Very interesting!kevinaston1 said:
A while ago I watched a video interview with an extremely creative musician, who explained that she had aural synesthesia, and that it played an active role in creating her music. She "saw" her own compositions as much as she heard them. She believed that was part of the reason for her very creative and original approach to music.
At the other end of the scale, there is amusia, an inability to perceive music, enjoy it, or to distinguish it from other frequently repeated sounds.
A person with an extreme version of amusia apparently cannot hear any real difference between a piano concerto, and the sound of cutlery being thrown in the air and falling to the ground. Both are just loud and irritating sounds.
Music is so deeply meaningful to almost all of us humans, that for me, it's hard to imagine a life without the capacity to enjoy music at all. What a tragedy that would be!
-Gnobuddy
It's that quantum mass that allow it to not possess the property of momentum! And we all know what quantum means...
Yes, wasn't that the name of a once popular tv series?
Quantum Leap?
I think a lot of people leaped into that quantum fishbowl!
Interesting. I should have added that, as Wifi calling has picked up a bit on its second attempt (first time round the two main supporters of the standard crashed and burned) most phones do most of their work around the house on wifi so as long as you are well filtered above 2GHz you should be ok.
Are you suggesting quanta don't exist?And we all know what quantum means...
For decades, popular culture, and Hollywood in particular, has been totally confused about what "quantum" means. But quanta are as real as any other concept in physics, such as mass or temperature or time.
For example, the shot noise that plagues every audio electronics device popular here on on diyAudio, results from quantized electricity - aka electrons - flowing within it.
Like raindrops falling on a tin roof, individual electrons cause tiny fluctuations in every electric current - shot noise.
If electricity wasn't quantized, but was a continuous fluid, there would be no shot noise. If your tin roof was immersed in a smoothly flowing stream, you wouldn't hear any noise from it.
Remember the Esaki diode, aka the tunnel diode? An amazing electronic device that had a brief heyday before fading away. It worked entirely by the phenomenon of quantum tunnelling.
Many other contemporary devices explicitly depend on quantum phenomena - they wouldn't work at all without quantum mechanics.
Solid-state lasers are one easy example. Quantum dots are another practical application of quantum effects: What are quantum dots?
The atomic clocks on which your cellphone and computer depend to keep accurate time, are another entirely quantum-mechanical device.
This Forbes article "What Has Quantum Mechanics Ever Done For Us?" lists several more applications of quantum mechanics: What Has Quantum Mechanics Ever Done For Us?
If I misunderstood your post, my apologies. Perhaps you never meant to suggest that (quantum = lies), though I don't know how else to read the long-nose Pinocchio emoji in your post.
-Gnobuddy
Excellent, glad to hear it!
Very true!
Of course, but in the era of 11 million "flat-earthers" in Brazil alone ( To 11 million Brazilians, the Earth is flat ), and with hundreds of millions of anti-vaxxers all over the planet, one can almost count on BS creeping into every online forum...even into threads mocking BS!
-Gnobuddy
Attachments
All these "debates" about flat earth, $3K speaker cables, you name it. The subject matter is irrelevant. The real debate should be: What are we to do about this pandemic of willful ignorance? Because it sure feels to me like it's getting worse and not better. Not only that, but our unprecedented access to information appears to be accelerating this process instead of retarding it, even though the latter of those would seem the more logical outcome. I suppose it's because more information also means more of all types, factual and otherwise.
We hear a lot these days about the wealth gap in modern society, and I don't disagree with a lot of it. But I wonder if our bigger problem is a growing intelligence gap. And I worry about how much worse it's gonna have to get, before it gets better.
We hear a lot these days about the wealth gap in modern society, and I don't disagree with a lot of it. But I wonder if our bigger problem is a growing intelligence gap. And I worry about how much worse it's gonna have to get, before it gets better.
Oh yes, the internet makes everyone way stupider. Here in the US of A, flat earth belief and young earth creationism are growing by leaps and bounds. In general it seems that people just don't care what's actually real. Their ridiculous beliefs are so precious and important, and it is IMPERATIVE that YOU must believe them too. In fact, I see this once great country sliding into a quasi theocracy. I don't know how this started, but I find it quite distressing.
When I was in high school in the 1970s, I was known as the "Wizard" because of my proficiency in electronics. But it was a nickname; people knew that I wasn't actually performing magic tricks.
Fast forward 45 years, and people are more scientifically illiterate than ever. People actually think astronomy and astrology are equally true (some people think astrology is more factual!), and alchemy and chemistry are the same thing (because it's all hocus pocus anyway), etc. There's a growing number of people that think gravity is a hoax, and there are thousands of internet gurus egging them on in their delusional beliefs.
It's culture shock to someone born into the age of science. I feel like I've relocated to some backwards illiterate country. Science is considered overtly evil in many circles now. I just don't know how this happened.
Fast forward 45 years, and people are more scientifically illiterate than ever. People actually think astronomy and astrology are equally true (some people think astrology is more factual!), and alchemy and chemistry are the same thing (because it's all hocus pocus anyway), etc. There's a growing number of people that think gravity is a hoax, and there are thousands of internet gurus egging them on in their delusional beliefs.
It's culture shock to someone born into the age of science. I feel like I've relocated to some backwards illiterate country. Science is considered overtly evil in many circles now. I just don't know how this happened.
The gradual transformation of what and how people think has been happening over a long time.
But its only been the last couple of decades that this has been increasing in intensity and speed, with the help of modern technology.
The average teenager these days has succumbed to and relied on smartphone apps, computers - that in itself is a major part of many of today's problems.
Some people tout this technology as being a wonderful thing, and insist that its not the cause of society's issues. - they obviously drank the proverbial koolaid.
And yes, in some ways, modern technology is helpful, if some common sense and individual cautions and self-control are in place.
You have to have sense enough to know when to shut off the damn device and focus on real living, as opposed to virtual living.
But nevertheless, the technology is laden, peppered with misinformation, is abused, overused, and a powerful vortex which resembles any other addiction.
When I was a teenager, I had to stand in the kitchen to talk on the phone.
It's ironic that technology is the conduit by which the populace is so massively dumbed down and pumped full of lies. When people knew less, ironically they knew more - ideas like flat earth were considered preposterous even by the marginally literate. Now, bank presidents and CEOs of major corporations probably believe it - so unbelievable is the propagation of blatant misinformation and lies.
I honestly feel like an alien in this society. I feel like I woke up into a real life nightmare. When I'm showing people the stuff I design and build, I realize that I could tell them anything - literally anything - about the equipment and they would just nod their head in agreement. For all they know I am a real wizard.
It's appalling just how far this country has slipped in the last 40 years.
The root of the problem is simple. Enthusiasts always want to improve their listening experience. Back in the the early days, we had guys like Bob Carver, Nelson Pass and others that made discoveries in their own labs. They were smart guys, and they were also fully trained in electronics. So there is the idea that a smart guy can make a discovery in his basement alone. Gee, that is romantic in a way.
Today that picture has changed dramatically. Their is an established science concerning signal amplification that is pretty well understood by those trained in that field. Small signal amplification has transitioned from discrete parts to silicon chip realizations for extremely good reasons. It is the only way to get the precise device matching and thermal tracking for ultra low distortion (and that means all forms of it). Power stages have come a long way also. I'm not a fan of integrated power output stages simply due to the high currents and heat involved, but we understand this stuff extremely well today. The time has passed where a discovery is made by a lone guy, or small group without proper funding and equipment. Not very romantic I guess.
This is how the entire audio scam works. People sell the romantic idea of a smart guy who can "discover" some device or material that magically improves an audio signal that a trained team of engineers with supplies and equipment can't, won't or hide from us. The effect is nearly always a secret, never peer reviewed and always have auditions instead of repeatable measurements for "proof".
The person(s) responsible for the "discovery" are always portrayed as being under attack from peers, even if they aren't. So the picture is typically of a lone person or small group trying to improve our lives against all odds. Very romantic indeed, worth fighting for. What is sold is faith, period.
When technical reality is introduced, they always, without fail, claim that the effect can't be measured, but can be heard. Always a mystery, and my favorite claim, "we don't know everything, so it could be".
Many who are not technical want to believe in something. Without training and instrumentation they do want to participate, and I can understand that. But in most other hobbies, you have measured results, like how well you score on a target, how fast your car is, things like that.
Everyone who excels in a hobby, say shooting, does a great deal of training and learning both on how to hold their body, and the mechanical realities of how the gun and cartridge work to achieve consistent results. These are known techniques and measurements. Same for racing engine output levels and torque curves, gearing and other things. You can prove something works or doesn't. Audio reproduction is the same. You are amplifying a signal and that chain is something we can measure. Speaker - room interactions and response can also be measured. So to do this well you have to train yourself and invest in the equipment needed to prove your results. It is true that how each person actually hears something is different. But, if you hear a certain sound live, then hear it reproduced, the closest to the live sound is the most accurate. Period. That means that a system that reproduces a sound more accurately than another will sound the most accurate in blind testing. As soon as you introduce how you think about a product or system, all bets are off since your mind is excellent at fooling you. It is how we survived as animals after all.
But we will always have those who understand how people think and capitalize (prey) on those romantic ideas. Many people want to believe in this kind of thing. But it is frustrating to those who actually do know what they are doing and can prove or disprove these claims to see someone operating on human nature to achieve sales and or fame.
I just care about right and wrong, what is true or false. Above all I hate folks who misrepresent the truth. There are many like me who are just trying to help those who don't understand things as well as we do. Like in any hobby, you have those who just want to profit, and those who enjoy what they do and try to pass on actual knowledge.
Today that picture has changed dramatically. Their is an established science concerning signal amplification that is pretty well understood by those trained in that field. Small signal amplification has transitioned from discrete parts to silicon chip realizations for extremely good reasons. It is the only way to get the precise device matching and thermal tracking for ultra low distortion (and that means all forms of it). Power stages have come a long way also. I'm not a fan of integrated power output stages simply due to the high currents and heat involved, but we understand this stuff extremely well today. The time has passed where a discovery is made by a lone guy, or small group without proper funding and equipment. Not very romantic I guess.
This is how the entire audio scam works. People sell the romantic idea of a smart guy who can "discover" some device or material that magically improves an audio signal that a trained team of engineers with supplies and equipment can't, won't or hide from us. The effect is nearly always a secret, never peer reviewed and always have auditions instead of repeatable measurements for "proof".
The person(s) responsible for the "discovery" are always portrayed as being under attack from peers, even if they aren't. So the picture is typically of a lone person or small group trying to improve our lives against all odds. Very romantic indeed, worth fighting for. What is sold is faith, period.
When technical reality is introduced, they always, without fail, claim that the effect can't be measured, but can be heard. Always a mystery, and my favorite claim, "we don't know everything, so it could be".
Many who are not technical want to believe in something. Without training and instrumentation they do want to participate, and I can understand that. But in most other hobbies, you have measured results, like how well you score on a target, how fast your car is, things like that.
Everyone who excels in a hobby, say shooting, does a great deal of training and learning both on how to hold their body, and the mechanical realities of how the gun and cartridge work to achieve consistent results. These are known techniques and measurements. Same for racing engine output levels and torque curves, gearing and other things. You can prove something works or doesn't. Audio reproduction is the same. You are amplifying a signal and that chain is something we can measure. Speaker - room interactions and response can also be measured. So to do this well you have to train yourself and invest in the equipment needed to prove your results. It is true that how each person actually hears something is different. But, if you hear a certain sound live, then hear it reproduced, the closest to the live sound is the most accurate. Period. That means that a system that reproduces a sound more accurately than another will sound the most accurate in blind testing. As soon as you introduce how you think about a product or system, all bets are off since your mind is excellent at fooling you. It is how we survived as animals after all.
But we will always have those who understand how people think and capitalize (prey) on those romantic ideas. Many people want to believe in this kind of thing. But it is frustrating to those who actually do know what they are doing and can prove or disprove these claims to see someone operating on human nature to achieve sales and or fame.
I just care about right and wrong, what is true or false. Above all I hate folks who misrepresent the truth. There are many like me who are just trying to help those who don't understand things as well as we do. Like in any hobby, you have those who just want to profit, and those who enjoy what they do and try to pass on actual knowledge.
You're certainly preaching to the choir. As far as I know, everything relevant to sound reproduction can be examined and explained scientifically.
I remember hi fi in the 1960s. It was getting popular and it was kind of a status symbol too. It was also steeped in more snake oil than it is today. My father had a hi fi and it was a big boomy box. I was building speakers. I was learning about tuned reflex enclosures and I was also experimenting with sealed enclosures, which were kind of new. My father insisted that a speaker enclosure had to have resonances like a "fine cello or piano" and that a neutral speaker could never reproduce music. No, no, no. And my mentor, the guy that was actually teaching me electronics, said an op amp based preamp would never work because "op amps belong in computers." In 1974 I built a preamp based on CA3140 and it shut him up.
I remember hi fi in the 1960s. It was getting popular and it was kind of a status symbol too. It was also steeped in more snake oil than it is today. My father had a hi fi and it was a big boomy box. I was building speakers. I was learning about tuned reflex enclosures and I was also experimenting with sealed enclosures, which were kind of new. My father insisted that a speaker enclosure had to have resonances like a "fine cello or piano" and that a neutral speaker could never reproduce music. No, no, no. And my mentor, the guy that was actually teaching me electronics, said an op amp based preamp would never work because "op amps belong in computers." In 1974 I built a preamp based on CA3140 and it shut him up.
Hi Eddie,
I agree. I began my career designing speaker systems and followed the T-S type reflex designs, quickly understanding it was a filter and a Q over 1 or under 0.5 wasn't going to sound very good.
I am posting to the audience that isn't trained, not people like yourself. I can only hope that some lurkers or other members read some of what we post and it may save them a great deal of money.
-Chris
I agree. I began my career designing speaker systems and followed the T-S type reflex designs, quickly understanding it was a filter and a Q over 1 or under 0.5 wasn't going to sound very good.
I am posting to the audience that isn't trained, not people like yourself. I can only hope that some lurkers or other members read some of what we post and it may save them a great deal of money.
-Chris
Someone spent $800 on Mundorf capacitors and they didn't do what he thought they would do.
Is multi way flawed?
I tried to help him. I failed.
Is multi way flawed?
I tried to help him. I failed.
I don't think T-S parameters were available when I started. I measured free air resonance, then resonance in a specified sealed box. I plotted the two measurements on a nomogram in a Howard Sams book (I was still in high school at the time), drew a line through the dots, and it told me what size enclosure and vent was "ideal" for that driver. It worked! I still have the book ($4.95 in 1973 dollars!).
- Status
- Not open for further replies.