It's awfully hard to argue against The Dragon in My Garage.
I am sure if credible evidence appears Absconditus will be happy to reconsider his position. Unfortunately, the rest of the world has long considered audio reproduction a mostly "solved problem" and there will be no funding for this kind of research.
I am sure if credible evidence appears Absconditus will be happy to reconsider his position. Unfortunately, the rest of the world has long considered audio reproduction a mostly "solved problem" and there will be no funding for this kind of research.
Yep!
Fortunately not. Unless 1/6th gravity and no atmosphere (as well a sun in the background and many other lunar conditions) can be replicated, it will simply be a Hollywood set. Sure, many believe the whole thing was faked but a great many people still believe dead people can talk to them "from the other side", so the Argument from Popularity proves nothing, again.
Yes, it's mostly solved, which is why PA systems, and general audio systems available in retail stores do such a brilliant job of reproducing sound, that most people can't tell the difference ...
funnily a version of Nelsons IV, but running higher gm fets, higher voltage, higher current and without the output buffer is exactly what i'm using in my ESS DAC. the NTD1 stands for New Take on the Pass D1. I liked it so much, I built another 2 channels, so now my DAC IV stage burns 100W and looks like a poweramp haha. big greenie I am.
But chris719 didn't talk about whether it was mostly solved, he merely reported on it being considered mostly solved. By which precisely he put his finger on the primary reason that most systems don't sound like the real thing as you report - if the designers recognised there was a problem they'd get on and fix it would they not?
Indeed people do hear all kinds of placebo effects. It is a real effect you know
thats fine, absolutely its a real effect, as real as anything, to the observer. Its when this possibility isnt accepted when mentioned and manufacturers that should know better start grasping at straws as to what the 'engineering' cause may be, in order to 'egg the customer on' and sell more product, power cords for example.
this isnt hypothetical, its a real scenario on an Australian forum at the moment.
I cant and wont argue with perception, quite the opposite ... but I will argue against its framing as something else that 'may' effect others the same, I will do so every time. when manufacturers mix in just enough technical info to baffle with science, then switch to talking about many 'years of experience' and couching every statement with 'I believe' 'I feel' when they have no actual info or reasoning, along with many other emotionally charged words in the same propaganda; this steps right over the line IMO
Last edited:
Not this again, the last desperate attempt to prove a non-existant point. So take a tool and pad the offset equal on both, then try the old no peeking DBT. We will wait a while on that.
Well, I'm glad that 'everybody' is way ahead of me in the I-V department. I guess that my opinion, originally derived from open listen tests, got 'lucky'.
You see, I didn't see the problem on the schematics, at first. Looked like good solid engineering to me, and the cap across the feedback resistor in the I-V converter would 'certainly' integrate any above 100KHz artifacts, etc.
Looking 'deeper' into it, made me come up to the same conclusion of many modifiers. This I-V converter is a problem to be solved!
Now, let's look at line cords and note their differences! '-)
You see, I didn't see the problem on the schematics, at first. Looked like good solid engineering to me, and the cap across the feedback resistor in the I-V converter would 'certainly' integrate any above 100KHz artifacts, etc.
Looking 'deeper' into it, made me come up to the same conclusion of many modifiers. This I-V converter is a problem to be solved!
Now, let's look at line cords and note their differences! '-)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.