Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site drufl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!ihnp4!drutx!drufl!pmr
From: pmr@drufl.UUCP (Rastocny)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: differences in sounds of CD players
Message-ID: <775@drufl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Jan-84 15:18:43 EST
Article-I.D.: drufl.775
Posted: Wed Jan 11 15:18:43 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Jan-84 04:02:20 EST
References: <773@drufl.UUCP>, <372@hound.UUCP>, <670@houxm.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Denver
Lines: 24

Interresting, and I agree.  But several engineering types have claimed
that time-domain related errors are undetectable by the human ear
at higher frequencies (names withheld).  (CD systems are uniform at
lower freq's and get into trouble usually over 5KHz.)  Others say that
they all should sound the same since distortion (et. al.) specs are
insignificantly different from one CD unit to another.  Some,
understandably, think that minute differences in loudness sway a
person's opinion of superiority regardless of the reference system's
quality.  You all can't be right, can you?  Who is?

Before things get too enFLAMEd, I suppose I should explain why I started
this.  I feel that the current set of specs used by everyone in the top
three audio mag's is inadequate in describing sonic differences that
are currently described in subjective magazines.  Anything that we can
hear, we should be able to measure.  Can anyone offer opinions as to
what specs would more correctly describes these differences? (e.g., why
isn't there a plot of the power supply impedance vs. frequency at full
load?  Or supply ripple at the output devices under full load?  Or
a time-domain plot?)

		Yours for higher fidelity,
		Phil Rastocny
		AT&T-ISL
		..!drufl!pmr