Go Back   Home > Forums > General Interest > Everything Else

Everything Else Anything related to audio / video / electronics etc) BUT remember- we have many new forums where your thread may now fit! .... Parts, Equipment & Tools, Construction Tips, Software Tools......

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16th July 2003, 12:35 PM   #1
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: US
Default Re: hmmm.

.This thread originated somwhere else, but since it is a discussion between two persons mostly, about matters that may not be of interest to other mebers, I decided to open a new thread on this specific subject and don't pollute the other thread

Peter Daniel
diy Audio Moderator


Quote:
Originally posted by SY
so I can take a "judgement suspended pending evidence" point of view and still be able to sleep at night.
SY, I am in complete agreement with you. While I don't believe, I am also open to the possibility that it is real. Thus, my urging Peter to persue it because I honestly think this thing is bigger than huge to all fields of electronics, if he can prove it.

I am quite disappointed in his unwillingness to back himself up (and make a buck or two in the process).

Quote:
Originally posted by Sawzall
If you make a statement as fact, be prepared to prove it. Every thing else should be clearly marked as opinion in a manner that a newbie could not confuse it as a proven fact.
I 2nd that. I think if one makes a statement, one should be prepared to back it up. What was offered as "explanation" in this case is highly questionable in its scientific validity, to put it mildly.

But that's not the point. We are here to learn from each other and I am glad that I did just that in the process
 
Old 16th July 2003, 12:51 PM   #2
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: US
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mrfeedback
[B]I agree with Jonathon Carr that different insulating pads will likely cause differing capacitive coupling to the heatsink and that this may be audible according to the transisent stability of the amplifier circuit.

I also agree that bending moments on the device may cause alteration of chip characteristics.

mrfeedback, I can state definitively that
1) different insulating pads will cause differing capacitive coupling;
2) bending moments (whatever that means) on the device causes alteration fo chip characteristics.

There is no debate / questioning on that. What the debate is about is how audible that it.

So far, we know four or five guys / gals who claim to hear it. The rest of us apparently are too deaf to hear it, and too ignorant to understand the rationale behind it, or see the link between vibrations and "airy" sound.

your observations on heatsink I think take Peter's theory one step further. so maybe we should also test heatsinks next time?

Has anyone tried to see if their amps sound different in winter vs. summer?
 
Old 16th July 2003, 01:55 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default Re: Re: hmmm.

Quote:
Originally posted by millwood


SY, I am in complete agreement with you. While I don't believe, I am also open to the possibility that it is real. Thus, my urging Peter to persue it because I honestly think this thing is bigger than huge to all fields of electronics, if he can prove it.

I am quite disappointed in his unwillingness to back himself up (and make a buck or two in the process).



I 2nd that. I think if one makes a statement, one should be prepared to back it up. What was offered as "explanation" in this case is highly questionable in its scientific validity, to put it mildly.

But that's not the point. We are here to learn from each other and I am glad that I did just that in the process.
So let's go one more time over it again. Do you have any specific suggestion how I can prove it? After seeing your desperate attempts to persuade me to do that, I'm actually more than willing to comply now.

By saying that "this thing is bigger than huge to all fields of electronics" you greatly exaggerate it, as some respected members already mentioned that it's old news.
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
 
Old 16th July 2003, 01:59 PM   #4
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: US
Default Re: Re: Re: hmmm.

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel


So let's go one more time over it again. Do you have any specific suggestion how I can prove it?
Peter, shall we NOT go there, please. Repeating myself isn't exactly the kind of things to do in public.
 
Old 16th July 2003, 02:10 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: hmmm.

Quote:
Originally posted by millwood


Peter, shall we NOT go there, please. Repeating myself isn't exactly the kind of things to do in public.
While you were constantly repeating your demands for me to prove things, you never presented a practical suggestion how I should go about doing that. Quite frankly I have no clue how I can do that. By that I mean that we are mostly restricted by time and location.

If you decide to not pursue it any more, can I suggest that you don't mention my name and demand for proving any longer in that thread?
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
 
Old 16th July 2003, 02:16 PM   #6
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: US
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: hmmm.

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
While you were constantly repeating your demands for me to prove things, you never presented a practical suggestion how I should go about doing that. Quite frankly I have no clue how I can do that. By that I mean that we are mostly restricted by time and location.
Peter, i thought I had actually presented a couple of ways for you to do but I guess you don't remember it. If you need me to refresh your memory, please let me know.

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
If you decide to not pursue it any more, can I suggest that you don't mention my name and demand for proving any longer in that thread?
I think I am going to pursue it, with or without you. It is just that i would be extra disappointed in your absence on such a top that you feel so passionate about,
 
Old 16th July 2003, 02:21 PM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default Re: Millwood

This is what I found on the subject of testing. But I still don't know , how I can arrange it in time and space, so you will not have any doubts as to my results. Can you provide suggestion now without repeating yourself?

Quote:
Originally posted by millwood



Andy, I am happy to provide one, if you are OK with it. I am not sure how scientific it is, tho.

How about getting a few test subjects. Divide them into three groups. Those who believe in pad sound, whose who don't, and those who don't know about it.

Provide two identical gaincard amps, one with a silpad (amp S) and one with an AO pad (amp AO). do the usually trick of volume adjusting them, etc.

Conduct a series of double blind A vs. B listening tests, and ask the subjects two questions:

1) if A is different from B;
2) if A is preferred over B.

A / B can be either amp S, amp AO, or both. So the possible combinations are

amp S, amp S
amp S, amp AO
amp AO, amp S
amp AO, amp AO.

at alpha of 95%, run a hypothesise that amp S sounds the same as amp AO. (t-test I believe).

at the same confidence level, run another hypothesis that amp S is preferred over amp AO.

it would be interesting to know how well doug blackburn will do in such a test,

Quote:
Originally posted by ALW
What time interval do you propose for your tests and evaluations?

The ear can only detect certain fundamantal changes during a relatively short assessment time (read: minutes, hours).

During this time one can make simple assesments related to amplitude and frequency balance. This is the problem with DBT - short time spans, matched amplitudes etc. reduce the ability to determine any difference at all. It's a null result, not a proof.

The assessment of the underlying improvement in the music (totally unrelated to both the above criteria) often only comes after several days listening, or at least a good few hours. This is a critical point - frequency response errors, changes in amplitude have NO EFFECT whatsoever on the fundamentals of the music, providing the devices are operating within their envelopes, and the changes are not so extreme as to cause other ill-effects.

This is what makes many people think that speakers are the worst part in the chain, as they have the grossest reponse / amplitude errors. They are most important to the sound least important to the music.

Quick A/B's do not work, they fail to take into account the way we hear, the processing of which occurs in the brain.

I think Jonathan Carr's method, proposed previously, of making externally identical amplifiers labelled A / B or C, with the salient details identified internally is a better method.

One has to ensure that the insides cannot be seen / viewed without obvious evidence you then simply pass these amps onto a number of individuals who report their experience / preference over a long time period. The data / listening notes are then analysed subsequently.

How many times have you changed something with the immediate result that you think it's better, only to find, several days later that it isn't? This is a common theme amongst those of us actually doing this stuff.

I've done a lot of design work with remote partners, where improvements have been made and both of us have reported identical results, sonically, and this has often been with people I would view as having daimetrically opposed views to my own, with different systems, musical tastes etc.

I strongly believe that better is better for most people and this has been a most surprising finding for me, the difference in opinions solely comes down to the actual location you are along the audio path to nirvana - I may not like your system, you may hate mine, but an improvement to a common area is likely to be the same to both of us.

Andy.

Quote:
Originally posted by SY


Quite the opposite. Peter is claiming to have possibly found an interesting phenomenon. Putting aside the notions of analogy, there's not much in the way of a clear mechanism in the electronics to explain this- unless Audio Freak's hypothesis is correct. Either way, there's potentially something important here, and those of us who would love to see the state of the art advanced, rather than just speculated about, are trying to figure out a way to pin this down.

Now, measurement is a fine thing IF you know what you're looking for. And IF you know you're not chasing a chimera. So the first thing that has to be done is to take the instrument that is giving the "funny" result (in this case, Peter's perceptual system) and run the experiment. It's possible that there's a real phenomenon here. It's also possible that Peter is falling into the normal human trap of bias and expectation. It's improper to assume one or the other in the absence of evidence. So the way to cut this problem in half is by LISTENING, not measuring.

And fortunately, through more than a century of sensory research, the methods exist to use the human faculty of listening to determine what's going on. Since Peter, like most of us, doesn't have much experience with sensory testing, my suggestion has mutated to something about which he (and apparently others) feel just as confident, but less emotional.

So, let's give the rhetoric a rest and start with some baby steps.
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
 
Old 16th July 2003, 02:25 PM   #8
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: US
Default Re: Re: Millwood

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
This is what I found on the subject of testing. But I still don't know , how I can arrange it in time and space, so you will not have any doubts as to my results. Can you provide suggestion now without repeating yourself?
I have plenty of time for the study. I am willing to wait as long as it takes, Peter.
 
Old 16th July 2003, 02:26 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: hmmm.

Quote:
Originally posted by millwood

I think I am going to pursue it, with or without you. It is just that i would be extra disappointed in your absence on such a top that you feel so passionate about,

With your constant drivel, I'm actually getting less and less passionate.
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
 
Old 16th July 2003, 02:27 PM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default Re: Re: Re: Millwood

Quote:
Originally posted by millwood


I have plenty of time for the study. I am willing to wait as long as it takes, Peter.
So again, if you decide to wait, can you stop using my name and demand for me prove it to you? Do we have understanding on that?
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
 

Closed Thread


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
support needed to prove argument w/ amp gain settings slicey Car Audio 3 21st August 2005 07:54 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:16 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2