Nice unintentional "pun" there, 🙂 ... yes, mains, and what the components and cables happen to be sitting on, what is nearby - the "ideal" would be an empty space, perhaps, the units locked in mid-air, frozen in position .. how far does one want to go, 😛 ?
Regarding fooling oneself, if you've been doing this optimising thing for some time you should have evolved a technique to shake yourself out of any fantasies - if I feel the system is in good shape, I'll automatically start putting on grungier and grungier recordings, "stress testing" the competence of the sound. And quite often I'll hit a pothole fairly quickly - uh-oh, not handling that type of difficult recording well, still not there yet. Once I hear the system not being right, then I keep hearing the "problem" - something to sort out.
Best is to be in a foul state of mind - if the system still sounds good then you're doing OK ...
Sorry, in the audio world that is not happening - and that's not good enough! A simple example: THD is recognised as not being good enough to characterise the subjective performance, this is repeated here often, yet nothing is being done to progress understanding in this area - I've already pointed to the total lack of interest in AES activities about this.
So, THD is not considered to be correct, as in being sufficient, but the scientific community has accepted it, it's the "standard" - so, what's being done about that ??
I think it's beyond strange to state that the target can move "moment to moment" then turn around and complain about slow progress in the field.
Well, when people spout ridiculous things like, "THD is not considered to be correct, as in being sufficient, but the scientific community has accepted it, it's the 'standard'," then you're dealing with issues having nothing to do with audio. It's now a matter of faith and social signaling.
You must be smoking some really good stuff. Can I get some?
Hint to where your logic fails: What manufacturers post in their specs, is not what the scientific community thinks are the correct specs.
Try eating cat excrements, it really helps with hearing fine details in your system, its a night and day difference, you just have to have an open mind and try it for yourself.
I have three degrees, one in physics and two in EE. I think that makes me a member of the 'scientific community'. I don't recall THD being mentioned during my education. In what sense of "accepted" has THD been accepted by this community?
Please could some kind person send me £5 (or even $5) every time THD gets mentioned by someone accusing someone else of believing in it? I would become very rich, then I could afford to buy some real high-end gear and discover why so many people seem to enjoy 10% distortion and frequency response which varies with volume control position and cable length.
Please could some kind person send me £5 (or even $5) every time THD gets mentioned by someone accusing someone else of believing in it? I would become very rich, then I could afford to buy some real high-end gear and discover why so many people seem to enjoy 10% distortion and frequency response which varies with volume control position and cable length.
Typically with a spectrum analyzer. And no-one with any technical competence and familiarity with the literature believes that "low THD" is "sufficient" except the voices in some folks' heads.
Why just a spectrum analyser ...it is you who seems to be narrowing down the choices of measurements....
A normal scale/range would be nice. Can you imagine that in the future a THD of 0.00000001% could be the norm.
Anything below 0.01% is quite good enough to ensure you biggest problem by an order of magnitude or more are the speakers.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.