Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site tilt.FUN
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!tilt!chenr
From: chenr@tilt.FUN (Ray Chen)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: Digiphobes
Message-ID: <304@tilt.FUN>
Date: Tue, 4-Jun-85 05:25:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: tilt.304
Posted: Tue Jun  4 05:25:12 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Jun-85 00:55:11 EDT
References: <2412@decwrl.UUCP> <350@moncol.UUCP>
Reply-To: chenr@tilt.UUCP (Ray Chen)
Organization: Princeton University EECS Dept
Lines: 65
Summary: 

Let's not be too unfair to the digiphobes.  I think you'll find that
most digiphobes will agree that the digital medium is potentially
one of the best.  It's the current implementation that we're
unhappy with.

I don't consider myself a "Golden-Ear".  I look for a good value/dollar
ration and would consider myself a mid-range audiophile.  (My system is
in the $2000-$3000 range.)  I will probably get a CD player in the next
5-6 years.

Why don't I have one now?

First, there simply isn't enough of a selection of good material on CD's.

Second, much of what IS there has been butchered by people who don't
know how to master properly for the CD medium.

Third, all but the latest generation of CD's (which I haven't listened
to yet) simply don't sound as natural as my turntable.

Unlike many people, I know from long first-hand experience what
most instruments sound like live.  Matter of fact, now that I think back
not counting the percussion section, there are at most 5 instruments
in a "standard" orchestra that I haven't done a lot of ensemble work
with.  I've also played both harpsichord and clavichord, so...

I looked at the first and second generation CD players.  My conclusion
was that the ones I could seriously consider (I refuse to pay $1000
for a CD player) didn't sound as real as a turntable and lost something
in the way of ambience and soundstage as well.

From all that I've been able to gather, these are all problems which can
be licked by the appropriate application of high technology.  Like any
new technology, CD technology has yet to mature and realize its full
potential.  When it does, which will probably be within 5 years, I'll
be in line to get one.  Until then, I'd rather have a more natural
sounding system, even if it's a bit noisier.

This is a trade-off that I decided I had to make.  Other people will
undoubtedly go the other way, especially if they aren't as sensitive
to whatever it is that I can't stand about the current CD players.

When debating about CDs, measurements, and specs, it's a good idea
to keep one thing in mind.  The human ear and brain are strange things.
Nobody's quite figured out exactly what factors in audio reproduction
are most important for "good" sound and exactly how important they are.
Until they do, audio engineering will be an art.  And even when they
do, audio will still be subjective.  An office worker who can only hear
up to 15 kHz is going to be looking for slightly different things than
a sonar operator who can hear up to 22 kHz, or a professional
musician who can hear up to 20 kHz.  What's good enough for one
won't necessarily be good enough for the others.

So can we PLEASE stop the CD argument?  Let's all admit that different
people listen in different ways for different things and that what is
adequate fidelity for one person may not be adequate fidelity for
another.  

As for myself, I'll be waiting to see which works out better, CD
or Beta/VHS.  Both have good S/N ratios and are more convenient than
records, plus Beta/VHS has the added boost of a simultaneous visual
signal.  Life could be fun five years from now.

	Ray Chen
	princeton!tilt!chenr