syn08 said:
One has to remember, that an engineer doing a dbt (or another listening test) is working in a field, in which he has no professional knowledge.
If he would just accept that in the field of cognitive psychology there is a lot more to learn before beeing able to do a reliable/valid/objective listening test, then i´m sure we would have had a lot more progress.
As pointed out before, normally there are measureable differences between cables, and, that´s why i so often did mention Bill Waslo´s diffmaker in the past, it can be useful to listen to the extracted differences alone.
The only point in question is, if these differences might be audible even when they are below common hearing thresholds.
Corvus corax said:
Which is?
Besides, as long as we don't have a common language, and you and your team are rejecting some basic electrical engineering knowledge and tools, there's little I can help. From this perspective Joshua is the ultimate resource, you may want to help yourself and your job (that you so vividly described here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1688718#post1688718 ) by integrating his body of knowledge in your design philosophy.
Unfortunately, most DIY'ers are stuck in about the same methodology you greatly described in the above link although for different reasons (like not having enough resources).
Seriously, I find there are a very few subjectivists that do not have a vested interest in promoting their beliefs. For those very few that don't, my deepest respect.
1audio said:
Wow that is obscure, one hit on Google. The reason I looked is that I still miss an old HP spectrum analyser and forgot the number. The screen got so dim it was useless and it was excessed without my knowledge. Old style ultra narrow crystal filter IFs, offsetable LO so I could do Dick Heyser style swept responses. Also liked the optional calibration in true nV/rt-Hz and 6-7nV noise floor.
1audio said:
Thanks for understanding my round about point. If one really wanted to look some postulated effects the process could be very difficult. E Brad Meyer tries to make the point that when using tedious equalization the effects disappear. Other say the equalizers added to the path destroy the test. Seems like no win to me.
he may not have designed the VW, if there wasn't a gap or opportunity. The newly build Autobahnen were still empty and the nazis wanted a cheap german car for everyone. At least this was the propanda! 
And Prof. Porsche jumped in...
Nowadays consumer audio is as democratic, as it could be. The masses can buy almost everything at cheapest prices.
MP3-players with headphones cost less than 10 Euro!
If you can make money with less expensive stuff, go for it!
But why do rich people need cheaper caviar?
regards
And Prof. Porsche jumped in...
Nowadays consumer audio is as democratic, as it could be. The masses can buy almost everything at cheapest prices.
MP3-players with headphones cost less than 10 Euro!
If you can make money with less expensive stuff, go for it!
But why do rich people need cheaper caviar?
regards
jacco vermeulen said:
Weird thing is that those doing the force feeding in this thread don't appear to be able to backup anything they say to show whether they are right or not, yet expect others to believe them.
Andre Visser said:
Then you get some objectivists who are unable to produce equipment with good sonics, thus trying to convince everybody not to trust their ears, because "they all sound the same".
Not really the case here though is it? The issue here is that a few non-objective types seem to think that regardless of all scienece, engineering and common sence they still expect the rest of us to believe that they have the best ears and the best ideas and they are the best judges of equipment and desgins even though they can only back up what they say with "I like it".
That is great for them, they have every right to choose what they like, but it gets to be a great bore when they prattle on about it ad-infinitum as though their ears alone are the only valid piece of equipment that the rest should believe in.
Clearly nonsense and an example of a requirement for blind faith rather than logical thought.
I prefer logical thought and like Syn_08 will leave this thread to those that have blind faith and think they have golden ears.
Sadly over the years these types have taken over the Hi Fi press and caused an awful lot of waste, and no doubt a lot of prizes have gone to well marketed psuedo science and designs that would not pass muster in a true enginneering world - the sort of engineering that makes real things happen rather than winning beauty contests or gains popularity due to there being a lot of followers that don't understand.
As for blind faith.
In other forums, people often ask advice about buying various equipment, loudspeakers, amplifiers, CDPs, cables etc'. I never recommend any specific item, my constant recommendation is for each to trust ones' own ears. To listen to each component in question attached to ones' own audio system, in ones' own listening room.
So, do you choose items for your audio system logically, without using your ears?
alansawyer said:
Alan, this thread is about going beyond 'good', pushing the limits of what is possible. How can you expect to do that, while relying on only what is known by science? Obviously there will be new observations that needed to be explained. Just pushing it aside by remarks like you can't trust your ears doesn't help at all.
I can't remember anybody claiming to have the best ears or the best idea's or whatever you claim. What I can tell you is that anybody that are willing to learn, can teach their brain to perceive much more than what is commonly accepted as possible.
I would rather depend on science than subjective opinions from people who are overly confident of there ears.( brain, thats whats listening). Use this quote for particle physics or building the worlds biggest bridge and see how silly it sounds. Designing electronics is still science. Use your ears but like any test equipment know there limits.
cbdb said:
Luckily we are talking about hi-fi which is all about sound and ears and listening, not bridges and whatever more. Nobody said to ignore measurements and good designs etc. but listening suggest that there are more to good SQ than shown by normal measurements. We can either choose to ignore it and stay with the 'known' (boring), or try to find and understand the unknown. Your choice.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.