I don't understand that saying, like, cheap at half the price, what's that all about?
The store is no longer around, but one manager at A&B Sound advocated starting with midfi gear. He said your system plays the speakers, and your speakers play the room.
Fix the room first, with bass traps and mid treble diffusors, then decide if you like your speakers.After that's addressed, most modern gear distorts below human's audibility threshold, about -80db, so you'll most likely be choosing a pleasing coloration, which he'd be very pleased to help you select, from his high end section.
I miss A&B Sound.
Digital audio consists of data plus timing. Only an ignoramus would claim that goop or anything else can improve data, so all the attention necessarily falls on timing. Unfortunately there is scope here for wild unproven but irrefutable claims, so they happen.
Analogue audio consists of a time-varying voltage. Only a small number of people can hear significantly better than average (e.g. several orders of magnitude lower distortion), but it is difficult to prove that someone is not hearing what they claim they hear - and there are lots of excuses why any attempt to actually test them will fail. Hence there is scope for wild unproven but irrefutable claims.
However, this thread is mainly about nonsense. Pure nonsense. Especially amusing nonsense. Not claims which few of us believe but we accept might, just might, be true even though the likelihood of actually demonstrating this is vanishingly small.
Analogue audio consists of a time-varying voltage. Only a small number of people can hear significantly better than average (e.g. several orders of magnitude lower distortion), but it is difficult to prove that someone is not hearing what they claim they hear - and there are lots of excuses why any attempt to actually test them will fail. Hence there is scope for wild unproven but irrefutable claims.
However, this thread is mainly about nonsense. Pure nonsense. Especially amusing nonsense. Not claims which few of us believe but we accept might, just might, be true even though the likelihood of actually demonstrating this is vanishingly small.
It's a misuse/misquotation of 'put up and shut up' ie stop whinging if you're not gonna do anything about it.
At some point a politician misused it and the misuse has stuck.
Similar to Americans mishearing the british saying 'I couldn't care less' as 'I could care less' removing any sense from it although some are desperate to get the sense back by claiming it is 'ironic'. Which is a tad ironic considering that Americans are famous for not understanding british irony.
Last edited:
It's a misuse/misquotation of 'put up and shut up' ie stop whinging if you're not gonna do anything about it.
At some point a politician misused it and the misuse has stuck.
Similar to Americans mishearing the british saying 'I couldn't care less' as 'I could care less' removing any sense from it although some are desperate to get the sense back by claiming it is 'ironic'. Which is a tad ironic considering that Americans are famous for not understanding british irony.
Ironic language/icon fail, or god complex?
I could care less, and shall!
Attachments
You mean the studies you read are concerning gold compounds injected directly into the body which is of course perfect invitation for complications.
Intravenous dosage is where the toxicity dangers are, not in wearing gold or in taking or applying small amounts in colloidal form which is very low concentration.
I'm talking from personal experience and in my experience yes colloidal gold is totally effective in banishing joint pain.
I also find it has a nice bodily and mentally calming effect....perhaps you should try some, it might help you to chill out.
Dan.
There is some research on timing and jitter. Not as much as would be nice, but some. A little bit written here: jitter_1
Regarding data, yes it normally doesn't change until something changes it, perhaps such as SRC in modern DACs. New timing and new data.
No goop effects though. It can be hard for scientists and engineers to put up with uninformed beliefs of lay people. It can be hard for doctors and lawyers to put up with uninformed beliefs of lay people,too. But at the same time, sometimes the experts are guilty of hubris. They don't know everything. They are still arguing about how to build an audio amplifier. And, it often seems like the other guy is the one being unreasonable and misinformed. What can you do? It's all part of the human condition.
I am a little worried about Max (Dan) though. He is a well spoken and interesting guy, seems like a good person, probably does hear very small distortion, but has some theories that are probably going to end up being disappointing. It may never get to the point of disappointing Dan, but I could imagine his son growing up to be one of those people telling stories about his dad being on a quest that never panned out.
Last edited:
Your expounding relativism again, all extraordinary claims stand on equal ground. We've been over this before, crossover distortion of a low frequency signal can be confected to not be masked this is not the same as an 0.01% smooth transfer function non-linearity. Easy audibility of the later is an extraordinary claim.
I'm not just talking about that. There wasn't one of PMA's listening tests where I and usually others could hear differences, blindly and repeatably. It looks like Bruno Putzys can hear that stuff too, although he doesn't talk about it a lot. He does say the audiophiles are hearing something real (at least some subset of them). You can believe it or not. There is no way to prove it without spending a lot of time and money since we know that Foobar ABX can be easily hacked. If you are interested enough in finding out, your generous contribution to new auditory research would be greatly appreciated, most likely. But, you know, it's not as attractive as cancer research.
Last edited:
I don't see that, show something substantial or stop talking about it. I don't see any misunderstanding at all, putting nothing up and doing 100 more posts about it is not a desired outcome. If something is put up I would expect the shutting up will never happen no matter what and I probably wouldn't want it to.
Last edited:
As far as I am aware this was the first time we talked about John Major's misuse of the phrase 'put up and shut up' as 'put up or shut up' which I seem to remember happened during the run up of the '92 general election in the UK and which has stuck.
A bit OT but it was meant to possibly explain why Scott (Joplin) could not make sense of the phrase as it now is.
I am not sure what you were thinking it meant.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.