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: Boyk and Cheever papers shot down...

Posted by andy19191 on March 19, 2007 at 09:01:11

In Reply to: Re: Boyk and Cheever papers shot down... posted by theaudiohobby on March 19, 2007 at 06:25:16:

> I am pleased that the information in both publications have been
> scrutinised in the context of existing information on the subject and
> have been found lacking i.e. the models and some of the key
> assumptions that form the basis of each of these publications are not
> applicable real-world devices, which renders them redundant as a valid
> citations to support reasonable discussions on amplifier distortion, I
> say reasonable become some folks will simply wave off the valid
> criticism leveled against both papers and cite them anyway.

Now the Cheever thesis can and should be condemned for a failure to follow the scientific method. But if much of the work was copied from Baxandall how can the Baxandall work be used to shoot it down? I am not saying it cannot simply that it seems odd.

The Boyk report would seem to be the complete opposite. Here is a music lecturer with, presumably, audiophile beliefs who roles up his sleeves and does some work to show how his expectations map to the scientific domain with some help from an Electrical Engineering prof. The presented work is clear, easy to follow and not distorted in any immediately obvious way. Yes there is some wishful thinking along audiophile lines and some laziness in speculating on psychoacoustic outcomes without taking the small amount of time to look them up but the results look perfectly reasonable and do not seem to support audiophile beliefs in any form I recognise.

If one shoots down the Cheever work on grounds of unscientific work surely one must support the Boyk work for the same reason?

As far as real world devices are concerned the Boyk work is quite clear about what is compared, how and why. To shoot it down for something it does not claim to be seems unreasonable and has strong echoes of audiophile behaviour. To shoot it down because the details are incorrect is another matter but are the details incorrect?

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

Sonic Craft

---

[ 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 ]

---