You'll find the article at:
http://drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf
some additional informations at:
BAS Experiment Explanation page - Oct 2007
and as stated before (in a response to syn08) the authors had to concede - after a lot of back and forth and complaints about the criticism before consultation of external advisors - that there indeed exist some problems with the data:
(D. Dranove, “Comments on ’Audibility of a CDstandard A/D/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback,’ ” J. Audio Eng. Soc., vol. 58, March 2010, 173–174 )
But even a flawless (perfect) experiment of this kind is not able "to prove beyond any doubt", even less if it was not so flawless.
Beside that, I've written quite often in several threads that i appreciated their efforts and further, that there hypothesis might be correct (but that it could not be concluded from the results/data of their experiment).
I know, and you are right.
I will try to answer-you in private in the next days, as it is pretty complex for me to explain.
To resume, on the subjects that are in my domain of competency (analog) I usually bore myself, not discovering a lot of new ideas.
And on the other subjects (digital) it often exceeds my level of skills and my knowledge of materials (modern dacs etc.). Too long out of the business. So, I read the threads that interests-me, silently, trying to learn.
Oh, those acronyms everywhere !
My main problem is i'm in a situation where I cannot listen to anything on the market. And, each time I ask a question on subjective listening impressions, that I take of course with a lot of salt, the war noise that follows impeach all share.
Same in this thread. There is a high density, more than everywhere else I know, of talented designers, specialists, and pationated experienced amateurs. I was in hope to learn from then, (and who knows, to share my personal experiences). But they are reduced to silence by people that, sometimes (to be polite) do not even understand what we are talking about.
Or by people who are just waging religious wars.
Religious wars, in hifi audio. Go figure !
Maybe you misunderstood his post, as he was just describing what happened at another forum, a forum that claims to have a firm stand on science.
But if a new member posts something (even as innocent as in scott wurcer's case) the "mobbing" starts based on pure belief. One would expect, that, for people claiming to be firmly interested scientific methods and reasoning, to get all relevant facts would come first before starting to rant.
Happens on a regular basis there; in this particular case another member there could set the facts straight, other new members weren't so lucky.
The statistical problems, that the authors finally conceded were just part of the problems, a lot more existed.
The objectivistic point of view is to analyze the experiment (methodology/operationalisation and execution) and if severe problems exist to conclude if further conclusion from the results are warranted.
If you instead are willing to accept any conclusion (without analysis or even despite the obvious flaws ) because it might fit your prior belief, then you are not acting like an objectivist but more like a subjectivist.
Re Meyer/Moran article, I found the test setup as attached, in the article linked. Was any measurement published, of the test setup used, with and without the additional test path. This would be the first think I would ask if reviewed a scientific article and the first think I would publish if I wanted somebody to take my work serious.
Attachments
I wish this episode would just go away. First of all the OP used the term aesthetics which clouds the issue, but I assume he was operating in good faith and honestly preferred his NAD amp just like the person that posted on the $9 Apple dongle being essentially indistinguishable from a Benchmark DAC via headphones. Personal preference has nothing to do with science, some would prefer to listen to Muck's Parsifal on old 78's than any modern performance at any quality level.
Personal attack like "Some people seem to have forgotten to take their lithium, another whose case seems incurable, should be put under a straitjacket: it will end up mutilating itself."?
They did. You called those attacks just because they didn't fit your narrative.
Seeing the products you praise, Bybee & speaker cables, I can see why it sucks, to you.
It will appear that way to you when you have different definition of certain term like "hi-fi". In such case, it's not that they don't understand what you are talking about, it is that you aren't speaking the same language.
You can call it a religion when person/s believe that their high price DAC makes audible improvement without proof.
But if you call that a belief based group, at least one of them will say you attacked him.Bunch of claims with no supporting proof.
That's enough, now, with your personal unjustified attack in answer to a comment about an ambiance (in an other forum) that was not addressed to anyone in particular here but as a matter to think about..
Now, a personal answer, because it is not the first time (i carefully ignored your previous agressions and never talked with you before, as far as I remember.):
With a professional activity (similar to yours ?) It is more likely that I had made more measurements in my >50 years of professional life in audio, both in R&D offices and recording studios than you had in your 25.
And had participated to the design of more successful commercial products than you, if ever you did.
"More likely", but not granted, and that do not change anything on the subject.
I challenge you to find any message from me that pleads for the opinion you have of my technical position. Nothing that goes against the laws of physics as we know them today (as far as I know them, and i stay corrected when i miss something).
To answer to your "but no other studies":
I participated in the DIY spirit of this forum by publishing at least a full study based on an *original* idea and collaborative work with the help of the talented 'alex mm' that resulted in a finished product. Including printed circuit and BOM.
A huge work offered to the community, that has given me nice positive reviews from some undisputed members of this community. (No name dropping).
With no commercial interest of any kind. Not even a group buy.
I was under another nickname.The reasons I changed my nickname do not concern anybody else than I.
But, some who know both pseudos will be able to confirm-it if they wish.
I am not in concern with who you are in real life, as well, as I don't like authority arguments. But you pretend to work in recording studios and call someone a subjectivist ?
That the funniest thing i had heard, not even from the tea boy.
And it would also make all EEs and audio designers laugh, with whom I had the chance to work in my life. (No name dropping as well ;-)
Now, because you placed yourself in the camp of the "objectivists: Why don't you buy a Benchmark AHB2 amplifier and some AD797 or equivalents and begin to listen to the music you like with your perfect system ?
Both exceed by a huge amount the thresholds of audibility that the most hallucinated of audiophiles could consider as possible as long as distortion and noise are in concern. And those measurements tells everything when its about music reproduction, isn't-it ?
I'm pissed-off of this aggressivity and this lack of tolerance. Tried to calm down the ambiance, get that kind of STUPID reaction. I join the long list of those who, before me, reacted the same way, harassed by the same few people: Goodbye.
Last edited:
It's a bit frustrating reading "Class B" when just about everyone who uses the term really means (easily discerned from context, such as above) Class AB.
You changed it, or you created another one? The latter is called a "sock puppet" and is not allowed by this forum rules.
And I'm sorry, but as far as I can tell your technical (electronics) skills are at best at an half competent amateur (if that) level. I would be happy to recognize any relevant technical contributions that I am not aware of, if you can point me at.
Not sure what you mean by that but given your posting history (of ignore list claims), I don't think it's a good idea to take your words seriously.
Last edited:
I meant B, with dead zone. There are confusions, Self calls B optimally biased.
Originally Posted by john curl View Post “I have certainly found that ABX sucks”
That’s the whole idea John. It sucks because you are forced to face reality with it.
It reminds of a movie I saw decades ago, set in the Middle Ages. Two men are arguing about why you need a jury. The one guys says ‘you need a jury for a fair trial’ the other guy responds ‘but how are you going to find the defendant guilty then’
That’s the whole idea John. It sucks because you are forced to face reality with it.
It reminds of a movie I saw decades ago, set in the Middle Ages. Two men are arguing about why you need a jury. The one guys says ‘you need a jury for a fair trial’ the other guy responds ‘but how are you going to find the defendant guilty then’
Last edited:
Yes. It is hard to group the types into two, A or B (which i think is a product of old generation before me), when there are many AB 'variations' in between. Self discussed this issue in the same chapter as where he discussed amplifier topologies, such that it was not clear (to me then) which topology he was referring to when he stated general statements, making confusion. But I believe Class B is when top transistor generates the positive half signal, so it can be optimally biased, under biased (with dead zones) or even over biased (with cross-conductance in CFP).
Right, this all makes sense, but you'll never get John to agree.
John and co. say ABX sucks - fine - then I wonder if we could agree that the differences we are talking about are small? I could accept this. Somehow I don't think we'll even agree on this, because it's a tacit admission that the difference between mid-fi and high end gear is not what it's made out to be.
The problem is, we get a lot of comments in the vein of "horrible / obvious / unlistenable", which should be easily ABXed unless the comments are just hyperbole.
It depends on who is perceiving them. Jakob mentioned someone who said they couldn't bare to listen to recordings rendered without ITD. There's always going to be one, or the so called 5% that hi-end is supposedly catering for
- Status
- Not open for further replies.