AJinFLA said:
AJ, if you are really interested, I will try and answer your questions, sometimes I get the idea that you are just trying to be difficult. (correct me if I'm wrong)
If you look at any scene through a camera and adjust the focus, you can clearly see when the picture is focussed. The same happen in audio, it is just difficult to get that focus optimally adjusted and can not be achieved by cables alone. Surely you need the right recordings for this, I've said before that good cables are perhaps only worthwhile if you like to listen to acoustic instruments and vocals, assuming the rest of the system is good also.
André
fredex said:
I think its about stability and positioning of imaging and soundstage, and small and very subtle ques that our ears/mind pick up. Very minor, imperceptable changes in timing/phase that aren't currently picked up by measurements.
.
.
.
.
.
and Rabbitz , if you read this .....
!!
Brett said:
There is nothing mystical, everything must have an explanation, the problem perhaps is finding it.
I believe the most important aspect in staging and even in reproducing detail is in the timing when the sounds from the two speakers reach the ears. It is well known that the brain is very sensitive to this to localise sounds, even small variations can be detected.
Andre Visser said:
You have looked at the scene of your recorded media? You were privy to these events?
Andy Graddon said:One hopes not !!!
but with your ears, could you tell them apart anyway.
G'day AJ
Yes, if you knew the proper physical location of each at the time of recording and they were reversed (flipped) during playback, the ears most certainly could hear this - sighted or blind. So what happens to our caped crusaders during DBTs? Why can't they immediately identify the blatantly-obvious-during-sighted-listening spatial cues? What causes the "Kryptonite Effect" here?
Andy Graddon said:
Rubbish. LCR is measurable (as is RF and other "know to science" parameters). But when do we ever see measurements of these and their effect on the "revealing" systems - to accompany the tales of our heroes?
Is it possible for (measured) LCR differences between cables to cause spatial differences below or near DBT thresholds. Certainly. But I've got things bigger than plankton to fry.
Like fish...and loudspeakers in rooms.
A DBT isn't going to mask stage depth difference between a dipole and a monopole. It may be artificial, but it certainly isn't imaginary.
cheers,
AJ
Howdy again, Get the highest resolution speaker you can get your hands on (Electrostatic?), set up a calibrated mic and measure the acoustic output. Swap cables and measure again. We can't hear electrons! We hear the acoustic output of a transducer which is our ultimate interface with the sound. Someone posted earlier that speakers can't resolve enough detail to make such measurements relevent. If speakers can not resolve enough detail to produce a valid measurment, it's highly unlikely our woefully inadequate ears can!
tc-60guy said:
I'm not sure that it will be that easy, firstly, the brain are able to track low level sounds in the presense of much louder sounds, a microphone can't. Also, I don't think the overall acoustic output is what really matter, it is the low level detail and timing that could differ.
Woefully inadequate ears? I'm not so sure.
André
Andre Visser said:
Greetings Andre, I only ment that our ears are pretty poor measurement devices. Factors which skew the results include......... Mood, mucus buildup, asprin, age, lack of sleep, hangovers, the war in Iraq, the release of that Sex In the city movie ( My God, they actually made a movie out of that drek!), hemiroids, Etc.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.