Jump to content
Computer Audiophile

Don Hills

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Don Hills

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. Audiophilia Syndrome

    Posted 14 or 15 days too early...
  2. Just to complicate things, there was also an aftermarket filter set for the Sonys that was quite popular. The brand name escapes me at the moment...
  3. AS WE SEE IT - MQA: Benefits and Costs

    Strictly speaking, it's the colorations imposed and agreed on by the artist(s) and producer. The engineer generally does as he's told. But yeah, if there are audible differences it's up to the listener's preference. My preference is usually for the sound the way it was originally produced.
  4. You said that you won't discuss the facts of Archimago's article because he is pseudonymous. Regardless of your convictions on the subject of anonymity, it doesn't help your credibility and the respect people have for you. (I do respect you for the quality of your participation here. Calm and polite under pressure in spite of considerable provocation.)
  5. AS WE SEE IT - MQA: Benefits and Costs

    No. https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/30381-mqa-is-vaporware/?do=findComment&comment=794782
  6. MQA is Vaporware

    As I read it, MQA is supposed to bring you (closer to) the sound that was heard in the studio. The first problem with this is that the sound you buy is not what was heard in the studio. It's what was heard (and approved) in the mixing and mastering rooms. To greater or lesser degrees depending on genre, this differs from the sound heard in the studio. The second problem is that for all legacy content and almost all current content, the sound approved for distribution was made with non-MQA ADCs and DACs. Even if we accept that they have audible defects, the sound has been adjusted to sound "right" on those devices. Applying corrections for supposed ADC / DAC defects will change the sound to something other than that approved. So you can prefer the sound of MQA to the original, but a blanket statement that it's better than the original is simply untrue.
  7. Do They Take Us For Simpletons?

    Pity. It would be really useful to cause major jitter side bands in Putin's missile system.
  8. Do They Take Us For Simpletons?

    You're supposed to put them on your tubes, not your fingers.
  9. Do They Take Us For Simpletons?

    I see what you did there.
  10. The Real Enemy Isn't MQA

    Speaking of metal and dynamic range, any site with reviews of iFi gear on the front page can't be too far from alignment with audiophiles: http://www.metal-fi.com/
  11. Michael Lavorgna strikes back.......

    I'm disappointed. I realise that moderation of an internet forum is like herding cats, but I would expect some effort to herd towards the thread title rather than away.
  12. MQA is Vaporware

    He started a thread over on WBF called "MQA (Master Quality Authenticated) - Better Sound or DRM?". It can best be described as a facepalm moment. Even after being corrected by Mans he hasn't acknowledged how wrong he is.
  13. How much disrespect is alllowed on Computer Audiophile?

    Bob, your username is more of a pseudonym than Mans'.
  14. How much disrespect is alllowed on Computer Audiophile?

    The amount of squawking going on in this thread at the moment does make me wonder...
  15. Oh yeah, you're right. Thank you.