Now you are back to confusing your personal preferences with objective reality. Just because you think the Neumann DST is the best sounding cartridge does not mean other audiophiles think this. And if they prefer some other cartridge it does not make them objectively incorrect. It does in your eyes -- but that's the fallacy of your thinking.
The Neumann DST is my favorite cartridge. It is the best I’ve heard. I’m not saying that everyone is going to agree. But some are proclaiming technology marches forward and the ever escalating prices are justified by superior sonics.
I am not saying anything about correct or incorrect. I’m not saying any of this is objective. I’m just questioning the proclamations made supporting the hiend industry. I asked an open question but no one has bothered to answer. If someone prefers a cartridge to the Neumann, I accept that gladly and would welcome a discussion about why he thinks it’s better.
again I’m not saying they are incorrect in my eyes as you phrase it. You are putting all sorts of words in my mouth. I’m asking for defenders of the higher end to explain why these different technologies and different materials sound better not just different. I am saying they sound different and I prefer some specific examples from the past is sounding better to me.
when someone says they went to Munich and her Western electric speakers in a system and it was the best sound I’ve ever heard, it makes me wonder what advances the industry has made outside of the convenience
of digital.
Just out of curiosity why do you think not everybody who visits David purchases a complete Vintage Audio Specialties curated system? Are we all incorrect? Does none of us understand natural sound? Does none of us know what we hear in the concert hall?
Ron, people have different tastes and values. That is simple and obvious. I’ve never claimed that people are incorrect for not buying something David is selling. Lots of people go to live concerts and share their experiences. They are hearing natural sound. Of course they understand what they are hearing. Why would I ever criticized it Or claim they don’t understand it?Why are you making this stuff up and why are you fixated on this topic?
I have no idea how you would begin to put some statistically valid numbers to this numerator and the denominator of this question, so I feel like this post is more rhetorical than anything else.
You tell us -- of all audiophiles alive today who have heard Western Electric horns or Bionors and who think they are the best speakers they have ever heard, what fraction do they represent out of of all of the audiophiles alive today who have heard both Western Electric horns or Bionors and contemporary loudspeakers? What is that fraction?
I think you are simply projecting your personal preferences here, and the preferences of some of your friends.
It is not about statistically preferred. I have no idea who has heard both the latest greatest Wilson and Vianor or western electric In appropriate systems and rooms. The claim is that the most expensive latest and greatest newest technology sounds better. I’m saying not everyone agrees with that so what makes it better?
Ron, what makes the latest technology and new materials of the Wilson speakers better? What do you mean by better? Francisco says sounding more like the real thing is meaningless because stereo is so removed from the real thing. I think that is hogwash and everyone knows what real music sounds like an a legitimate goal in our hobby is to try to approach the sound of real instruments. That’s how I define better and it is a subjective opinion based on my own experience and listening abilities for me.