Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

RE: Actually, I did...

You're right in that we can go on and on about this.
This is also not a new fight: people have been fighting about this here a lot.

Let me leave you with this to consider though: If we/the audiophile community had agreed upon objective definitions of accuracy: the fine folks at LAMM and the fine folks at Halcro would not be both asserting that their respective amps are more accurate than the other. One of them asserts a lower rate of THD, the other questions that relevancy, and asserts that it doesn't matter as much as harmonic feedback. Indeed, listeners fall on each side of this argument asserting one is more accurate than another.

How do we resolve this? We resolve this by saying that one can never be UNIVERSALLY accepted as being more accurate and we give up. We say that each manufacturer and listener must decide for themselves what is more accurate, and if not accurate, then some other SUBJECTIVE term.

As human beings, our hearing varies from person to person. For it is not only our ears that hear, but it is our brains that interpret what we hear. And, what is "accurate" for an older person may have changed from another younger person, or perhaps even in the same person when she was younger.

I bet you that if you and I sat down over a couple of beers and listened to the same music and the same gear and ran a comparison between Halcro an LAMM, we might come to similar conclusions listening to a certain recording of Stradivarius violin. But, perhaps a player of that violin might come along and disagree. When we hear a normal, rock, recording, it is at least 5 generations removed from when it was played in the control room. I can tell you that when my band was recorded, the lead bass guitar sounded different in the room, then different on the rough mixes, then different on the final mixes, then different being cut to lacquer, then on the final vinyl, then different on the final CD.
Cripes, this happens all of the time, another subjective variance removing us from objectivity accuracy. Have you ever heard a small system, in a small room, (with stand-mount speakers), ever deliver the real bass weight of the lower register of an acoustic piano?

My point in saying this is in order to have objectivity, you must have universal acceptance: otherwise it's subjective. Objectivity is like theoretical math. 2+2=4 always, anyway: it's either right, or it's not, and we all agree. "Natural," - is always subjective.


From All Experts:

""Generally, demonstration is limited by a set of assumptions, and also by acceptance of what given observations mean. If you therefore reject either or both of these, it's doubtful that whatever I provide will be found satisfactory.

First, one must assume that: Earth is a planet and not some confection of the mind, or "virtual entity" within we all find ourselves. In other words, there exists an objective and independent reality.

Also, one must assume that whatever I can tell you that I can see, or observe, you can also. If you are blind, for example, even partially, this assumption fails and what I provide is useless.

Third, we must assume that the language I am referencing is also understood by you to mean the same thing. Else, all bets are off.

In terms of the observations, it must be clear that what I describe is reasonable to you, and moreoever can be confirmed and duplicated where you are. It must also be at least approximately true, that the meaning of the observations as I interpret them, is also shared by you.

If any of these breaks down, then what I tender will be dismissed.

That out of the way, let's get to specifics. If the Earth revolves around the Sun - and is not static in space - then it must be true that over the course of a year say, we observe differences - for example in:

i) the stars that appear at the same time in the night sky

ii) the altitude and azimuth (position with respect to the horizon's N, S points) of the Sun.

The first is easily verified, say over the course of obseving the night sky at the same time (say, 8 p.m. local time) each night. You will therefore see a procession of different stars, objects as time goes by.

This is the first indicator that Earth must be moving through space and not stationary.

A further observation to reinforce this is *revolution* and not merely linear displacement is obtained by repeating said observations *year after year* and making notes of the objects seen.

In the same 6-month period, therefore, you ought to see the same objects in the night sky at the same time.

This implies repetitive motion, and hence that the Earth is not merely linearly moving in space, but returning time and again to the same relative position in space (e.g. in it s orbit)

Second, the position, altitude of the Sun. If you do the same thing for the Sun, you will note its changing positions both in altitude - at specific calendar dates - and its rising (and setting) positions along the horizon.

Thus, it ought to be obvious - again, say over a 6-month period of observation - that these are changing.

Again, if you repeat them *year after year* you will see the exact same positions duplicated, suggesting that the Earth is returning to its same position in space relative to the Sun. (The seasons, of course, are also indicators of this)
Of course, you can refine measurements - say of the Sun's changing altitude - through the use of an instrument like an astrolabe (which can easily be made using a lead bob attached to a string, and affixed to a wooden or cardboard protractor).
Hopefully, this will help you to see how we know the Earth revolves around the Sun - even though I do not claim it is "proof".""



"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Schiit Audio  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]