Scott Dolan

It was a great one, Neal. Thank you, and thanks to Bright Moments, Larry, GA, BeBop, Master Secor, and most especially Valerie! You cats put a big smile on my face. BTW, Neal. Is the iPod still kicking for you?

A thousand times better, thanks! And thanks to everyone! Just got back from playing 18 holes with my buddy Scott. Interesting note, I met him through work many years ago. We were the only two employees that worked at our location. Both named Scott, and we were both born on June 4th. So we celebrated our birthdays today with a nice round of golf. I struggled as though I were hitting pumpkins with a broom for the first four holes. Five and six were "acceptable". But then it's like the golf gods flipped a sympathy switch for me on seven and I drilled everything the rest of the day. We got rained on on the back nine quite a bit, but nothing major and it helped keep us cooled down. Very good day so far...

Not this boy.

Rice paper? That's a new one to me. I'm interested in the answers to this as well.

Bad thread for you so far, isn't it? Folks busting on both cable elevators AND Mapleshade.

Because positioning height of speakers cables does nothing to change the signal passing through them. Many people claim to hear a lot of things they can't, but once they get it in their mind it's impossible to get out without a blind test. There are people out there who claim they can hear the difference between a CD and a lossless file ripped from it. We can convince ourselves of anything, really. None of this is meant as a put down of Larry. Could happen to anyone. As Kevin and I have both stated, there may be a problem, but it's coming from a component, not the speaker cable positioning.

Mapleshade is one of the premier snake oil dealers in the world. But, I will give them credit, their furniture is quite beautiful. I don't know anyone crazy enough to collaborate in the behind-the-sheet experiment, at least not without laughing so hard that they might knock things down. As for whether I hear a difference, one of my standard "test" CDs is the title track of Louis Smith's "Smithville" -- because it's such a vividly great RVG recording job (albeit great of his style) and because it proceeds in layers: first, solo Paul Chambers walking, then only Chambers and Smith, then with Sonny Clark and Art Taylor and finally Charlie Rouse added. My key tests here (or if you will "tests") are the entry of Taylor's ride cymbal (its relative prominence and crispness in relation to the rest) and the relationship (spatially and in relative prominence) of Clark's comping to the rest. I swear that with the cables on the lowest level (as described in my initial post) Taylor's ride cymbal is barely distinguishable, while with the speaker cables one level up it is just about where it should be in relation to everything else; likewise with Clark's comping (which I feel should be somewhat, but only somewhat, spatially separable from what it supports), though Clark's comping doesn't virtually disappear with the cables at the lowest level the way Taylor's ride cymbal does. I'm pretty sure that unless I'm imagining all this, it has something to do -- as you suggest -- with something in my rack interacting with something else. The simplest way to test this, with or without the sheet, would be to leave everything else as is and, say, switch the positions of the amp and the CD player and see if I hear any difference. But that's annoyingly hard to do physically by myself -- the space between the rack and the back wall of the basement is awkwardly tight and both those units weigh a ton -- so I think I'll just live with things as they are. Besides, there are practical reasons for keeping the CD player at the second level from the top; I don't want to have to kneel down on the floor every time I put in or take out a CD. Or I could run those speaker cables through my rectum. Larry, I say this time and time again. Our ears and brains have an uncanny ability to conspire against us. If you can't do a blind test, then simply "find" the "ideal" position for your speaker wires, and be done with it. You won't be able to change your mind at this point without a blind test. So just placate it. Don't risk hurting yourself or damaging your equipment by moving components around.

Neither have an effect. Unless you're rubbing your feet on the carpet right next to where your cables are sitting. And even then the claim is rather dubious. And cable elevators are as outrageous as it gets.

Again, very nicely stated.

Oh no! Terrible news, as is every death. I grew up watching The Brady Bunch. Alice was far closer to me in personality than anyone else.

When we are using we sometimes think we are fucking brilliant and invincible. For some to get clean and stay clean, one of the most important ingredients is to realize that we are not equipped to manage our lives while using. To think a true using drug addict plans and manages and might be true on the outside as I also know many who never got arrested or ever lost jobs, etc. - but those are a small minority. The answer for a guy like Roy Hargrove if he is an addict has nothing to do with learning or hoping not to cop on the street at 4:30 in the AM. If he is an addict and continues to use, he isn't gonna get any better at using or any smarter. It only gets worse. Perfectly stated, my friend. I currently work in a substance abuse rehab, and see example after example to reinforce what you have stated. It's incredibly complicated. And it consumes some really good people...

" Or am I just imagining effects that don’t in fact exist?" - Larry Kart *dingdingdingdingding* ...since Mr. Nessa beat me to the most appropriate response. There may be a source-based problem, but your speaker cable placement has nothing to do with it. Cable elevation is the most snakiest of snake oil.

On that part we'll agree.

There is absolutely no such thing as a smart addict, sorry.

When it's 4:00 in the morning, we do anything for a hit You're not them anymore, Steve.

I have the wimpiest skin on the planet. I can only shave my neck and face with an electric, and anything short of Mach III on my head will leave me looking like I just came out on the losing end of a fight with a bobcat. I'll sometimes shave my head with my electric, but it takes twice as long.

I wonder if that's it. The more I think about it, I'm not sure how anyone could guarantee streaming at any particular bit rate because there are so many factors that are out of their control. Bandwidth and ISP restrictions being very big issues.

Maybe. But even then the differences should be next to nothing. Perhaps the compression needed to properly stream it makes a bigger difference? Because a 320 file stored on your computer should sound no different than its CD counterpart.

Spotify streams at 160kbps on your computer. So yes, you should notice a big difference between it and CD quality. If you get their premium subscription you get streaming at 320kbps. In that case, you shouldn't hear any difference at all if the file was properly encoded.

I rip them to ALAC. That way you have the full lossless file that you have on the CD. Then you can create whatever you want from that. I would create a copy of each and see for yourself if one is better than the other. As I said before, 256 is the cutoff for me. And actually, are you using an iPod/Phone? If so, you can designate the format and bitrate to convert your music to before loading it on your device. I set mine for 256 AAC, that way I don't have ALAC files on there taking huge chunks of storage away. I once did a comparo between CD, AAC 256 VBR, MP3 256, as well as a Mastered For iTunes versions of Sympathy For The Devil. Through both loudspeakers and headphones, both of which are surgically clean, I heard zero difference. I actively tried convincing myself that I heard differences. You know, like the MP3 was slightly lighter on bass, or the Mfi version was "rounder", or there was an abundance of sibilance, blah, blah, blah. The same nonsense you hear from those who have convinced themselves that they have bionic hearing and x-ray vision. Or claim to have the laughable "higher resolving" system which is usually centered around tube amps and turntables, the two home audio pieces that introduce the highest levels of distortion to the audio chain. But try for yourself. And go with whichever puts the biggest smile on your face.

That's an excellent point, Sonny. But there are enough out there that have to have every "new" version of every recording they own. Just take this and Hoffman's website as an example. How many threads at either have to do with original releases rather then re-masters/reissues/hi-rez/HDTracks/SACD and whatever those super duper Japanese CD's are called? There are still plenty of OCD music collectors out there.

If you already have it on CD, or at least a higher bit rate digital format, then save your money for something you don't already own. Lark is right. This is yet another way for the record companies to separate fools from their money one more time.

Yeah, I still have a subscription to Emusic. Their only problem being their catalog isn't nearly the size of iTunes catalog, and some of their albums are still in lower (i.e. under 256kbps) bit rate MP3. Whereas everything in the iTunes store is 256 VBR AAC. And that is my personal cutoff point to where I no longer hear a difference.

I have compared some Mastered For iTunes tracks against their CD counterparts and heard zero difference. No big deal since the Mfi material isn't any more expensive than the regular.

http://www.vinylren.com/_index.php