[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
84.75.150.159
In Reply to: RE: Much said about "audibility" is beliefs rather than facts posted by Richard BassNut Greene on June 17, 2008 at 10:07:38
"When brand names are hidden and A-B SPL's and L-R Channel Balance are closely matched, those audiophiles who have tested their abilities in the past 30 years have had far different experiences with electronic components than those who believe electronics have easily heard differences somewhat like speakers, although they never attempt to prove they can hear those differences to witnesses."
Richard I know this is a kind of Mantra for you so please just read the articles and discuss the articles...for once. If you will note they do blind listening tests on music files that have had distortion of varying amounts with regard to the models used to make the distortion. It is audible and at surprisingly low levels for some kinds of distortion (read: specific circuit topologies that generate particular transfer functions).
"The right way to test what measurements are audible is to find two electronic components that do sound different to most listeners in blind comparisons, and later compare all available measurements in an attempt to explain why people might hear the differences they described (perhaps no measurement will provide a clue)."
Actually, I think using modeled data on the SAME recording is an equally valid way to determine audibility limits for different modeled circuits. It is also a lot easier to do and to make a controlled test from rather than trying to swap gear back and forth, which is fraught with logistical problems as well as perhaps giving clues to the listeners. Only cables can be conveniently ABXed. With music files one can take the same recording and put all these modeled results on one cd and randomly skip between tracks. All nice and easy.
"The right way to test what measurements are audible is to find two electronic components that do sound different to most listeners in blind comparisons, and later compare all available measurements in an attempt to explain why people might hear the differences they described (perhaps no measurement will provide a clue)."
What's to explain then, Richard, these new research papers that seek to correlate sound and measurements showing quite low thresholds for certain kinds of distortions?? I think you are stuck in a mental rut.
"Dr. Geddes is one who believes the results of tests, and uses such inexpensive amplifiers that he makes my amplifiers seem "high end"."
This doesn't make Dr. Geddes a good or particularly sensitive listener now does it? A good music historian may know everything there is to know about a Stradivarius violin...except how to play it properly. A good scientist might even know all the secrets of how that violin works...except how to duplicate or play it properly. Just like a great coach may not have been a great player, Geddes might know all the tricks about acoustics and how to make great models of audio systems but maybe he can't hear worth a damn.
Another thing: I am not using Geddes paper to support any particular belief other than things in audio aren't what they seem in particular with electronic specifications and those who use them to hold up the quality of a particular piece of equipment. I think that I have posted ample evidence that shows in fact amplifiers with what people "think" is high distortion may not even be audibly distorted while those amplifiers with "inaudibly low" distortion are nothing of the sort. There is a big misconception that as long as the distortion is below some value, like say 1% (whoever said this was high or low distortion??), then it MUST be inaudible. It turns out that this may or may not be true depending on the content of that distortion.
Its the same with you and cables, claiming that the "small" measurable differences (on what absolute scale Richard?) couldn't possibly be audible because they are "too small" in your opinion. What constitutes too small to be audible? In which frequency range? You are the one with fixed beliefs that obviously cloud your abilities to listen critically to equipment. Your foregone conclusions most likely prevent you from hearing things you might (there is no guarantee your hearing is any good...most likely you haven't bothered to train it properly being fixated on bass and speakers) have otherwise heard. Perhaps subtlety of thought or going beyond the surface of subjects eludes you? Just musing...
Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]