Sony attempts to lure audiophiles with 'Premium Sound' microSD

[watercooled]

It's like some valve-based systems - compared to a decent quality semiconductor amp they tend to colour the audio, and some people simply like that, and maybe only for certain types of music. Which one is subjectively 'better' is down to opinion; the semiconductor one is probably more mathematically correct though.

I've also heard one theory about cables influencing peoples' perception of audio by their appearance, and what they've read on the box, etc. This is probably why you see silver cables described as giving 'brighter' audio while gold is 'warmer'. Hence the importance of blind tests if you're going to assert one is better than the other.

The AV amps that use HDMI cables - do they abide by the HDMI spec or use their own protocol on the wire? Just out of interest.

Anyway even assuming a possible advantage for better quality cables, it seems a lot of the cables sold as 'premium' are actually worse than to-spec mass-produced varieties, just they're sold on the merit of their pseudo-scientific claims.

[Saracen]

There was a food program I watched recently where the "experts" replaced a families grocery stocks with unlabelled alternatives, in plain packaging. Some products, like some meats, were supermarket variants replaced by premium meat from a butcher, usually at the same, more or less, price. Others were "brand" names, like cereal, replaced by "essential" versions at often MUCH lower cost. Yet other products they, the sneaky gits, kept exactly the same product the family had, but put it in plain packaging.

The resultant blind tests were, to say the least, eye-opening.

Perceptions are important. And we're manipulated using them, all the time. All too often, we think we get what we're expecting to get.

[DanceswithUnix]

I've also heard one theory about cables influencing peoples' perception of audio by their appearance,

Amusingly I chose my speaker cable primarily on looks. I had no way of hiding the cable between the amplifier and speakers, and figured if it was on display then rather than mains cable (which is cheap and works well for speakers but isn't exactly pretty) I would use the oxygen free copper cable with transparent plastic sheathing so you can see the shiny copper inside. Very tasteful

[deejayburnout]

I read a review on it and at no point did I see the point in one of these sd cards over a standard one. Waste of money. Anyone who buys one of these needs their head examined.

[crossy]

It's like some valve-based systems - compared to a decent quality semiconductor amp they tend to colour the audio, and some people simply like that, and maybe only for certain types of music. Which one is subjectively 'better' is down to opinion; the semiconductor one is probably more mathematically correct though.

Seems to be slightly different for guitar amps though - semiconductor-based units are definitely seen as "second best" with a lot of the (low end?) ones pushing hard their "valve like" qualities. In fact, the only plus point (other than price) I've seen for the non-valve gear has been that their consistency. From my cursory brush with the audio hifi market I thought that it was pretty much accepted that "valve is best" - hence the plethora of valve-powered "enthusiast" gear - including iPod/iPhone docks (which seems a bit strange to me)

Anyway even assuming a possible advantage for better quality cables, it seems a lot of the cables sold as 'premium' are actually worse than to-spec mass-produced varieties, just they're sold on the merit of their pseudo-scientific claims.

I bought a set of (expensive) Monster cables a while ago and won't make that mistake again. They were flimsy and badly made, and got replaced with a set of mid-priced ones that were a heck of a lot better (and at half the price!).

Maybe I'm being unfair but in the "audiophile" market there seems - to me at least - be a lot of brand snobbery with not much fact to back it up.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Amusingly I chose my speaker cable primarily on looks. I had no way of hiding the cable between the amplifier and speakers, and figured if it was on display then rather than mains cable (which is cheap and works well for speakers but isn't exactly pretty) I would use the oxygen free copper cable with transparent plastic sheathing so you can see the shiny copper inside. Very tasteful

I did the same TBH - I did do some blind tests of cable myself. The very cheap stuff I could reliably(like a £1/meter) notice but the all the other stuff sounded much the same.
With the interconnects I tried a whole number of them from £10 to £40 myself. The £10 ones I was surprised I could identify - the rest I could not. I opened the £10 ones up and realised they had not been soldered/crimped properly - so it was more a construction thing.

[DanceswithUnix]

Maybe I'm being unfair but in the "audiophile" market there seems - to me at least - be a lot of brand snobbery with not much fact to back it up.

Probably no more than the market for cars, graphics cards, processors, vacuum cleaners and no doubt much more.

[Saracen]

Probably no more than the market for cars, graphics cards, processors, vacuum cleaners and no doubt much more.

I'd expect most of those things to be more susceptible to objective, and repeatable, tests, though. Of course, just because something measures better in a test, such as a CPU or graphics card benchmark, doesn't necessarily mean a given user will gain any real-world benefit.

On the other hand, appearance can be important. I very much doubt I'd buy a car I didn't like, or at least didn't dislike, the appearance of, no matter how good it was, objectively.

[ZaO]

Wow. Saracen is dropping knowledge! I didn't know about some of the things mentioned.. Have you had a lot of experience with different AD/DA converters? By that I mean, have you heard much difference with them? I've always used onboard soundcards until late last year, when I got myself a Focusrite Scarlett 2i4. Apparently it was a gooden for the money, and the AD/DA converters are meant to be good. But tbh, I wasn't clued up enough about these devices to know either way. Since I've had it, it's been used with a pair of Yamaha HS7's I bought at the same time. So, I assumed my monitors were making most of the difference. I have also ran the 2i4 back through the same amp, powering the same Hi-Fi speakers I was previously using. But, since I've got so used to my monitors now, my Hi-Fi sounds strange anyway. Don't really know to what extent my audio interface has improved the accuracy of the sound... Either way, I at least have much less latency when recording music now

[Saracen]

Not really, ZaO. Not that would be much help, anyway.

I do have a Yamaha HS6 though .... or to be more precise, Yamaha Electrone HS6. Not sure it'll help though.

[DanceswithUnix]

I'd expect most of those things to be more susceptible to objective, and repeatable, tests, though. Of course, just because something measures better in a test, such as a CPU or graphics card benchmark, doesn't necessarily mean a given user will gain any real-world benefit.

But repeatable tests don't seem to come into it.

People just *know* that their German car is more reliable than my Italian one. They assume that I have to walk home on a weekly basis, and that I am constantly fighting a losing battle against rust.
They will tell me of the compatibility problems I must have with my AMD processor.
My vacuum cleaner is not a Miele, what was I thinking?

I haven't bought any proper hi-fi equipment for over a decade. Back then I could audition bits of kit in a listening room at the shop, take stuff home to make sure it sounded good in my own living room and if I wasn't happy with the sound could bring it back and try again. All very civilised, and results in something that you know sounds the way you want it to.

The nostalgia of buying stereo kit just had me looking on the Linn website to see what gives these days. Amplifiers and 192KHz/24 bit DAC built into the speakers? Interesting, would love to know how good they sound, and having a fully digital chain right up to the speakers would once again make a low noise SD card pointless

[watercooled]

Seems to be slightly different for guitar amps though - semiconductor-based units are definitely seen as "second best" with a lot of the (low end?) ones pushing hard their "valve like" qualities. In fact, the only plus point (other than price) I've seen for the non-valve gear has been that their consistency. From my cursory brush with the audio hifi market I thought that it was pretty much accepted that "valve is best" - hence the plethora of valve-powered "enthusiast" gear - including iPod/iPhone docks (which seems a bit strange to me)

A lot of it is down to perception - valves are apparently seen as cooler. I couldn't argue which one is 'better', as I say it's largely subjective, however from the comparisons I have seen, semiconductor-based systems have a much flatter response than valves. Valves are mistakenly seen by some as perfect pass-all, lossless devices which they're very far from. Look how semiconductors are used in (even high power) radio amplifiers and transceivers - they're far more sensitive than our ears and work with massively higher frequencies/bandwidths.

I dunno, maybe some of the valve opinion came from the early days of semiconductors when high-powered transistors were less common?

There doesn't always have to be logic behind consensus - look how many people are walking around with certain overpriced celebrity-branded headphones.

A similar debate exists between vinyl and CDs - fair enough some people just admit they like the sound of vinyl, but there's no reason CDs should be technically worse as a format, apart from poor mastering and e.g. heavy-handed dynamic range compression. Quantisation is often mentioned, but that also assumes vinyl will perfectly reproduce sound, even though it can be quite rough under a microscope. Something being more 'analogue' is often mistaken for meaning it's more accurate, which isn't necessarily true. http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

[Saracen]

I think a lot of the "valves are better" attitude probably came from the days when, well, they were. In no small part, it was down to stage switching in semiconductor amps, due to lack of devices capable of good performance at low power, and yet still capable of high power too. Hence, amps with a (case) switch from low power "Class A" to higher power, Class B, with switching.

Also, I had valve amps for high power long after transceivers were either semi-con, or hybrid. Mind you, those big valve amps at least saved on needing central heating.

By and large, though, for audio amps, I just liked the valve sound. Whether better, or more accurate? Dunno. But somehow warmer, fuller, more "soul". Just like vinyl, over perhaps overly clinical CD. Subjective, I utterly agree. But, I preferred it.

And that's cat well and truly among pigeons.

[crossy]

A lot of it is down to perception - valves are apparently seen as cooler. I couldn't argue which one is 'better', as I say it's largely subjective, however from the comparisons I have seen, semiconductor-based systems have a much flatter response than valves. Valves are mistakenly seen by some as perfect pass-all, lossless devices which they're very far from. Look how semiconductors are used in (even high power) radio amplifiers and transceivers - they're far more sensitive than our ears and work with massively higher frequencies/bandwidths.

I'm basing my attitude on what I've seen in Total Guitar/Guitarist mag and on the Fender forums. People keep talking about valve-powered amps being "warmer" and having a "less clinical" feel - although if you've got an explanation of what that actually means in practice then I'd love to hear it!
My current amp (Blackstar ID:15 - pretty good too) has something Blackstar call TVP - True Valve Power - which:

When engaged it delivers the response, dynamics, sag and break-up characteristics of a valve amp and uniquely delivers the same acoustic power output as an equivalent valve power amp.

And that seems to be more about Spinal Tap-style projection rather than any desired quality in the resulting sound (or in my case, "noise").

But repeatable tests don't seem to come into it.
People just *know* that their German car is more reliable than my Italian one. They assume that I have to walk home on a weekly basis, and that I am constantly fighting a losing battle against rust.
They will tell me of the compatibility problems I must have with my AMD processor.
My vacuum cleaner is not a Miele, what was I thinking?

You think you've got hoover problems, I got persuaded to buy a Kirby. Okay, it's built like the proverbial brick outhouse but for the price I could buy 3 Dysons ... top of the line ones at that! SWMBO was definitely not impressed, the only saving grace being that it's supposedly very long lived. Which, given the build quality, is probably reasonable.

Oh, and I used to own two Lancias - both suffered from rot. And even the six month old Fiat 500 my wife got from the insurance folks while hers was being repaired (other car slid into it) had a rust patch near the door. Although that little 500 was an absolute hoot to drive, really like a chance in the Arbarth version...

[ZaO]

I'm basing my attitude on what I've seen in Total Guitar/Guitarist mag and on the Fender forums. People keep talking about valve-powered amps being "warmer" and having a "less clinical" feel - although if you've got an explanation of what that actually means in practice then I'd love to hear it!

I haven't caught the conversation you guys are having about this. But a 'warmer' sound is often defined by harmonic content (at least by some people. I'm not sure if that's technically what it refers to). Valves tend to add harmonic content to the sound, making it sound a bit richer, especially in the mids, which is what some people will be referring to as a 'warm' sound. Valves are also live things, not just some zeros and ones/computer program. So, like analogue instruments, they have actual random things that can happen, not just 'random' algorithms. This randomness adds a 'warmth' to the sound. A good example is to listen to an old analogue synthesizer from the 70s or 80s. They sound very warm and not exactly the same each time you play, where as digital synths tend to sound a lot sharper and defined, losing that analogue warmth, because they don't actually have it to begin with. Also, I notice people refer to tapes as being warm. One I thing I notice about tapes, is that they lack a bit of top end/top end is dulled a little (also a bit of low end). This leaves the mids feeling the most full part of the sound with all their harmonic content. Tapes seem to respond well to mids.

Please be aware that all of what I've just said are just my observations/assumptions. Don't assume I'm correct You can always do a web search to find some info from someone who can explain things better than me

[shaithis]

I think Zao just caused some younger members heads to explode.....as they go off goggling valves and tapes!!