05-Sep-2019, 15:03
Well I'll add my findings to Guillaumes's. I've been more than a bit nervous to write anything as it's all subjective, no science involved in my viewpoint at all and all done for fun. Shoot me down in flames! I wasn't expecting any difference at all, yet I found it slightly more dynamic and fuller with the Telegartner, but with the SOtM somehow more narrow in presentation yet possibly more detail.
Why? I have no idea. It defies logic. Cognitive bias? Quite likely, but I had no idea if one option is supposed to be better than the other and didn't expect to be able to hear any differences. Something exposing a flaw elsewhere? Could be. Guillaumes's system is super-resolving and realistic and I seem to be able to hear things I couldn't hope to hear on mine. Differences are small, if any, and I suspect there are alternative methods of striving towards audio nirvana with a better cost/benefit ratio!
Why? I have no idea. It defies logic. Cognitive bias? Quite likely, but I had no idea if one option is supposed to be better than the other and didn't expect to be able to hear any differences. Something exposing a flaw elsewhere? Could be. Guillaumes's system is super-resolving and realistic and I seem to be able to hear things I couldn't hope to hear on mine. Differences are small, if any, and I suspect there are alternative methods of striving towards audio nirvana with a better cost/benefit ratio!
