In Reply to: Re: One more thing, while I'm at it. posted by rcrump on November 12, 2002 at 06:39:23:
"Phil, DBT will not advance anything......It will tell you which component sounds better is all, something that is better measured with a meter if we could afford one sensitive enough.....DBT is merely a beauty contest, but one that would pit Ruth Buzzi against Bette Middler"Sorry, but I believe you have it backwards. I gave an example of that in your posting a result of -120dB, when in fact, you'll find that artifact to be 40dB below your playback equipment distortion levels. So where is the beauty contest then? Is it in being able to say you can measure something that is -120dBc, or whether or not there is an audible difference? Test equipment already is, and has been for some time, far better than the human ear in measuring differences that are not at all audible. You can't throw out the DBT, it is the only way you'll ever advance the art by correlating AUDIBLE differences with measured differences and not necessarily at the singular component level, either. Otherwise you have no foundation upon which to base your results.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: One more thing, while I'm at it. - Jitter_by_Coffee 07:59:06 11/12/02 (8)
- Re: One more thing, while I'm at it. - Ubiquitous Skittercat ;,,,~ 19:32:49 11/12/02 (7)
- Re: One more thing, while I'm at it. - Dan Banquer 09:40:55 11/14/02 (0)
- Re: One more thing, while I'm at it. - Jitter_by_Coffee 20:44:15 11/13/02 (0)
- I believe it is the tests that are flawed, not the equipment - E-Stat 14:47:59 11/13/02 (4)
- Re: I believe it is the tests that are flawed, not the equipment - Jitter_by_Coffee 20:38:26 11/13/02 (3)
- Therein lies the challenge - E-Stat 03:50:55 11/14/02 (2)
- Re: Therein lies the challenge - Jitter_by_Coffee 08:58:01 11/14/02 (1)
- We certainly agree here - E-Stat 13:44:27 11/14/02 (0)