What happened to diyaudio?

[MJK]

Originally Posted by Variac

Yeah, Teflon appears to be a troll or a sock-puppet.. or a troll-sock-puppet

I think he is right on the money with his points. There are a lot of very interesting and knowledgeable people who are members of DIYaudio, and I have seen less and less posts from them over the past year.

[markus76]

Originally Posted by 45

I don't have so much time so I don't waste it on something that works!

Any speaker "works". What proof do you have that your speaker preserves "musical sound as a space-time sequence"? It's nothing more than a belief.
The K+H O500 can be made 100% linear phase if that's what you're looking for. Is it important? No.

Best, Markus

[Key]

Originally Posted by 45

Yes and you have to make it the most congruent possible. There is nothing to fool.....

Do you have to? Really? You just made a prerequisite for a realistic playback system to be the MOST accurate playback that is theoretically possible on the planet. Is that an accessible solution to home and studio sound reproduction?

I think all you need to do is avoid distracting incorrect cues and supply a few elementary correct cues. You can get to a certain point where you are only chasing abstract concepts and benchmarks which have little to no direct effect on the end sound imo. If we were to make a standard in which everyone of these measurable deficiencies and there solution is a requirement for accurate playback. Then we are only making accurate sound reproduction less accessible for the sake of blind perfectionism.

[45]

Originally Posted by skorpion

And now he is telling me what I think ?

/Erling

I haven't asked any question.

[Theo404]

I'm sorry if you find the following question offensive, in no way do I intend it to be, but its going to bug the hell out of me if I dont ask...

Is english not your first language? May explain some of the confusion.

[45]

Originally Posted by Key

Do you have to? Really? You just made a prerequisite for a realistic playback system to be the MOST accurate playback that is theoretically possible on the planet.

Yes it is because it makes the minimum error.

Originally Posted by Key

Is that an accessible solution to home and studio sound reproduction?

What do you mean?

[45]

Originally Posted by Theo404

I'm sorry if you find the following question offensive, in no way do I intend it to be, but its going to bug the hell out of me if I dont ask...

Is english not your first language? May explain some of the confusion.

It's the second.

[skorpion]

Originally Posted by 45

I haven't asked any question.

Besides beeing time-variant it might also be so that he doesn't understand what he reads . ! ?

/Erling

[45]

Originally Posted by Key

I think all you need to do is avoid distracting incorrect cues and supply a few elementary correct cues. You can get to a certain point where you are only chasing abstract concepts and benchmarks which have little to no direct effect on the end sound imo. If we were to make a standard in which everyone of these measurable deficiencies and there solution is a requirement for accurate playback. Then we are only making accurate sound reproduction less accessible for the sake of blind perfectionism.

I think I have tried. Maybe I am not so good. Anyway, from the pictures you can see a lot. Also you may want to experiment something. You can do it with any speaker and in any room. Just to see what happens....

[45]

Originally Posted by skorpion

Besides beeing time-variant it might also be so that he doesn't understand what he reads . ! ?

/Erling

hahaha....
You don't know what system I am speaking of but you certainly know what any stereo system can or can't do. Is is a postulate?