As in music? That will teach you what *you* like. But you are one in 7 billion, and others will have different tastes.
Last time I checked there was no grey zone between truth and error in mathematics.Kastor L said:
A gated sine wave has infinite bandwidth, simply because a square wave has infinite bandwidth. Those who understand Fourier analysis will know this; others will just have to take it on trust - it is true, no matter how much someone might wish it to be false. Therefore a sampled data system cannot accurately represent a gated sine wave. This is of no practical consequence because true gated sine waves do not occur in nature or music. It does mean that any gedanken experiment involving gate sine waves is likely to give a non-intuitive result to those whose intuition is not guided by Fourier.
I'm pretty sure mathematics will look pretty much the same. Most of what is being argued about in this thread is actually mathematics.
Science will look different in some areas, and the same in others. Where it looks different it will almost certainly contain current science as a limiting case - just as QM and SR both contain classical mechanics, so have extended mechanics rather than replacing it.
I guess in 70 years most of the theory about digital sound reproduction also won't show much change compared to what we know today.
I still am curious what a 10Ghz sampling frequency in audio has to offer over the today's 192Kz or 384Khz techniques, which prove to be over-kill already...
Didn't someone show (back in the 70's) that microwave radiation could actually cause thermal expansion in the ossicle bones, and this explained how people living near powerful radar stations could "hear" the radar beam...
Not sure I want my sound system to radiate kilowatts of microwave energy...
______
I certainly did not mean music.
Perhaps you can make a wild speculation now at what I meant.
Note to self: Need to be 10 times more concise next time in discussions like these.
Why cherry-pick 192 / 384 kHz?
Why not just take the bull by it's horns and say DSD, DSD128, DSD256, DSD512 and DSD-Wide "are all completely nonsensensical and will never be perceived by any living human, I'll put my money on that".
10 gigahertz seems like it's accurate for earths atmosphere, with five collisions per nanosecond it will capture every single collision, that is pretty intense!
Move to Jupiter and you'll need to revise the formula.
Wait nevermind infinity is accurate on both this planet and Jupiter.
Except it isn't.
A perfect picture has "infinite pixels", alright, so let's sample an infinite amount of megapixels.
Now just wait until the camera catches on fire.
Last edited:
I think so as well, it will look the same just extended.
Actually "discovered" is the right word since mathematics exists even if we don't.
Just like numbers, they just exist.
In that sense we may remove a few incorrect formulas or theories here and there, but the universal numbers and truths are constant.
I think some "subjectivists" don't understand this and think everything is just some kind of illusion.
I think some people have the idea that mathematics is "invented" as well.
DF96 said:
It will look very different in medicine for starters.
Human perception is the key here, it starts with the classical five senses, now extended to 40 I think in some papers.
The limits of perception will change.
Audio is "pretty high quality" right now but it still needs a number of adjustments.
Yes you can make sensical deductions like we have no perception above 21-25 kHz.
The "Xiph" article which dismantles 24 / 192 downloads uses infra-red light as an example why it's all nonsense, but it doesn't cover aspects like folded down IMD, impulse response, time performance, subliminal perception and "hearing ultrasonic frequencies with your skin" ......
As soon as a casual audiophile notices that the debunking is usually partial, which it is, then they just lose faith in all the "science" and stop reading it.
If you really want to "win" you can't be partial, imho.
Then again I'm not sure if you guys actually want to win or not, seems like you're happy with your little "university accepted data" team =)
Edit
Last edited:
By the way I've downsampled 24 / 192 to 16 / 44 in the past and I can't hear any difference in Foobar ABX.
Not using Foobar ABX - which I tend to believe can cause perceptual illusions via deletion - I can't hear very much difference either.
I lost faith in 24 / 192 a while back, just using it as an example.
At least, it seems like "very small fish", in my experience at that time, definitely not a shark.
It's the differences in DAC's and amplifiers which I find to be very much medium sized fish.
Looking at "lampizator" for example I believe what he hears is real.
Even though he has no "university data" to support what he writes =)
Not using Foobar ABX - which I tend to believe can cause perceptual illusions via deletion - I can't hear very much difference either.
I lost faith in 24 / 192 a while back, just using it as an example.
At least, it seems like "very small fish", in my experience at that time, definitely not a shark.
It's the differences in DAC's and amplifiers which I find to be very much medium sized fish.
Looking at "lampizator" for example I believe what he hears is real.
Even though he has no "university data" to support what he writes =)
Last edited:
Any scientific explanation will always be partial, and usually you have to dumb it down for those who don't have the mathematical and conceptual tools too.
Feel free to push the boundaries of known science, but how about learning the known science first? And remember two useful rules: 1) just because you disagree with the establishment doesn't mean you are right (this one is called "the Galileo fallacy"), and 2) extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I believe you believe what he hears is real. And it is. At least to him. But it is well-known that the soft clipping and distortion patterns usually associated with valves are often perceived as pleasing to the ear.
Haha at least to him, implying partial illusion?
Please don't tell me you only associate distortion with clipping.
Implying the possibility.
Why would I? There was an "and" in my sentence. But a well-designed modern amp has very low distortion under normal operating conditions - unlike some valve stages that have very high harmonic distortion, but of an order that tends to be pleasant to the ear.
I don't investigate valves at all by the way since that seems like a pursuit leading to nowhere.
The only theory I've seen why we should use them is that they are void in the upper harmonics, like the 7th harmonic and higher, while op-amp's tend to convolute the signal up there.
I was recommended the Jean Hiraga amplifier for this very reason as well, which I'm looking into.
If all I cared about was pleasant or interesting sound I wouldn't write all this stuff, honestly.
______
At some point I realised that a perfect audio system is the only way to solve this.
Minus the transducer, just speaking of the DAC and amplifier.
The only theory I've seen why we should use them is that they are void in the upper harmonics, like the 7th harmonic and higher, while op-amp's tend to convolute the signal up there.
I was recommended the Jean Hiraga amplifier for this very reason as well, which I'm looking into.
If all I cared about was pleasant or interesting sound I wouldn't write all this stuff, honestly.
______
At some point I realised that a perfect audio system is the only way to solve this.
Minus the transducer, just speaking of the DAC and amplifier.
I more meant that he can hear DAC chip differences. He can most likely listen to an unknown device and quickly identify which DAC chip is in it, including a few modern chips.
Anything unscientific in that?
Ever heard of a markov chain? That passage reads like it was produced by my cousin, Mark V Shaney.
But... but... doesn't "perfect" imply infinity?
Indeed. A lot of gear sounds much better without a speaker.
Nothing unscientific in that, if it has been independently verified. Do you have links to actual evidence?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.