Post by Perigo January 4, 2012 (71 of 87)
|
|
SA-CD.net has been in these 10 years one of the most important witness for SACD survivance. All of we, music and hifi lovers, have to thanks a lot Zeus and the supporters for the efforts to keep alive the most trustable and well-sounding system to reproduce music at home, named SACD. Happy new year!
|
|
|
Post by zeus January 4, 2012 (72 of 87)
|
|
Arnaldo said:
Personally, I never felt the urge to use SA-CD.net from a smartphone. It's not like posting on this forum or checking releases and reviews are the kind of urgent tasks that have to performed in the middle of a meal in a restaurant.
It's not about where you access this information, but how.
It's also an opportunity for me to bring this site back to its original purpose, namely recognition and reward for those producing excellence to perpetuate great recordings on the format. Discovery is what interests me ... instead of next-big-thing/real-soon-now discussions, extolling the virtues of something you haven't heard or using this site to leverage unrelated products/services.
|
|
|
Post by zeus January 4, 2012 (73 of 87)
|
|
Arnaldo said:
Why would someone use a smartphone instead of a computer when accessing this site at home or the office?
At the moment, there's little incentive because the site isn't formatted for these devices. Given a new way of interacting with the site, and (upcoming) double-density displays, you may just change your mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Amaldo, all reviews should appear in the review section......agreed....
But padding reviews with useless verbiage is also non~productive and subjective, at best.
And I love, love, love those who discredit the SOUND QUALITY of an SACD when others reviewing the SQ OF THE EXACT SAME TITLE AWARD IT 4 or 5 stars..........Maybe it's time for some posters to reassess the deficiencies of their equipment.........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arnaldo said:
Why would someone use a smartphone instead of a computer when accessing this site at home or the office?
I don't have one personally (yet) but maybe they'd want to post immediately after listening perhaps without needing a relatively noisy laptop?
|
|
|
|
|
|
rammiepie said:
And I love, love, love those who discredit the SOUND QUALITY of an SACD when others reviewing the SQ OF THE EXACT SAME TITLE AWARD IT 4 or 5 stars..........Maybe it's time for some posters to reassess the deficiencies of their equipment.........
Would that mean more or fewer poor ratings? :)
|
|
|
Post by seth January 4, 2012 (77 of 87)
|
|
Arnaldo said:
Personally, I never felt the urge to use SA-CD.net from a smartphone. It's not like posting on this forum or checking releases and reviews are the kind of urgent tasks that have to performed in the middle of a meal in a restaurant.
I use my iPhone at tablet to surf the web at home all the time -- I often read and post on the forum using them.
The website actually renders pretty well on the devices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polly Nomial said:
Would that mean more or fewer poor ratings? :)
I think it unfair to judge a disc as to it's sound quality when one's system isn't up to par when others with better equipment render a higher SQ rating. A lot of posters, I'm sure, would not knowingly purchase a disc when three or more posters (whose value judgement we trust) rate it poorly (SQ~wise).
I.E.: It seems the latest batch of EMIs from Japan have received less than stellar reviews in the SQ department (but, not all, of course) so I, personally, am not going to rush out and purchase them (considering the price of a place ticket to Japan is exhorbitant)
OT, but even blu~ray reviews are way off kilter and have turned many a potential buyer away from purchasing said disc because the reviewer either doesn't have a perfectly calibrated monitor or is tone deaf as to the SQ of the disc......aka poor equipment!
As to your initial question, Polly Nomial.........fewer poor ratings ......... but you have to have the goods and a great set of ears and a perfectly calibrated audio system to make these assessments valid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
rammiepie said:
I thought that's what you meant but your earlier post could have been read in an entirely different way - thanks for clearing this up.
Best
PN
|
|
|
Post by Peter January 5, 2012 (80 of 87)
|
|
rammiepie said:
I think it unfair to judge a disc as to it's sound quality when one's system isn't up to par when others with better equipment render a higher SQ rating.......
....
As to your initial question, Polly Nomial.........fewer poor ratings ......... but you have to have the goods and a great set of ears and a perfectly calibrated audio system to make these assessments valid.
Well said, in all respects.
|
|
