Home Propeller Head Plaza

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

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

Re: A really big can of worms

"And when we are talking of loads, why do people of your kind Soundmind persist on making measurements of power-amplifiers with a purely resistive load?"

I agree. On this one you are preaching to the choir. The methods for measuring and specifying amplifier performance do NOT correspond to the way they are used in the real world. If you have read my postings on the subject, you will see that I have said that much more work needs to be done to bring those measurements into conformity with their normal application. And I agree that not only are loudspeaker loads not ordinarily purely resistive, they are not even passive loads. That explains at least in part why different amplifiers measuring the same by our antiquated methods sound different. This however does not excuse the maker or marketer of amplifiers to make claims he cannot substantiate. What it does is to prod him to hire or become the scientist who develops new objective criteria and present them to his peers so that they will accept his claims. It is not good enough for Otala to theorize about TIM, he had to define it, devise a way to measure it, and show that his designs were a valid improvement in reducing it. I am not opposed to progress. But mere claims are not progress. That is why we have a scientific method and peer groups who challenge and duplicate test results. When they are proven, they become part of the science and are legitimate fodder for the ad men, not before.

“Take my word for it, if you can hear it, it CAN be measured.”

I'll stick with that. We have sound transducers much more sensitive than the human ear drum and we have the electronics and mathematics to analyze anything fed into or coming out of them. Once again, if it isn't being done yet, that does not give anyone license to make claims based on the unproven and expect to be taken seriously by other engineers. You do the science, publish it for all to see, and when the majority of us are convinced, we accept it as the new expanded version of the science.

"And yes I’m also very suspicious when somebody comes with a “new” explanation to some of the things I’m hearing. But I almost get MAD when somebody is trying to tell me that I can’t be hearing what I’m hearing because we can’t measure it."

I am not necessarily suspicious about someone coming up with a new insight into sensory perception or how our brain interprets it. But because our senses are so easily tricked, especially our hearing and because our memory of sensory perception is so fallable, here more than ever, carefully devised and performed experiments must be conducted to determine what people actually can and can't hear. And again, the criteria of proof is the ability of other skilled scientists and engineers to look at claims, data, methods, results, and try to repeat them or shoot holes in the logic which connects them. Then when a difference you think you hear is proven to exist, it becomes incumbent upon people studying it to correlate the difference with objective differences in electrical and mechanical performance to explain how and why those differences come about, not to advance unsupported theories as proof. That is what science is all about and that is what is usually lacking in the consumer audio industry insofar as "high end" products as well.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  WEET Music Caps  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]