!allegra!alice!rabbit!jj
From: jj@rabbit.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Now Hear This, BUCKLEY!
Message-ID: <2479@rabbit.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 6-Feb-84 10:05:34 EST
Article-I.D.: rabbit.2479
Posted: Mon Feb  6 10:05:34 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 9-Feb-84 02:31:41 EST
References: <1043@drux3.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 66


Listen, Buckley, I HAVE heard state of the art systems.
I have heard a NUMBER of such, each different, each
with its strengths and weaknesses.  If you can't admit
anyone besides you (and maybe Phil R) has ANY experience,
then you aren't being  honest. Then again, maybe you
can't deal with anyone who disagrees with you.  

I don't understand at all how you can take something  SO incredibly
sensitive and complex as the human auditory system and
make NON-DOUBLE BLIND tests with DIFFERENT MATERIAL on
each system, and claim that you are testing anything.  
I don't see how you can take a poorly recorded CD
 and claim that there
is ANYTHING wrong with the CD system, when you couldn't
hear the differences through the awful recording techniques.


Unless you listen to LIVE performances twice a week, I don't know how
you can claim to have ANY handle on  what sounds realistic.
I do know that you can get accustomed to your own system,
and begin to use IT for your standard of reference.

I'm not going to sit here and swap qualifications, working on
digital signal processing and doing critical listening are what
I do for a living, and I don't feel a need to explain my
credentials to anyone.   I'm NOT going to sit here and be slandered.
I DO (most of the time) sit here and watch superstition flow
past my terminal, because I'm not willing (nor do I feel
a need) to try to tell the rest of the world what to do.


Enough already!  I suggest that you set up a reasonably controlled
double blind test, ensure matched levels, loads, presentation,
etc, and THEN listen for a while.  Unfortunately, I don't 
(at the minute) know where to get an analog signal
good enough  to not be recognizibly
analog.  (Maybe the trick is to take a digitization of an analog
disc and then play both, but that still has it's problems.)

I've heard enough BAD compact discs that were clearly recorded
and/or mixed so poorly that they don't represent a good test.
I have heard a VERY FEW discs that were recorded well enough
to compare with audiophile recordings, but I don't blame
that on the CD player  I blame THAT on
the desire of the CD manufacturer to make money, first
and foremost.

Please, Mr. Buckley, in the future would you restrict your
opinions to things that you know about, such as your
OWN reactions to a CD player, your OWN system, etc.
Showing your prejudices against anyone who disagrees with you
is both pointless and insulting, both to those who are insulted,
and those who have to read your articles.  If you like,
I'll send you the netequette  section on ad-hominem articles
to help you out.

===============
James Johnston

Acoustics Research Department
AT&T Bell Laboritories, Murray Hill, NJ