In Reply to: Re: Some morsels posted by Hafdef on November 12, 2002 at 20:48:30:
Wow! I really believed that this basic question would be easy enough to solve, to lay some kind of groundwork for further inquiries and discussions. Now, we have this sort of butterfly-fluttering-its-wings-in-China-having-an-effect-on-weather-in-New-York-type-proposition. The issue here is whether admitting that some phenomena does exists, does it assuredly imply that we as humans can perceive it. This is the bread and butter of subjectivists. Take some pretty well established phenomena, for example let's say the skin effect, and then contend that because it exists, it, therefore, is heard by the human ear at the end of the reproduction chain. Now we have some sort of an outline of an argument that audio reproduction entails more than the human hearing mechanism. I don't know if any discussion with any kind of basis in science can ever get off the ground if things as fundamental as these can't be settled. Audio in the last fifteen to twenty years really seems to be best summed up as a paradigm lost.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Some morsels - middleground 07:58:58 11/13/02 (12)
- No… - David Aiken 12:00:51 11/13/02 (11)
- Re: No… - Pat D 08:27:35 11/17/02 (2)
- I'm dubious about that possibility - David Aiken 23:25:48 11/17/02 (1)
- Re: I'm dubious about that possibility - Pat D 06:45:16 11/18/02 (0)
- Re: No… - John Escallier 19:14:00 11/13/02 (7)
- I doubt that US would.. - Penguin 16:10:55 11/14/02 (2)
- Alas, if it were only so easy.. - John Escallier 18:41:26 11/14/02 (1)
- Agree..` - Penguin 06:14:10 11/15/02 (0)
- Re: No… - David Aiken 22:37:51 11/13/02 (3)
- I did that - John Escallier 15:27:44 11/14/02 (2)
- Hey man - Phil Tower 00:34:24 11/15/02 (1)
- They were Klipsh corner horns. - John Escallier 15:33:07 11/18/02 (0)