That seems to be a plausible conclusion and is a valid hypothesis.
If appropriate positive controls were used, it would have been possible to find some confirmation of this hypothesis.
Without positive controls (and usually negative controls) it is nearly impossible to show that your conclusion is justified.
Graciously accepted and acknowledged Sir
.In time concrete/reproducible data will come...
I treated the FOH production power/FOH audio multicore on a stadium system tonight The_Amity_Affliction.
Fellow crew member and I described the substantial and not so subtle sonic change/improvement in same words.
The change in bass/low bass is physically palpable...and most agreeable.
Much better clarity in vocals...limiting/processing clearly revealed.
Highs clear with splash and hardness removed....enjoyable.
Reduction in RFI may be part of the the cause, but I think not the whole story.
Please do not misunderstand me....I do not idolise JC, BUT I do respect his achievements, and I do enjoy reading/learning of/from his experiences and knowledge, just as I learn from the valuable snippets that you drop re layout, EMC and other subjects.
Regards, Dan.
I don't have anything particularly notable to report on the design side, but I am interested to hear of your audio triumphs.
Go ahead, tell us about your listening gear, and what you have constructed.
I have to agree, and it is the same parties reflex arguing against observations that they/nobody fully understands....more discussion and teasing out of facts would be much more productive.
JC for one, has vast design and T&M experience going back to before most of us were born....I for one would like to learn more from his recollections, but alas John rarely gets the chance to get a word in edgeways.
We are all past EE 101,.....Marce, your insights into fine points of PCB design are appreciated.
Dan.
Graciously accepted and acknowledged Sir
In time concrete/reproducible data will come...
I treated the FOH production power/FOH audio multicore on a stadium system tonight The_Amity_Affliction.
Fellow crew member and I described the substantial and not so subtle sonic change/improvement in same words.
The change in bass/low bass is physically palpable...and most agreeable.
Much better clarity in vocals...limiting/processing clearly revealed.
Highs clear with splash and hardness removed....enjoyable.
Reduction in RFI may be part of the the cause, but I think not the whole story.
Please do not misunderstand me....I do not idolise JC, BUT I do respect his achievements, and I do enjoy reading/learning of/from his experiences and knowledge, just as I learn from the valuable snippets that you drop re layout, EMC and other subjects.
Regards, Dan.
As I have said I have a lot of respect for JC and have crossed words with him many times regarding the more esoteric beliefs....
He has in the past. Generally, he likes to pull out variables that are different than the ones being actually tested (e.g., level), which don't really have validity.
Positive controls are important where appropriate, but they aren't always appropriate. Inflexibility in experimental design is a sure path to failure.
I have a sneaky suspicion that teasing is what keeps JC here! He's had a loooong time on this forum after all.
Jebediah Cuthbertson. He invented the Cuthbertson Frammistat about 40 years ago, and has been living off that ever since. It was, to be fair, the first bilateral frammistat, though some might claim that it was too obvious for patenting, given the long and rich previous history of frammistats. Nonetheless, he's been flogging it ever since and seems to have a small group of fans.
Clean enough vocals sound, but brickwall limited/compressed losing pretty much all dynamics and expression....typical modern sound of the genre including the profanitiesWould that be the "clean" or "unclean" vocals.
.Dan.
Last edited:
It shows the definition of terms. It shows no examples of positive control in audio electronic component listening test.
For example, if you want to test whether a DUT component extends the highs
compared to the reference component, you would try a third component known
to extend the highs, and see if that's what you perceive. If you can't perceive that,
there's no point in doing the test. Maybe there's not enough bandwidth in the source,
or the extended highs do exist, but are not recognized through inexperience or
hearing damage, etc.
Last edited:
You must not be familiar with audio DBT. Before the start, those components with the claims of audible difference are compared in non-DBT just to see if the listeners agree. If they do, then DBT proceeds. If they don't agree, no DBT.
Not everyone can hear well, or has enough experience or ability, to give a reliable opinion.
What matters is whether a particular individual who DOES, can hear differences.
If you're sick, you don't take a survey of random people, you go to a good doctor
who specializes in your problem, knows what they are doing, and who is much more likely
to have a valid opinion than some yutz.
The conductor of our local symphony didn't notice that our then-new concert hall had poor,
weak bass until I pointed it out to him.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.