sure.
you have the only correct and verified facts?
do you really think that story has "the facts"??
from whence did they come??
Seriously.
lessee, you were ever in any of these studios??
At the time that the NS-10 was first used?
Don't think so.
_-_-
Dan,
As i explained before, Dick Sequerra did this "phase plug" modification on his tweeters since the time that the speakers first came out. I think that's maybe the 1970s... so no, he did not copy the people you mention.
Dunno what those things are, but whatever.
_-_-
Mr. Marce,
Mr Curl turned 74 years of age, 185 days ago, I'm positive he did not suggest that your hearing is less than his.
If one assumes we simply cannot hear above 20kHz, that would be correct.
If one assumes however, that we have sensitivity to some aspects of the musical waveform at the level of 1.2 to 1.5 uSec, then such a blanket statement is unwise. To wit, it is an extraordinary claim you have just made, which of course requires proof, as that burden is yours.
Do you have any proof that humans are not sensitive to content at the 1.5 uSec level? Otherwise, we may have to reject such an unfounded claim.
I believe he stated exactly that...that it was a scam..
Richard,
Upon review of the omnicron pdf you linked to, I note that they also do not consider radiation as a confounder. Given the fact that they made a loop antennae, they do not mention any losses of energy as a result of it being tossed out of the system. Any real energy radiated by the loop will be presented as resistive loss. They should have at least discussed this..I certainly had to consider this when I was testing my valhalla clone years ago.
John
I'm quite happy to say that I don't use OR promote Synergistic researches HFT, or any of their stuff.....then again I would be interested to see what's inside.
I reckon these kinds of products do work on some peoples, but for undisclosed/unrealised reasons.
Imo, the reasons is/are to do with changing of local fields and nothing to do with actual acoustics.
Some people are (unknowingly) very sensitive to fields, and interpret these changes as positive/beneficial.
Similar deal, there is a subtle change but ascribed wrong explanations.
Marce, you are better than that kind of unnecessary comment, please say you won't do like this in future.
Dan.
Last edited:
No it was a dig regarding skin effect, but irrelevant to the conversation. To be honest I would expect JC to be a far better listener than I am, he has far more experience and myself these days I just enjoy the music unless I hear something is wrong... But I don't do much critical listening these days and haven't done for at least a year, I decided life is to short and there is too much music to enjoy🙂
Yes I can be petty sometimes, but amongst all the relevant stuff JC posts there are often these little digs/comments that I cant see the relevance so I responded, with I hasten to add a wink and a smile, they were critical to my comment and just for you Max...
😉😉😀
I was thinking in terms of trying to measure something like whatever timing jitter a DAC and amplifer might be able to reproduce, or partially reproduce with some distortion, of a non-repetitive waveform, relative to bandwidth, time resolution, or settling time of some measurement apparatus. Maybe you have some ideas about how to best measure whatever "high end smear" might consist of, if we can start out from an assumption that there is probably something there to measure?
No idea, but I posted a while back a study on anisotropy in air and its effect on sound propagation. The numbers they threw out exceed the usual claims on the need for jitterless digital audio.
But how can you develop a measurement procedure if you have no idea what it is you want to measure?
Who knows what 'time smear' is?
From all I have read here it seems like an anthropomorphic expression for 'I hear something I don't like'.
No?
Jna
Who knows what 'time smear' is?
From all I have read here it seems like an anthropomorphic expression for 'I hear something I don't like'.
No?
Jna
Thanks guys. That explains it and puts it into terms I can understand.
Do you think it was the medium itself, or the A/D converters?
Frank Kelly used to comment that he heard a hint of a jelly-like grunge in the upper midrange, just to bedevil folks at trade shows. It was intended to be completely meaningless.
Smear = group delay. 99%
Esp associated with filters... digital or devices such as transformers.
THx-RNMarsh
Esp associated with filters... digital or devices such as transformers.
THx-RNMarsh
- Status
- Not open for further replies.