Joshua, be reasonable. It doesn't matter what I or you have or have not heard. Stereo is the ultimate delusion. Whichever way you turn it, you imagine hearing something that isn't there. Really simple. Don't be disturbed, we're all in the same boat here.
jd
Jacco.......you need to call me again sometime. We need to talk, and not about Hans Deutsch von Stahlenberg 🙂
When there is something in my living room which sounds like a live violin playing, when there is no live violin – it is a delusion. However, not many audio setups are able to create that degree of closeness to the real thing.
I'm not sure my knowledge of quantum physics surpasses his, but I am sure the wall I walked into while I had my eyes closed WAS still there.
This is the kind of garbage we used to throw around when I was an undergrad and we were smoking dope after QM class. 😀 It's nice that the Swami has found a good scam to keep him in the lifestyle to which I'd like to be accustomed (and a much nicer one than the salaries paid profs at minor universities). There's always ignorant suckers around to eat up this garbage. Sometimes, I wish I didn't have a conscience...
Anyway, am I the only person who remembers Edmund Flewelling and his speakers? He was a delightful crackpot, and the speaker concept seems remarkably like this one.
Since my time is short today, I'll ask one of the other moderators to split off the speaker discussion into its own thread which it deserves.
Anyway, am I the only person who remembers Edmund Flewelling and his speakers? He was a delightful crackpot, and the speaker concept seems remarkably like this one.
Since my time is short today, I'll ask one of the other moderators to split off the speaker discussion into its own thread which it deserves.
AFAIK, he did the ribbon part, but the system concept and the use of VERY nonstandard woofers was carvers. Nice speakers from the few times I heard them.
I'm not english but that delusion word just sound wrong to me.
Delusion = an erroneous perception of reality?
Illusion = an illusory mental image?
OK maybe on a 😱 system but with a good system the second one fit the description much better. 😉
Walking against a wall with eyes closed is opposing the above exercise and question. The question asked was whether the world exists when there is no sensory perception of it.
This is a very deep philosophical question.
Quantum physics deals with it.
Indeed, it's easy to be ridiculed – for all who find satisfaction in ridiculing that which is outside their present box.
I agree with you.
It seems to me better to phrase it: "The better the audio system is, the illusion of the real thing is closer to the real thing itself". Of course, it's illusion that there is a live violin playing in my living room, however, the sound in my living room can be darn close to a real, live violin.
Why does it fit better? They both are correct in this context. Maybe the 'D-word' hurts more?
(Don't answer right away, think it through for a moment).
jd
thanks Glen
was a far much better topic, than my uprising problems with hemorrhoids which I otherwise had to mention! 🙂Hot French women!
Regards
There is a difference between those words. The choice of one or the other may come from wanting to stress one implied meaning over the other.
Either way, having illusion or delusion, I enjoy listening to music reproduced be my setup. There are varying degrees of resemblance to live music. With my present setup, this degree is very high.
Would you please give me an example of when "there is no sensory perception of it." When I close my eyes, I am still very much aware of the world.
I wonder what blind people walk on?
Simply stunning.
It didn't take long for this thread to die in an excruciatingly painful mess.
Joshua, I get that you like your speakers. That's cool, but they are not designed to be accurate. Accurate = transforming and electrical signal into the acoustic equivalent.
Hi Curly, most of us agree that components can sound different, but this has been talked to death. You're going over ground traveled often before. I guess it's easier than creating your own new trail. Re: Bob Carver. His amplifiers got better over time, and his last ones sounded extremely good. I have heard them all, from the M-400 cube to the TFM-75 and Lightstar (owned one for a while). Even the tube amp. I did warranty for Carver products for years. Bob drove me nuts with the phrases he came up with, but the designs were solid and reliable.
Hi John,
Smaller capacitors and that's all? No. I think it may have been Peter Traynor that proved that "smaller capacitors were better" in a power supply. That's an open statement without any conditions attached, so it isn't correct as it stands.
If you look at Bob Carvers power supply designs, you have to recognize that they are fundamentally different from what is normally seen. I know they are from all the botched repairs from other shops I had to fix. Those supplies used smaller capacitors, however the "mag coil" type transformer had much lower effective impedance than a normal EI type, probably toroid as well. The primary power circuit was a very effective regulator that maintained supply voltages under varying load. The lower capacitance levels prevented huge (unnecessary) current surges under load. As you should know, current surges from the wall outlet were pretty heavy anyway. The system did it's job of maintaining power supply voltages to far tighter tolerances than most standard supplies, any I can think of at any rate. His final solution with Carver was a high frequency regulator in the Lightstar amps that stepped bipolar 125 VDC down to the required voltage. Two circuits, one for each channel in the TFM-75 and Lightstar.
While amps like the M1.0 sounded rough (for a few reasons), later products did not suffer from poor sound quality. Maybe not as good as yours (I don't know), but I'm sure better than some other amps you might have some respect for.
Bob's ideas ...... brilliant. A great marketing guy as well, and he knew his target market too.
-Chris
It didn't take long for this thread to die in an excruciatingly painful mess.
Joshua, I get that you like your speakers. That's cool, but they are not designed to be accurate. Accurate = transforming and electrical signal into the acoustic equivalent.
Hi Curly, most of us agree that components can sound different, but this has been talked to death. You're going over ground traveled often before. I guess it's easier than creating your own new trail. Re: Bob Carver. His amplifiers got better over time, and his last ones sounded extremely good. I have heard them all, from the M-400 cube to the TFM-75 and Lightstar (owned one for a while). Even the tube amp. I did warranty for Carver products for years. Bob drove me nuts with the phrases he came up with, but the designs were solid and reliable.
Hi John,
Smaller capacitors and that's all? No. I think it may have been Peter Traynor that proved that "smaller capacitors were better" in a power supply. That's an open statement without any conditions attached, so it isn't correct as it stands.
If you look at Bob Carvers power supply designs, you have to recognize that they are fundamentally different from what is normally seen. I know they are from all the botched repairs from other shops I had to fix. Those supplies used smaller capacitors, however the "mag coil" type transformer had much lower effective impedance than a normal EI type, probably toroid as well. The primary power circuit was a very effective regulator that maintained supply voltages under varying load. The lower capacitance levels prevented huge (unnecessary) current surges under load. As you should know, current surges from the wall outlet were pretty heavy anyway. The system did it's job of maintaining power supply voltages to far tighter tolerances than most standard supplies, any I can think of at any rate. His final solution with Carver was a high frequency regulator in the Lightstar amps that stepped bipolar 125 VDC down to the required voltage. Two circuits, one for each channel in the TFM-75 and Lightstar.
While amps like the M1.0 sounded rough (for a few reasons), later products did not suffer from poor sound quality. Maybe not as good as yours (I don't know), but I'm sure better than some other amps you might have some respect for.
Bob's ideas ...... brilliant. A great marketing guy as well, and he knew his target market too.
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.