I won't go so far as a mono tape (Even when in an emergency it's ok), but the real difference of sounds between decent equipments (Unless you're a proffesional in recording) is so subtle that 99% of the people who boast about their fabulous equipments are unable to listen an improvement so great that justifies the expense.

 

If I'm in a desert island, the last thing I would care is about what specific piece of equipment I need.

 

I have a modest LG DVD and Home Theater in the living room and it's more than enough for me, in my room I own a good Sony all in one with a Room Theater (Nothing special) and it's perfect.

 

Iván

 

 

 

  high end equipment

 

Oh you meant audio equipment.

 

BTW - without decent quality listening equipment you are missing half the picture - our favourite musicians and their producers and technicians spend many hours and many thousands of pounds creating  cd's for our enjoyment, and work very hard perfecting the sound  - show them some respect please and throw the walmart junk and the mp3 players away!

 

 

 

 

Trespass is a fantastic album sonically, very smooth and detailed - indeed you seriously need to upgrade your system and you will discover a new world, the albums will sound how their creators intended. Incidentally Mark Knopfler and the Conductor Von Karajan were both keen advocates of cd music systems when they appeared in the 80's, though Phillips had been working on the format for years before. CD gave vinyl playback systems a good boot up the backside and technology has come a long way since then for both formats, though Mark Knopfler said at the time about cd that at last people could hear a recording near to how it sounds in the studio, a bit of an ambitious statement, and cd technology has really advanced since then, but he was referring to the quality of the playback technology more than the actual cd - the studios contained state of the art technology, but today it it really possible to hear how it sounded in the studio, as the artists intended, hearing good sound is hearing the music properly. Instruments sound like real instruments, the true emotional meaning and purposeful playing come across very clearly. As for cables, it is true - poor quality cables can spoil the sound!

 

BTW you don't have to spend thousands to get a good system, there are some brilliant budget equipment to be had out there, especially the British  makes, we still lead the world in inexpensive hifi equipment!

 

 

 

hopefully my next big upgrade (apart from a rapidly disintegrating car) will be a tube amp!

 

 PS - i generally  lose little sleep about what people think, but if anyone believes i care more about sound than music, just have a look at my album/concert reviews!

 

 

 

 

i must write 50 times-

i am not a gear freak

 

 

....i don't do cassettes anymore!

 

 

show me some  TOOOBS!!

 

 

 

 

 

That's certainly the most sensible comment in this thread thus far

 

But would they be audiophile cells?

 

Tuners are an interesting audiophile concept.  With a tuner you can only listen to what your radio station produces and they definitely do not use audiophile equipment.  Add to that the fact that the standardised FM transmission only has a bandwidth of 15KHz and uses a mono + stereo and mono - stereo derivation of left and right using a limited stereo signal modulated around a 38KHz carrier and the sound quality will never be great.

 

I remember an audiophile friend preaching about this great tuner that he had for listening to Radio 3 (BBC Classical music channel) with gold connectors and everything else and raving about that pure analogue sound.  He was most put out when I explained to him that Radio three travelled through nearly THREE MILES of twisted pair bell wire inside Broadcasting House and then went to the transmitter via a 13BIT linear digital link.  All goes to prove that it's all subjective.  He had spent the money and was convinced that his kit was best so, to him, it sounded the best.

 

Oliver, I work in radio and can tell you that practically EVERY radio station now links to transmitter via compressed (APT-X or MPeg2) digital link and then most use a digital sound processor at the transmitter (like the Optimod 8400).  This includes French stations who, in my experience, use far more digital processing on air than in any other country. 

 

The sound quality of FM transmission, regardless of whether it's CD, Vinyl or live is audibly worse than a direct connection.  The difference is far more noticable than say MP3 over CD and anyone will immediately notice the difference in a back to back test between FM and a direct connection.

 

That said the FM system is, like MP3, quite acceptable to most people and has a rightful place.  I agree with you that it allows us to hear "live" performances without any editing and that has to be good.

 

By the way, video signals by their very nature lend themselves perfectly to digitisation.  Even analogue televisions use a digitised delivery (TV screens are pixleated, therefore "digital").  A linear digital delivery of video is unbeatable by even the best analogue TV system because of the inherent noise in transmission.  The reason that current analogue systems still often look better is that the TV companies compress the digital signals to the point of distortion to fit more channels onto the multiplex.  Therefore rapidly changing pictures (like panning across a football game) lead to picture break up.

 

 

 

 

BEEB I DEMAND A REFUND!!

 

 

 

 

Never knew Danbo had been on British telly!

 

Jim, I thought that you were supposed to put old pictures of yourself in the "Rogues Gallery" thread?