I will.What's " **** " ?
It was an "s," followed by an "h," an "i" and a "t" before the Taliban nanny filter got hold of it and turned it into a series of asterisks.
And just to illustrate how utterly absurd and irrational this whole notion of "bad words" is, I could have said "Oh. Crap. Sorry about that."
se
Last edited:
Ever play with a TDR? (Time Domain Reflectometer) An RCA is around 100 ohms the source impedance can be 10 ohms to 1k or so, the load is rarely below 10k. If I get really bored I might capture a screen shot and share it. It bounces and rings like crazy. Can you hear that? I don't know, never tested it.
The frequencies involved with audio do not allow the kind of effects you can easily measure at RF, eg SWR.Oh i don't know, i wouldn't be so sure as there must be other things governing what's going on
Years before i got seriously into audio i was into radio, now you may not think there is a link but there could be.
If you include the word audible then LCR is perfectly adequate.
Here is an example of the same test one done by reversing the cable the other by using a dpdt switch.
How do I know that you are not just imagining that?I'm not having any problem with that.
Yes.
Now, what's the bandwidth of the pulse the TDR pings the line with? And what's the bandwidth of a typical recorded music signal?
se
Sounds similar to my little system.
And no patch bays for the last 10 years rdf?
So is all this gear hardwired and that patchbay just a useless organ? http://www.quadnyc.com/Studio_A_files/IMG_4997_2.JPG
I sense something here, but that is all...
What I'm saying is that those who are frequently referred to as "subjectivists" aren't truly subjectivists in my opinion.
A true subjectivist simply accepts their subjective experience for what it is and doesn't attempt to pass it off as anything more.
This in contrast to those often referred to as "subjectivists" who routinely assert their subjective experience as an unerring reflection of some physical reality. In other words, if they subjectively perceive some difference, they insist that it's due to an actual audible difference.
At that point, one is no longer a subjectivist in my opinion. I'm not sure what you'd call them. Perhaps "pseudo objectivists" would be a good term, after the phrase "pseudo science" which also tends to be part and parcel of their belief system.
se
That's my intent. As a matter of fact, I'm all for Tom doing so and hope to attend. I'm not on the side of those desperately wanting to torpedo it.
Who say's I am? As a rationalist, I have to accept that being human, I'm fallible (unlike the so called subjectivists). So no matter how remote, I could be wrong and again, unlike them, be forced to accept this conclusion. But I would certainly also want to know why, if there is indeed a physical reason (for non LCR etc wire "sound").
Terrific. So tell us about your method in your DBT's, since "disinterested" isn't "unknowing". How was the person switching blind to this fact? Do you analyze yourself to be a "non-adversarial" administrator?
Define "good-sounding" recording.
As a "non-adversarial", why haven't you performed any DBT's to support your beliefs? No takers in all of Canada? Why only excuses about performed tests...and no testing yourself?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.