Scott Dolan

Right, but in that case you'd get multiple titles to select from. And if he didn't get that... I remember ripping The Beatles box set. Good god, there were at least four titles to choose from for each disc. Even one in Japanese script!

Hahahaha..., thanks. That IS pretty clever. And quite the tongue twister forwards. I remember the first time I saw it I sat there for a minute or two trying to figure out how to pronounce it.

I've always wondered what his username meant...

And those unheard before! Only by sound engineers in the studio before they ruin it!

They do indeed. I think Monoprice does as well. I'd definitely recommend going that route.

Um, yeah. And Elton John's testimonial should clear everything up for you. "It blew me away, it was like being in a recording studio," said Elton John. "Listening to Bob Dylan, you could hear him playing the harmonica right next to you. You could hear the drums and the backing vocals on 'Respect' by Aretha [Franklin]. I haven't heard a sound like that since vinyl." So, essentially what you have here is a bunch of snake oil salesmen, who likely have an honest fondness for vinyl, who are telling everyone that even though vinyl introduces a higher level of distortion and has less dynamic range than CD, that this Pono horseshit is somehow lightyears beyond CD and sounds more like...um, vinyl. OK... It's really just taking the mythology of vinyl being superior to CD and putting a digital spin on it. Which is quite ingenious, BTW. They've obviously studied the marketing of such nonsense as cable elevators, sonic pucks, $1,000 HDMI cables, etc. And now they've made this move which helps ensure that they aren't competing in the tired ol' digital market of MP3's/FLAC/iPods, but creating some "entirely new". They'll get a niche of audiophools who will lap this garbage up and proudly proclaim how superior it really is due to their expert level ability to bullshit themselves into believing anything. They'll make a very modest profit, but that's about it. Hey, they're no dummies. They didn't crowd source this project because they thought it was going to corner the market. They knew damn well this was going to be a one shot deal, and that the jig would be up sooner rather than later.

GA, have you figured the overall length you're going to need? How long for each side?

I'm certain he was talking about regular speaker cable, since he was talking about the money saved. You can buy fully terminated and nicely jacketed speaker cable for far less than you'd spend on true in-wall speaker cable.

Now you're talking. Good rule of thumb: only pay for purdy cables if you're going to be able to admire their beauty.

If they are going to be out of sight there is really no point in spending extra money on purdy cables. Just get the proper gauge for the length you'll be running and be done with it.

Ah, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks, Larry. What a shame. At least he had his priorities straight. Good for him.

I remember seeing him all over the place back in the 70's and early 80's. But then he kinda fell off of the map. Funny cat, though.

A bar that would probably have one of Neil Young's worst albums cranked up loud on their PA system. Well, if we weren't able to settle our differences at said bar, we only have one option left. Find a better bar! BTW, did you catch the thread on HA about all of this? It wasn't particularly kind...

I'd say those reservations are both minor, AND likely due to the limits in communication the internet straps us with. If we were sitting in a bar face to face we'd have them ironed out in a matter of minutes. And if we didn't, we could step outside and settle it like men! With a knockdown drag out round of rock/paper/scissors!

OK, I guess that's fair enough. I'd still like to see those ABX tests if you can direct me to them. As for MP3 vs AAC, I have to be perfectly honest and again say I can't find any appreciable differences between them, either. Now, I know AAC "leaves more detail in", but just this past week I compared a 240 VBR MP3 (Sympathy For The Devil - Rolling Stones) that I had downloaded from Emusic to its 256 VBR AAC counterpart from iTunes and after about 20 minutes of desperately trying to find a difference, I gave up. I did this both through loudspeakers, and headphones. So even the MP3 vs AAC argument at higher bit rates seems rather dubious to me, even if I do defer to the fact that they are "different". Either way, I've enjoyed the conversation. It never hurts to have food for thought, or being forced to do even more homework. At the end of the day, I'd say you and I are pretty much on the same wavelength.

I visit HA all the time. I've never seen a 256 VBR AAC vs CD ABX. The only ABX tests I've seen are between different compressed formats. If you can link me to the appropriate test, I would greatly appreciate it. I do find it somewhat confusing that earlier you said VBR averaging 256 was your cutoff point (and that sentiment is echoed far and wide amongst fair-minded audio entusiasts, including myself), then Jerry said cd blows MP3 away to which you took minor issue with, and now you seem to be saying exactly the opposite. Some people claim they hear a difference between cd and FLAC/ALAC/AIFF as well. I take what people say they can hear with a grain of salt. As for your closing line, advances in codecs are made using scientific research. It's not based on what people do and do not hear anecdotally.

No, it was implied when you stated if you don't have some awesome system for playing back vinyl, then stick with CD's and MP3's. If you have a lesser system, the music won't sound that great. If you have a superior system, the music will sound great. The source is irrelevent.

CD's are not inferior to vinyl no matter what kind of system you're listening to. That's simply some nonsense that audiophiles who want everyone to think are on the cutting edge of sonic reproduction want others to think. http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl) Might as well make the argument that VCR is only worth worrying about if you have a superior CRT television to play it back on. Vinyl, like tubes, sounds different to digital. But, good system, or bad, it really doesn't matter which format you're using. It's strictly personal preference.

This is not the case, since there are people that really can hear the difference, even at 320 kbps. They are just not in majority, and it all depends on the conditions. Sorry, I'm just not buying it. The people that claim they can hear the difference are also the same people who think the ABX test is a sin against god. If I ever see a definitive and conclusive ABX of these mythical golden ear types, then I'll believe it. Until then, I'm calling bullshit.

It is true objectively. CDs are wav files, a lossless format. If the bandwith from 20 to 20 khz is saturated with signal, even 256 VBR will miss something. Try an ABX test and tell us if you still think CD:s blow MP3:s away. It's easy to compare any and every format with CD:s since they've been around for so long. But a recording may be technically inferior to a 16/44 wav and still be indistinguishable from that, depending on the material, compression rate, listener, listening conditions etc. Amen, and pass the potatoes. And as I said before, you don't even have to ABX. Just do a simple A/B test. IMO, a double blind isn't even necessary. I wanted to hear a difference, yet still didn't. Compressed digital files, sampled at a higher rate, using a modern codec, will be indistinguishable from a CD. Period.

Yeah, I'll have to order some of your stuff, because those two pieces were really, really good.* I see you had Ras with you on that date. That's my boy! I love Ras to death ever since our days back on the old Freejazz.org. He and I also traded a lot of bootleg material many moons ago. Had the pleasure of meeting him in person at Viz several years ago. Very quiet and humble cat. Funds are somewhat frozen right now due to some rather expensive home renovations we're doing, but I'll hit you up soon. BTW, who was the guitarist? That cat was fucking smoking! And I normally don't care that much for electronic instruments in Jazz. *I know many artists hate being compared to others, so please understand I mean absolutely no offense. But Tent Walk almost immediately had me thinking of Eric Dolphy's Music Matador. Has that same humor and knockabout feel to it. And that's one of my all time favorite Jazz tunes.

Yeah, but Jerry that simply isn't true. Older MP3's ripped on software a decade ago, or longer, at a smaller sample rate, sure. But nowadays? Absolutely not. The new codecs and formats are simply too advanced. Rip something at 256 VBR in the format of your choice and A/B it with the original CD recording. I'd be willing to guarantee you won't hear the difference. I did it, and actively TRIED to convince myself there was a difference. And out of sheer frustration I threw in the towel. The differences simply didn't exist. Or if they do, I cannot hear them. And while I have a decent case of tinnitus, my hearing is still excellent otherwise.

Listening to the Allen Lowe tracks right now. Tent Walk is absolutely stellar!

Of course, we all do. But that's all he ever presented here, and that still pissed off certain people. So that's what I was saying, let's keep pissing them off. Not rude at all. It's a pat on the back for aloc, and a finger in the eye of his haters.

My money says no. Like most of the magical and mystical audio "advances" that come out that "blow MP3's away", this is more likely than not a bunch of hooey.