Re: [ARSCLIST] Can 78s sound better than LPs?

[steven c <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lou Judson" <loujudson@xxxxxxx>
> Maybe my clients are too poor to deserve the best. Steven is looking at
> an extremely lower budget, too... I guess the available budget counts
> asthe very best audio technology available? or not... ??
>
1) Very true...and I can also add that to MY ears (even back when they
were working up to specs) the sound obtained by using a crystal or
ceramic cartridge, and the resultant .5 to 1 ounce of tracking pressure,
is a more (sonically) accurate rendition of the contents of 99& of 78's
than a current state-of-the-art magnetic cartridge feeding kilodollars
worth of s-o-t-a electronics. The modern system is, mainly, too GOOD
at reproducing the sonic content of a digital recording...reproducing
all the "non-program" sonic garbage inherent in shellac (and to a lesser
extent vinyl) sound recordings. As well, the post-WWII standard equalization
parameters were designed to remove the effect created by then-standard
crystal cartridges!

> /Rant mode on
> I'm working with a client now transferring his cassette collection to
> CDs - he insists the previous person who helped him was inferior
> because they only used the $1,000 "interconnects" instead of the $2,500
> wires we are using now to connect his cassette deck to my Digi system.
> However, I believe I am getting a far superior sound because of the
> better signal chain  - no processing at all except dither!
>
2) This is a constant peculiarity of the "pseudo-audiophile" world!
They can easily be convinced of scientific-sounding balderdash, as
long as it sounds impressive enough (and has an equally impressive
price tag!). This is partly due to the fact that the explanations
for REAL improvements (i.e. truncated elliptical styli, usw.) are
equally complicated and confusing...and also partially due to the
fact that audio systems also serve as important "status symbols"
for certain types of owners! Therefore, Joe Audiophool IV can
proudly announce to his rivals that he has just expended $31,643.57
(with tax) on genuine ytterbium-plated 24K gold (with crystals
magnetically aligned through a secret process) cables, all of
which have been accurately aligned with relation to the earth's
magnetic poles to cancel out potential stray indced currents, to
correct his various zircon-encrusted apparati...and, to him*,
this has created a noticeable improvement in his system's sound!
* And to the others he has invited to show off his acquisitions.
Which it has...because the human mind works in strange ways, and
we have NO way of establishing exactly what each person "hears"...

> Interesting process - it is cassettes after all, one would expect it to
> be poor quality, but we are playing them on the actual deck they were
> recorded on, and they are original live recordings of a piano, no
> mixing or anything. 2 mics to cassette. There is plenty hiss and
> nothing above 16k but fine sound.
>
> I still have a problem with people who think a better piece of wire is
> going to affect the sound. These audiphiles care nothing at all about
> the quality of the A/D, the CD type and burn speed, or if they are
> hearing 16 or 24 bit! I CAN hear a difference between 16 and 24 bit,
> but not between $10 wires and $2,500 wires, even if you plug them in
> backwards...
>
> And he doesn't seem to mind that there is ten feet of cheap wire after
> the digi unit and to my monitor amp... he can still hear the difference
> between the expensive wires on the input. But the bottom line is, he is
> happier with my CD transfers of his cassettes than he was with the ones
> done by the previous guy who owns a real studio. Even on my $400,
> fifteen year old studio monitors.
>
> rant mode off\ thanks for letting me rave. Don't know if this has
> anything at all to do with 78s, but it has everything to do with
> archiving!
>
3) See #2 above...

Steven C. Barr