In Reply to: RE: Define evidence posted by gusser on April 22, 2019 at 12:14:51:
"But it remains fact there is no published test data that proves effectiveness in audio reproduction."
But there is in the medical industry....
And that is the same claim made, - that it provides galvanic isolation.
And it may POSSIBLY work in audio reproduction....
It is not universalizable. Like the great Ayre company does, this isolation is provided in the DAC itself, - so the effectiveness of the Intona may be mitigated due to that fact. Also, - of course, - low performance audio reproduction will not benefit as well.
""That's why we measure any technology by science and mathematics.""
First, - these devices are measured, - the noise level is measured and reduced. Second, - just because that is the case, - whether that noise reduction makes it's way into the sound that comes out of the speakers is not certain. Do we really need to go over why?
And again, - we take this back to the point of making measurements: in that the measurements we have now do NOT ACCURATELY reflect the efficacy of the product, - that's why we use other tools to judge!!!
""If Uptone or Empirical audio could show evidence of audio improvement don't you think they would?""
It's up to the listener to properly apply: see above. The evidence has been demonstrated by the comparative listening done by the testers.
Uptone or Intona or Audioquest don't know what their devices are going to be used with. The recognize that there will be a difference if their devices are used with MacMini's or Sonore's ultraRendu. They will behave differently, - and they will behave much differently with a MacMini and a Meitner than they with a MacMini and Sony piece-of-junk.
"" What is the downside to that. The fcat is they can't because it's not there.""
Again, they have, they've gone through extensive testing. And with many of their products, - before they ship, they are well tested and used.
As I said they do publish their measurements. These are easily found on the interwebs. But again, these things don't keep planes in the air. They are made to possibly improve the listening experience, - and they're so ridiculously cheap, - and of such great value, - try it, - then sell it if you're not running a noisy computer.
In any case, - John's is developing a much more comprehensive set of measuring tools that will be MORE REFLECTIVE of performance. Those will be out soon. And then you will be presented with more evidence that you will close your mind too and stomp around shout about angrily.....
"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:
Follow Ups
- RE: Define evidence - Sordidman 12:37:17 04/22/19 (11)
- LOL! - gusser 12:43:59 04/22/19 (10)
- RE: LOL! - Sordidman 12:57:15 04/22/19 (9)
- What experience? - gusser 14:01:41 04/22/19 (8)
- RE: What experience? - Sordidman 14:24:04 04/22/19 (7)
- For your use I agree (nt) - gusser 14:54:56 04/22/19 (6)
- Again, not me. For high performance, digital file playback use - Sordidman 15:35:54 04/22/19 (5)
- Right! I don't have high performance digital playback! - gusser 15:53:41 04/22/19 (4)
- RE: Right! I don't have high performance digital playback! - Sordidman 16:21:40 04/22/19 (3)
- Vitriol - audioengr 10:42:36 06/06/19 (0)
- Your system. - gusser 16:56:37 04/22/19 (0)
- RE: Right! I don't have high performance digital playback! - gusser 16:27:52 04/22/19 (0)