There must be electricians out there who are smart, although I confess I have yet to meet one. At least (lately) they probably make more money than I do.
But phase and group delay are easily measured things, not some vague hand-waving maybe imaginary ghosts. And in most DACs and A/D and D/A chips they are leagues better than analog systems, and 20 to 20kHz they are usually nearly ideal until it reaches the speakers and room. People throw around terms like "phase problems" and "group delay issues" like they have secret insight into them that no one else can see. Look at the data sheet of almost any ADC or DAC and you can see the phase response (and group delay is just proportional to its slope when viewed linear-frequency wise). There aren't gremlins hiding there.
Yes my statement may have been a little vague. Although I put them on every circuit in my out building in the breaker box. The inspector didn't understand why I wasted money on such things as this and 10 gauge wire.
I'm watching a train wreck right now, there are solar installers here that want to connect 10kW of panels to a grid tie 300' away with doubled #10 wire.
yes.... Group Delay been known but has been too hard to deconvolve it with an all analog approach. We could go further and take it out of the speaker system as well with another black box. MQA talks about time smearing... which is what G-D does also to transients. Just guessing as to what MQA affects in the signal path. But will bet a dollar on it being G-D.
Maybe something like this can be applied ?
http://www.deconvolve.net/
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Electricians are trained/qualified to connect mysterious 'black boxes' using bits of wire obeying relevant wiring codes.
The thinking required is merely how to do it good/quick/cheap.....pick two.
For giggles try asking an EC how an electric motor works.
Dan.
Well, lets try again to make a somewhat philosophical position to engineers who always want exact details for analysis. You wont get full, complete and exact details very often. First lets get rid of one thing from the question... the use of terms which elicit bias....such as, - taste, and Like or better or worse. If we can ask the question in such a way as to remove it from like and dislike and better or worse etc, we can get something more useful from a DBT. IMO.
I am sure one could phrase a question to be neutral..... I'll try...you might think of a better question. "Which tv monitor can you see distinctly separate convergent lines closer to their center? {subjects pre tested for 20-20 vision) That question isnt affected by peeking. taking any bias potential regarding look, price, brand etal out of the question asked.
Cant we do that also with audio? I think so. In fact I think we must.
Now regarding the data mined thru large volume of listeners or viewers or what ever..... it gives a fuller and IMO a more accurate and complete account of what is actually experienced or occured. It certainly needs to be factored into audio. If not, we only have the DBT to go by and nothing further.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Only true for good data. If it's just a pile of anecdotes and magazine articles, it's got all the evidentiary value of reports of alien abductions with anal probing.
You can ask any question you like in a sensory test. The only strict rule is- no peeking. No amount of dancing, huckstering, or excuse-spinning can bypass that fundamental requirement which separates make-believe from actual experimentation.
Seems to me that you don't like the outcome of the tests that science agrees upon to work.
Well the vast majority of people don't notice any difference between cd and higher bitrate perceptual coding/high resolution audio. It's just a few people that say they do.
I thought it was per circuit in the UK - eg lighting (typically zoned), power outlets, washers etc.
I'm getting my new man cave (where I'll be doing my 'audio stuff') wired up week of 2nd June and asked the electrician to put one in for me. At my seniority level you never know when the screwdriver will touch the mains . . . And 220 packs a wallop.
For insurance purposes, the work needs to be certified, so I'll not be doing this myself. I figure if I pop my clogs due to electrocution, the wife will have grounds for litigation as well
IMHO most DBLT's for audio are essentially useless.
For example a DBLT returns result of 50/50...DBLT adherents will quote this as a null result.
Not so fast... this means that half the subjects claim not to hear a difference and I have no problems with that, but what about the other 50%.
Useful data would be to descriptions of the changes perceived from the positive 50%.
If these descriptions reasonably closely match then these is indeed a finding of a noticeable difference.
If I was developing a product (I am), I would test my product on say 100 people of all ranges of age, sex, education, income etc with some degree of interest in quality sound reproduction (I have).
If 50 subjects report no change, then all and good but my product potential market has been reduced by 50%, all good.
Now, if I then quizz the positive 50 subjects for descriptions and get reasonably close matching on description of change (I have), I can now say that 50% of the test subjects Hear the change clearly.
If I then quizz the positive 50% on preference, and get say 100% Preference (I have) I can then say that half of the test subjects recognise, appreciate and prefer the change.
The next question to ask is perceived Value/affordability, and if say I get result of 80% acceptance (I have), I have data upon which to make production and marketing decisions.
So for me this is a very useful exercise....50%H x 100%P x 80%V = 40%.
IOW 40% of the population with some degree of interest in quality sound reproduction would be prepared to shell out for this product.
Now this is an entirely different result to the initial DBLT adherent finding of inconsequential perceived change/guessing, and serves to emphasize the folly of DBLT adherents.
Amen.
Dan.
Real figures are 90%H x 98%P x 80%V !, for a $20 accessory item.
People who say they don't like something or don't believe something or disapprove of something sometimes turn out to dislike/disbelieve/disapprove something quite different from what other people like/believe/approve. Maybe DBT is an example? Maybe some of the DBT-haters have simply misunderstood what the numbers mean?
I realise that most DBT-haters do so because it delivers inconvenient facts.
I realise that most DBT-haters do so because it delivers inconvenient facts.
Ok, in my testing I am not being so rigorous as full DBLT protocol.
In fact most testing has been sighted with the statement 'this may or may not change the sound'...90% notice the change and describe the changes similarly, and of those, 98% preferred the change, and of the 98%, 80% stated that the price/value is acceptable/desirable....win/win.
Dan.
Yes, I can also get 100% correct identification with peeking and coaching.
As Koko the Clown wisely observed, "It's Make Believe Time! All of the Big People have to leave the room!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBvpj0cCHLA
As Koko the Clown wisely observed, "It's Make Believe Time! All of the Big People have to leave the room!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBvpj0cCHLA
- Status
- Not open for further replies.