Don't you see? If we don't know everything then we effectively know nothing. Get it?
The problem is these people are often in complete denial of what is known. Like the fact that human subjective perception isn't the unerring reflection of the objective reality that they make it out to be.
se
Or it is you who didn't understand what Pavel is saying
SY question was hard to understand but IMO Pavel got it right. It was you who I thought didn't get what Pavel was saying? Of course it could also me who didn't get it
Who was it saying something about the logical fallacy in this thread? Not you? I don't remember but I think you must be careful not to fall into that fallacy.
As far as I can see, the complete denial is in you. Those you accused are genuinely badly informed or doesn't have sufficient knowledge to explain the phenomena they can observe or experience.
Or it is you who didn't understand what Pavel is saying
I'm trying to get Pavel to clarify what he is saying.
Can there be improvements in "subjective sound quality" even in the absence of actual audible differences?
If his answer is "yes," then there is nothing to argue.
If his answer is "no," then what he is saying is just nonsense. We don't have to test or measure "subjective sound quality," we just have to test for an actual audible difference, and we know how to do that.
se
and there are some parameters about a cable which can have measurable differences. For example, how much series Ls in a speaker cable will drop the tweeter level by a detectable amount (.1 or more dB)?? Maybe compare it to the Ls of lamp cord and tweeter Ls., etal. in SIM first.
For listening comparison/detection -- A simple way to listen to any amp for HF roll-off etc is to put the PA within inches (like 5cm) of the speaker and use short jumper to speaker..... then compare to long length speaker cable.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Got it right again.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
se
You forgot the third one: The ones who have the needed technical formation added with practical experience and still use their ears and feelings in the same time ;-)
Note that their position here is not comfortable: the are the preferred target of the thumbs, mostly in the so calling objectvist camp, because they feel (the thumbs) they cannot impress them with their book knowledge.
At the end, it is fun to see some of them, taking attitudes of "promoters of science" using deep scientific arguments like "Go back to sleep".
Last edited:
Meaningless. It's been trivially easy to design an audio cable with no audible degradation for over a century.
se
BTW - what is the low value of Ls of dome tweeters? How does it compare to Ls of 10-20' zip cord? Someone else ought to look into it and check the magnitude of difference some commonly used speaker cable would have.
Contrary to Cutzi's assertions, the equivalent of the Cap 'expose' pieces was done by Nelson Pass on why cables are audible. Since then a lot of the cable interfacing and design improved.
https://passlabs.com/articles/speaker-cables-science-or-snake-oil
THx-RNMarsh
Contrary to Cutzi's assertions, the equivalent of the Cap 'expose' pieces was done by Nelson Pass on why cables are audible. Since then a lot of the cable interfacing and design improved.
https://passlabs.com/articles/speaker-cables-science-or-snake-oil
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Not so much. Ian Masters and Richard Clark are two people who I offhand am aware published their tests, and Masters used a Pioneer (though probably not your model). I'd think that the issue with your Pioneer will be with pathological speakers with bizarre impedance curves. No problem for the almost-as-old Adcom sitting in my living room at the moment.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.