Re: 2 down 1 to go

[dieckeaw@plu.edu]

On Fri, 5 Apr 1996 PDQSHIP@aol.com wrote:

> The subjective part of objective measurements are the compromises you are
> willing to accept for the measurements you are given.....  Do you change the
> car design for the audio, or do you take the subjective compromise and
> address another measure, and leave the drivers seat where it is....  Quality
> of sound can be measured.....  Your definition of "involving" or "rythmic" is
> anothers "distant" and "offbeat".....  The compromises you accept are
> measureable.....  So are your subjective definitions....  The compromises are
> the subjective part of audio design.....

You're mostly right.  While one person's preference can be another's 
anathema, most people will agree on whether or not a system is, say, 
"rhythmic," for example.  I'm talking specifically about the Linn home 
systems.  No one will deny that they are probably the most rhythmically 
involving systems made.  That's Ivor Tiefenbrum's goal.  Some people may 
not like it as much as others (I love it), but they still won't deny that 
its there.  It is possible to put to identically measuring audio components 
side by side and do a comparison.  You WILL hear differences.  Why?  
There are many aspects of audio we still cannot measure.

-Adam