[
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 ]
64.13.14.96
In Reply to: RE: Wow! And I knew better... posted by jpvs on July 08, 2008 at 18:54:23
I enjoyed your post, especially the explanation of the quote which as you may imagine I lifted from Bartlett's on-line! I'm sort of a lightweight Shakespeare fan. I grew up in Medford and a highlight of summer was warm evenings spent watching plays "under the stars" in Ashland.
But electronics has fascinated me since I was about five and it's both my profession and one of my avocations. About thirty years ago I tentatively tried this hypothesis: People's observations are usually reliable but their explanations aren't. It has proven to be such an effective approach to problem solving that for me it's now an axiom and I'd never go back. I do think they should be weighted, but I consider that quite different than doubted.
"The problem is people thinking that they can actually perceive anything unbiased and that any results they might have can be considered applicable to others without any external, objective reference the parties involved can agree upon to reduce the effects of bias."
Yes, I mostly agree. However I see the rub in transferability usually being the result of not correctly apprehending the underlying mechanism rather than one of observational bias. If the root cause of what you hear can be chased down then it opens the door to predicting how other systems may be affected. This can be a very difficult task and often well nigh impossible without sufficient knowledge, experience and access to often expensive equipment. So what's a hobbyist to do, sometimes you just have to settle for your best guess.
But I firmly reject arguments that if I can't explain an experience I've had in a manner satisfying to another that the obvious implication is that I didn't really have the experience. Hell, lot's of the time I can't explain them well enough to satisfy me, but I don't doubt that they happened.
Here's a recent example of sorts: Nowadays I use my desk computer for a music source when I'm working in the study. It's hard to believe how good it sounds all things considered, but it's seemed a little off the last few months, not bad, just off. A couple of Saturdays ago I decided to look at the audio output with a scope because I was curious why the two CD drives in the machine sounded differently and wanted to see if in some strange manner one was inverted even though they both use digital extraction. (they were both the same) anyway I noticed a little more noise on the output than I thought I used to have and poked around a bit. Ultimately I discovered that the feed from the D/A on the drive itself had gotten mysteriously turned on and I didn't notice because I didn't have that "mixer" input visible. Well, I turned it back off and that reduced the noise and that was the end of it.
Almost. To my amazement, the next day I was just tickled with how good the sound was again. Now I wasn't hearing any noise, and the noise wasn't all that loud yet it seemed to make a substantial difference in the pleasure of the result. Then, just a few days ago I was was reading a thread in PC audio and someone was saying that the K-mixer only does sample rate conversion if two or more inputs are used. Now it all made sense, having the unused (I don't think I even plugged the wire back into the drive) input unmuted probably caused not just a little inaudible noise, but likely caused a whole mode shift for the worse in the S/W paradigm.
The moral is that I apparently resolved a problem that was bugging me by dint of sheer luck. I was working on a different issue. I turned off the mixer input just on GP's, not because the noise was very high. The explanation, assuming that the problem was indeed caused by a mode shift in the software, was one that I would never have guessed even though I've tried diligently to understand that system via the manufacturers terrible documentation with little success.
I see a parallel here with many things that audiophiles run across. Had I posted the experience prior to happening across what I believe is a likely explanation would I have been excoriated and told that I was only imagining it? Will I yet? After all, I've made no effort to try and verify that a mode change in the mixer was it or that turning inputs on cause the problem. I haven't even tried reestablishing the initial conditions to verify that the sound becomes worse again.
There really is a difference between a hobby and work. We're not going to be shipping 10K of something that might not work well. It's one system, one customer, and that customer is always right! Since that customer is currently happy, the engineering department is going to bed.
Rick
Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]