explain your logic plz do

btw intel user

a lot of great links inside these I can provide more if you wish

http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths

http://nwavguy.***/

/facepalm

lol your analogy is a workstation card to a mainsteam media card, no comparison, it has to do with computing vs media? do you even know what an amp does?

wait you did it again you had to put dollar amounts in it,

you fit post 6 on the headfi link---> For some audiophiles, it actually has nothing to do with the "love of sound" and "trusting your ears." It has more to do with having the most expensive system, knowing the least about it, and making outrageous claims about how they have been in the hobby for a long time and they know what sounds best.

you should research how your brain works with sound

provided in those links above, was the outrageous expensive shit ever clearly selected across all blind tests?

This post was edited by yupitsmeh on Oct 7 2014 07:43pm

I know.. compare a consumer grade Nvidia Quadro to Pixar's supercomputer that probably has thousands of Nvidia Quadro's (or equivalent) combined with a 10,000 core Intel XEON CPUS (or equivalent) still that supercomputer can't run "pixar graphics" or "avatar graphics" @ 60, 30 or even 24 fps. Or even 1 fps. or even 1 FRAME PER MINUTE.
h
the fact is even these mega hyper powerful super computers need HOURS to render a SINGLE frame of modern hollywood CGI, but is this CGI really that much better / more advanced / more realistic than what we can achieve in real time, 60 fps with a consumer grade graphics card?


Of course not, you plateau as per law of diminishing returns.


But yes if I had the money, I'd buy the best, even if its only 1% better.


Edit: I can use any analogy you like, take cars for instance...


Golf GTI @ £25,000 has a top speed 160 MPH, while a £240,000 Ferrari (10 times the price) tops only 210 MPH (not even 40% increase in top speed..) and a £1.6 million Bugatti Veyron Super Sport maxes out around 260MPH (its 431km/h to be exact, whatever that makes out to in miles...)

This post was edited by MGS4BestGameEverMade on Oct 8 2014 10:16am

And about your article... You can find 1000s of articles that are against your claims, you just won't acknowledge them and say hurr durr but they didn't blind test or "but they were paid by the manufacturers" etc.. So I won't waste my time finding an article supporting the difference in cheap and expensive audio gear, cause there's hundreds of thousands of them floating around.

This post was edited by MGS4BestGameEverMade on Oct 8 2014 10:19am

lol dodge more

link one blind test

Meh I'd rather trust my own ears, I've participated in multiple blind tests and win them every time.


Found some cool online blind tests though, they're just frequencies (not actual music or movie content)

http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_index.php


On the easier tests I kept getting 10/10 so I just started doing the most difficult ones...


9/10 on dynamic range of 78dB
8/10 on 1c pitch difference
6/10 on 0.1dB sound difference
5/10 on the20khz hearing test


I just guessed on the last one though couldn't hear any difference at all tbh, but then again human hearing only goes up to 20khz anyways (but you can 'feel' higher frequencies with sound systems)


Used my Denon D5000s

on scale from 1-9 my hearing was 9 in the military o.o (same with eyesight)

Holy fucking shit, I thought that shitty ass $350 Beats were overpriced - Now Chanel has partnered up with Monster Audio to create a $5000 pair of 'quilted headphones'.


"The designer and Monster Audio have teamed up to release luxury headphones that feature Chanel’s signature quilted leather aesthetic and iconic logo, while the sound engineers behind Beats by Dre are responsible for the audio quality."


OH DEAR LOLD

http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciaadamczyk/2014/09/25/chanel-unveils-5000-quilted-headphones/?utm_campaign=forbesfbsf&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

will buy 10pairs
ty for link

have you did the golden ear challenge?