The claims are based solely on ideal simulations with an admission that the actual results can not possibly be measured. The "listening" tests are sighted with a disclaimer that DBT is too stressful to be useful. In other words all a plie of useless anecdote.
One could also ask how ~50bit numbers are entered into a 24bit DAC.
Last edited:
No, I did not implied that.
I have meant to ask what is the "proper sound" definition in 2021, to evaluate if Hi-Fi or not: in the context that nowadays all new sources (even voices) are digitized to an unknown (possibly very low) standard. So, what is Hi-Fi today?
From your answer I can understand this: you believe that digital processing is much better. Ok, let's assume so.
The problem in 2021 to evaluate "Hi-Fi or not" is that sources are not standard anymore. So, what means today "proper sounds"? If you do not have a definition for proper sounds, then how can be the OP-question answered? <<Sound quality vs. Measurements?>> What is the measurement reference, in 2021? Is there a standard track, for any genre?
This was the question.
It won't stop them from doing what they do. Thick skin is a requirement to be a salesman / shill.
No, if you think I am in a race with you... hahaha. Stay calm and sit.
I simply ignore you, as you said yourself. I do not believe you are in position to withstand any dialogue, short or long, with most of the readers here inclusive myself. You must grow older my friend, and learn a much more. What to answer to you? That Aleph-infinity is not fully defined yet, and if it would be well-defined, then you cannot generalize any physical model (like "quantum", or "Continuum") onto it, based purely on our best human logic, despite even this concept cannot be generalized and hence any human interpretations are by definition false? I wish you success digesting my answer.
And, not lightly for dealing with trolls: I choose at least to not ignore the rules of the thread: no religion debates!
So, I am simply back to business, just for different directions - not yours.
Ionmw,
you can`t ignore me.
OK, mysticism and mathematics go hand in hand. I was talking about the transfinite cardinality of the infinite numerical discontinuum, more precisely, the Axiom of Infinity and the Axiom of Absolute Wholeness (or is it holiness?). They are parts of the fuzzy Set Theory. I sincerely hope that Cantor's Continuum Hypothesis will be proved on a bright sunny day, albeit nobody can say what a mathematical proof is or even what a number is.
you can`t ignore me.
OK, mysticism and mathematics go hand in hand. I was talking about the transfinite cardinality of the infinite numerical discontinuum, more precisely, the Axiom of Infinity and the Axiom of Absolute Wholeness (or is it holiness?). They are parts of the fuzzy Set Theory. I sincerely hope that Cantor's Continuum Hypothesis will be proved on a bright sunny day, albeit nobody can say what a mathematical proof is or even what a number is.
Because if we do not have a set of references, then logically and scientifically the equality:
sound quality = measurements.
holds.
If anything else (call it "perturbation", or sonic behaviour, or distortion, or any other name) is desired, then one can devise a method to add it to the "perfect measurement device" and hence should theoretically satisfy the goal. But remember, you have to define not just the goal, but also the method to measure and to validate it!
I have yet to see this happening. This missing is not a problem.
The real elephant in the room is missing the reference (source) for qualifying devices as Hi-Fi or not, for modern music. This is my opinion.
Cantor got crazy. Have this wish for yourself?
He did not finished his theory.
etc.
I definitely can ignore you, as long as you do not respect Hamilton, at least. Starting now.
The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology recognized Andrew Lipinski’s outstanding hearing abilities. He was the only individual to receive a 100% score on evaluation of phonographic recording, rated 1:1000 chance among pro audio professionals.
Lipinski Sound - Wikipedia
Thanks. Accepted. We all do mistakes, by definition. Persistence in them is the annoying part.
Come on, there are red lines regarding some names, not necessarily with lord titles.
Maybe you wish to share your opinion, if any available at this moment, about my new question regarding definition of Hi-Fi in modern days? Or help the original topic question once again?
We already have biometric for human voice that has become widely used for verification and similar systems for signature and face recognition. Andrea Mori was questioning about the reproduction quality of a Steinway piano. I believe our technology has come very close to the point that would enable a quality assessment on the faithfulness of a reproduced sound of a Steinway, if such a task is found beneficial since it still needs some more R&D. But as you can also see in the thread, we have a supposedly expert who seems to strongly oppose discussions on certain qualities of perceived sound, so who knows.
On Hilbert spaces I had a sort of "transcendental awe and fear". Decided to follow it in-depth only after I answer my (own) question: WTF was allowed to invent "division" between different units of measure before sorting out the universal constants containing only "products"? This relates to Hilbert idea too, I hope.
Ok. we have good pianos and instruments as reference. Human voice probably too.
Problem is that most music today is made with samples (unknown quality, as the artist wishes so) and pps voices (unknown quality, as the artist wishes so). Then we have all the rest of midis and lopping and so on...
This is modern music. What do we do with it, regarding Hi-Fi definition, as this is the facto 90+% majority?
Prost!
Then, what are we talking here?
Storage and processing wise, incl. amplifiers:
sound quality = perfect measurements + desired flavours&modifications
Reproduction wise:
all about the electroacoustics (drivers + enclosures + room)
"Feeling right" wise.
all about friends and mood... and personal set skills.
I have met someone who can hear clean and proper only between 50 and 70db (above this levels the ear was distorting)
I have met another someone, who was convinced to hear "the noise from neighbours" through 3 ceilings, although all were not home
and finally I have met many someone, who did not like any music but had a perfect hearing. They used to tell others what sounds good, despite they could not make an AB obvious difference between original CD and WAV-ripped file .
Then, what are we talking here?
Storage and processing wise, incl. amplifiers:
sound quality = perfect measurements + desired flavours&modifications
Reproduction wise:
all about the electroacoustics (drivers + enclosures + room)
"Feeling right" wise.
all about friends and mood... and personal set skills.
I have met someone who can hear clean and proper only between 50 and 70db (above this levels the ear was distorting)
I have met another someone, who was convinced to hear "the noise from neighbours" through 3 ceilings, although all were not home
and finally I have met many someone, who did not like any music but had a perfect hearing. They used to tell others what sounds good, despite they could not make an AB obvious difference between original CD and WAV-ripped file .
- Status
- Not open for further replies.