BAJ issue 50 6.indd - Malcolm Steward

LETTERS
6
Letters to the Editor
Dear Malcolm,
I
write in response to the feature on MP3 that
was written recently by James Clark. I get the
impression that Mr Clark is not a seasoned
audiophile.
His article is a bit like writing to the world’s top
chefs and telling them that if their meat is off just
add a load of spices and your customers will not be
able to taste the difference. He could quote tests
that were paid for by the Spice and Chilli marketing
board!
The effect of masking I do perceive but not
completely. Take the example of a baby crying in a
crowded noisy room - the mum will be able to hear
it, when your MP3 algorithm would happily deny
its existence. So to state with such certainty about
the limits of our ears is simply incorrect.
I would like to say that I have just had the
pleasure of the latest DCS CD player - the Scarlatti.
We demo’d it to a client who, like myself, could not
believe how good it was (and, yes, he bought one.)
I never thought I’d hear such subtle detail and
sense of reality from a CD source. I’m still not going
to sell my vinyl, but I can be absolutely certain that
should I compress that CD to MP3 and play it back
again I would not be remotely interested in paying
a fortune for it and I’d go out and buy a new Ducati
1098 as it makes a better sound than most hi-fis.
I find the sound from MP3 rather like a piece of
wet string compared to the CD original on a hi-fi.
Of course it’s fine for portable players and the like,
but all information discarded from a CD is audible,
as the CD standard is set so low that there is no
margin for error, without hearing it. Of course you
have to be very interested to care about these
differences.
So it’s a shame to read from the BAJ an article
that effectively closes the door to the wonders of
Human Aural Perception, reminding me of scientist
from the 1950’s who commented that “if your eyes
were as perceptive as your ears you’d be able to see
the craters on the moon with the naked eye”.
All the best
Chris Adair
The Cornflake Shop
Hey, Chris, we don’t ask that you agree with
everything we put into print: just that you give it a bit
of thought. We don’t pretend that any opinions we
express are the inarguable truth. The whole point of
our features is to be thought-provoking, and James
clearly succeeded here.
Dear Malcolm,
I
read with astonishment Martin Colloms’ humble
request that the audio trade should feel duty
bound to subscribe to his publication.
Surely market forces are at work here,
subscribers voting with their pockets as to what
constitutes added value to their hobby or work.
If articles in HIFICRITIC are ‘genuinely
independent’ the implication is that articles
elsewhere by the same authors are not. This
is closer to the truth and surely with a more
intellectual consumer explains why all audio
publications are seeing revenues dropping.
Why should the audio trade feel obliged to
support the declining incomes of authors who
have brought this situation on themselves,
no doubt profiting from less than genuinely
independent articles?
Is this the last stand of the dinosaur press or will
we soon be asked to purchase a testimonial copy
of this publication?
Regards,
Conrad Mas
Managing Director, Avid HiFi Ltd.
You talk of “authors who have brought this situation
on themselves” as though authors exercise total
control over what appears bearing their name. That
is infrequently the case. Authors are briefed and
have to write to a magazine’s guidelines. If they fail
to satisfy the title’s requirements then their copy is
adjusted accordingly by the sub-editor. Writers tend
not to complain about this too vociferously because
it is hard enough to earn a living as a writer in this
industry at the best of times without upsetting those
who employ you.
Believe me, this is a much deeper and more
convoluted issue than my reply suggests, and one
about which much more could – and may well – be
written.
If you would like to comment
on anything you’ve read in the BAJ
please email
malcolm@theBAJ.com
The BAJ ISSUE 50 | 2008