No. Just the only one who bothered to reply to it instead of just shaking your head and moving on to the next post.
I'm befuddled by your sentence structure.
What you really want is the realisation that you already have them.
I wish it were that easy, but then there are no sense in trying to lie to yourself.
Some are good at it though.
Problem is if you trust DBT's (considering the way they are done) more than your ears then mid-fi should be the ultimate sound. Your choice.
I think John's, perhaps inadvertently, pulling your chain.
He has said in the past that when he's got something he thinks is good, or an improvement, and it measures and sounds right to him, that he sends it to people he trusts and they get to listen and play with it and tell him what they think, because he doesn't trust his own ears.
It's a sort of informal DBT - should work pretty well since he's not there.
Naughty, naughty, John
Mind you, he's right about the mags. I stopped reading those hifi mags over 30 years ago because I had the impression they were taking in each others' washing.
The last couple of decades AES has perhaps published a lot more research having to with developing 'OK' sound with minimal resources - CODECS and so forth - rather than publishing bleeding edge research on very best sound quality and how to achieve it. I suspect this is because not a whole lot of research is going in that direction - where is the money for it going to come from?
He has said in the past that when he's got something he thinks is good, or an improvement, and it measures and sounds right to him, that he sends it to people he trusts and they get to listen and play with it and tell him what they think, because he doesn't trust his own ears.
It's a sort of informal DBT - should work pretty well since he's not there.
Naughty, naughty, John
Mind you, he's right about the mags. I stopped reading those hifi mags over 30 years ago because I had the impression they were taking in each others' washing.
The last couple of decades AES has perhaps published a lot more research having to with developing 'OK' sound with minimal resources - CODECS and so forth - rather than publishing bleeding edge research on very best sound quality and how to achieve it. I suspect this is because not a whole lot of research is going in that direction - where is the money for it going to come from?
I don't get that Andre. First of all, DBT's are all about listening - the ears, remember?
Secondly, what's the connection between DBT and mid-fi? I don't understand that. Care to explain?
jd
I said that before here, some people are deaf about cables so they will never beleave that cables make a difference. Cables are a quite linear filters so can be compensated for in active systems. what makes it unpedictable is that cables are put in any not defined system and differences appear. A whole industry is based on that.
TG,
It's not often that I feel personally offended by a poster, but you pulled it off. In a previous post you called me intellectually dishonest for calling attention to expectation bias in uncontrolled testing.
Again in this post:
you accuse the rationalists (and I count myself among them) as unable to have an intelligent discussion. Well, read the posts here by the rationalists. Aren't they reasonably intelligent? Your are unfair to all those that clearly try to have an intelligent conversation.
Also we do not call you all those things. We only try to convince you to do a certain type (controlled) tests so we can all know where the beef is. You may not agree to all that, fine. But try to stay at least as honest as you want us to be.
jd
It's not often that I feel personally offended by a poster, but you pulled it off. In a previous post you called me intellectually dishonest for calling attention to expectation bias in uncontrolled testing.
Again in this post:
you accuse the rationalists (and I count myself among them) as unable to have an intelligent discussion. Well, read the posts here by the rationalists. Aren't they reasonably intelligent? Your are unfair to all those that clearly try to have an intelligent conversation.
Also we do not call you all those things. We only try to convince you to do a certain type (controlled) tests so we can all know where the beef is. You may not agree to all that, fine. But try to stay at least as honest as you want us to be.
jd
Jan, people that hear differences in cables will always be acused to be unscientific. It simply can not be proved to make a difference. I measured differences in cables and i got so much hate mail that i thought this poor souls must have been really cheated many times. i gave up to measure cable a long time ago but i still try to improve my cooking.
I use too much salt though most of the time.
I use too much salt though most of the time.
I understand that Joachim, but I don't see why I should accept being called intellectually dishonest or unwilling/uncapable to have an intelligent discussion when it is clear to anyone that that just isn't true.
jd
And it is indeed hilarious to read the shuffling and ahem-ing when something which is clearly a terrible component gets a rave "subjective" review.
When they review woo-woo stuff, do they also do measurements?
True, until they bother to actually demonstrate that they (or ANYONE) hears these differences, rather than make increasingly obtuse excuses about why they can't do it without peeking.
Yes I believe it is self defence, and the more inner doubts one has about one's position the louder one becomes, just human nature, I do it all the time.
Would you accept that I've been having three-ways with Scarlett Johanssen and Reese Witherspoon, but they're keeping it secret?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.