John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

There is no need for me to demonstrate to others that I hear what I hear.

There absolutely is when you make claims such as "Experienced audiophiles do now how to eliminate all the variables that aren't the actual and genuine audible experience."

Or when you attempt to pass off your subjective experience as something more than simply your subjective experience.

se

[simon7000]

Originally Posted by SY

No, we wouldn't. Perhaps a cartoon of a rationalist might, but no-one I've ever met would assume that clipping behavior and recovery is the same from amp to amp.

SY,

Historically ringing on clipping went unnoticed for several years! there still are amplifiers made that do that! So yes with hindsight we should not make that mistake, we have so many new ones left!

ES

Steve,

The brass seems like a good idea, but the thieves would mistake it for gold and then get upset when they found out otherwise and take it out on me!

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

I'd love to see the factual scientific ground on which you declare that the differences in sound I hear are based on ego and arrogance.

It would be a compete waste of time given how you just make stuff up as you do here.

se

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by simon7000

The brass seems like a good idea, but the thieves would mistake it for gold and then get upset when they found out otherwise and take it out on me!

Yes, vanity does have its price. But just think how GREAT you'll feel about yourself BEFORE they come back and open up a can of Whoop *** on you.

Edit: Aw man, I thought they'd eased up on the silly-*** nanny filter.

se

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy

There absolutely is when you make claims such as "Experienced audiophiles do now how to eliminate all the variables that aren't the actual and genuine audible experience."

Or when you attempt to pass off your subjective experience as something more than simply your subjective experience.

se

This is as far from factual scientific knowledge as it can be.
This is a pure speculation on your part, probably cased on your beliefs.

[jacco vermeulen]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

I'd love to see the factual scientific ground on which you declare that the differences in sound I hear are based on ego and arrogance.

Maybe the fact that you've been stating it time and again, several years on end, and to what end ?
Without the data, the 'audiophile' hardware, nor the expertise to back it up.
Factual observations + circumstantial evidence = rational assumption, till proven otherwise.

(forgive me father, i myself have commited arrogance display again)

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy

It would be a compete waste of time given how you just make stuff up as you do here.

se

Another demonstration of a declaration based on factual scientific knowledge (to your view).

[jan.didden]

[QUOTE=Joshua_G;2611511]

Originally Posted by janneman

If you are interested in the facts I can narrate how by making various changes to my system I hear audible changes, some times for better, some time for worse, and sometimes mixed results. Very often the audible changes I hear are opposed to my expectations beforehand.

However I doubt if you are actually interested in the facts of this issue.

Well, of course I am interested in facts. You should stop putting words in other peoples mouth in every post of you. It get's boring.

Anyway, yes, the facts. I have understood from various posts by you that you don't agree that non-auditory clues may influence your assessment, and that consequently you don't take measures to make a listening test controlled.

If that is correct, I am not interested in the details how you do your test as the results will be personal to you and not very interesting to me.

If this is not correct, if in fact you have chaged your mind and agree that tests should be controlled to prevent non-audditory clues to influence your assessment, I am quite interested in how you set up such a controlled session.

jan didden

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

This is as far from factual scientific knowledge as it can be.
This is a pure speculation on your part, probably cased on your beliefs.

And you're just spewing a bunch of gibberish. I've better things to do with my time.

se

[simon7000]

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy

Yes, vanity does have its price. But just think how GREAT you'll feel about yourself BEFORE they come back and open up a can of Whoop *** on you.

se

Steve

I think I will stick with my tin ears, that way I won't have to get into silly debates over what one can hear versus what can be measured.

I'll stick to the debates on if what you are measuring has any influence on what can actually be heard.

ES