Posted by Guest on 11/09/06 17:09

--
This post is Sponsored by: www.overheadsoft.com

http://www.linkreferral.com/cgi-bin/linkreferal/adwel.cgi?oldrefid=20013
"JerrySmith'sTightEnd" <jhgfjh@hjhg.com> wrote in message
news:KxG4h.40$yE6.10@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Guest" <llcoolj@comcast.com> wrote in message
> news:B9z4h.7318$9v5.6346@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>>
>> --
>> This post is Sponsored by: www.overheadsoft.com
>>
>> http://www.linkreferral.com/cgi-bin/linkreferal/adwel.cgi?oldrefid=20013
>> "Jim Gilliland" <usemylastname@cheerful.com> wrote in message
>> news:4552a256$0$32406$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
>>> Randy Yates wrote:
>>>
>>>> S/PDIF is a single-wire interface that embeds the clock with the data.
>>>> Because of this, problems with the interface that aren't serious
>>>> enough to cause bit errors can still affect the sound by affecting the
>>>> quality of the recovered clock. A PLL is used to recover the clock,
>>>> and depending on the type of loop filter used in the PLL, input noise
>>>> from cable degradations could introduce jitter into the digital clock
>>>> and thus the reconstructed analog signal.
>>>>
>>>> How audible is it? That is a whole dissertation unto its own.
>>>
>>> Agreed. That's why I focused on his remarks about volume and bass.
>>> Modern equipment does a pretty good job of recovering the clock, though.
>>> It wasn't always true.
>>>
>>> I can't help but wonder if this guy isn't just a troll - it's hard to
>>> imagine anyone believing this kind of garbage. Then again, there's an
>>> awful lot of snake oil on the market. Someone must be buying it -
>>> perhaps we've just discovered who that is. <g>
>>>
>>> I'd suggest a good double blind test, but I doubt that he'd accept the
>>> results. He seems pretty fixed on his delusion.
>>
>> See son, you are biased without even giving it a try for yourself. I
>> would not waste my time if it were not true. Try the shit(with cables of
>> your choice) and see if you hear or see a difference. First, you have to
>> know what you are dealing with before you try and figure out what you are
>> supposed to hear or see.
>
> Dang, getting a bit bitter? And now those who disagree are "son", a
> putdown implying you are somehow older, wiser and more experienced? You
> have no training in engineering or technical matters, but act like your 15
> years of using consumer electronics mkes you an expert.

Who needs to be 'trained' but a dog? My 15 years of high resolution video
and a little over 20 years total experience with strict attention to detail
and flawless testing does make me an expert. I have dealt with many
different brand of a high end nature buddy. If you want to get technical,
then you are not dealing with the real world experience, only the
technical - which very few actually see.

Imagine getting technical about driving a car. Imagine getting technical
about having with your girl(guy?). Imagine getting technical about your
dinner. If you did, you would be very lonely, miserable and insane!

>
>
>
>>
>> You say that I am delusional, but how come I see scratches on the film
>> when I saw none with the generic? How come details are brighter, cleaner
>> and earth materials look as they should? Don't knock it until you try
>> it. What you have written is similar to a cocksucker who has never had
>> pussy. You look at porn seeing pussy and imagining what it is like from
>> reading about it and looking at it, but hands-on experience so very
>> different from you 'education' from reading.
>
> It seems you're getting back to talking about analog signal cables, which
> can make a marginal diference. If you're talking about differences with
> digital signal cables, you're retarded. Your continued fascination with
> homo-erotic imagery reveals thingsabout your personality, none of which
> have anything to do with the discussion. But hey, if you like that sort
> of thing, there's nothng wrong with that.
>

[Back to original message]