Me too, only I suspect it relates mostly in the acoustic domain, so I think the questions relate largely to transducers (I don't mean ears and brain, not much to be done about them)
Btw, given the fact of neuroplasticity in the auditory cortex, it seems that there is indeed s lot that can be done about (at least) the brain, which might - given the feedback paths to the ear - in the end even will do something there.
Lots of things are intuitive but wrong. Falling back on "intuitive" language to incorrectly describe a phenomenon is also known as "lazy thinking".
I wish you all the best!
Had a short time sudden deafness in one ear ~25 years ago, accompanied during the (luckily) very short recovery time by a tinnitus.
Merrill,
At last it looks like you have been able to construct ground rules to self govern your own behaviour within a meaningful dialogue. You may be surprised to hear that I am of a forgiving nature. Unlike some, I find it easy. So, you have the benefit of my doubt - but - just the once.
Let’s get a couple of things straight here. Those who know most, know when they are wrong. There are those who have spent a lifetime learning practical science, and when confronted with new incontrovertible findings will abandon everything they previously thought was true, and although it hurts, they benefit tremendously from their own intellectual honesty. In this respect, you are the new kid on the block. Consider all scientific theories as portals that look and listen to a common consensus of reality - even though that consensus is shifting continually in leaps and bounds, with peaks and and troughs that abruptly ends on a plateau leading to the bleeding edge of a cliff.
I mean, what could possibly go wrong? The onus is upon you now, so don’t let me down.
ToS
Last edited:
Sure, I could be wrong - I don't concur with "most likely", however
Although my thoughts might be similar to others who you have categorized together, I have always said that it is the waveform, sound stream, auditory scene where the answer will be found, not some ethereal "magic" that is unmeasurable - we just have to find measurements that correlate with the sophisticated analysis auditory perception performs on the same waveforms
That's what I'm interested in, not tearing down anything but building on what has already been achieved by engineering to date which is pretty good sound for even $9 DACs
However, I'm interested in the better than "pretty good sound" as I've experienced it & many other here have too. I'm interested in the underlying basis for how this better sound is achieved & why, only a few devices achieve it.
I thought the Purifi amplifier was a good case study (although I haven't heard it - only a few have but it appears to deliver an experience which is more natural sounding & real than all the other amplifiers which measure well but not as well as the Purifi.
According to current thinking the "better than most" measurements of the Purifi should be of no significance as they are all considered to be below the threshold of audibility. This interests me.
So far from pulling down any edifices, I want to try to understand & build from here - the first being to self-examine what might be weaknesses in the current measurements &/or accepted thresholds of audibility.
Sorry if this bores people - I know the constant arguments do bore & do prevent any real discussion - when people say "that's the way it is" against my "maybe this could be considered"?
Thank you. I read a post recently, can't remember who, they said they had suffered for years but not anymore, that was good to read
It seems most likely to me that Bruno is right and "current thinking" is wrong
Having a bad day?
I only quoted you as a reference to the question in point. My question was to no one in particular, hoping maybe one of the other members of "the brain trust" here know because I don't know either. 
I could say your post is very condescending but I won't - I'll let others decide.
I react to people in the way they treat me & usually mirror back to them what they dish out to me. In your case it was an incessant critique of every word I said & constant comment on my lack of maturity, dumbness etc.
I too am forgiving & let things go easily so let's make your post & my reply a clearing of the air between us and the onus is on BOTH of us so ......
I hope you read my other post about what not trying to tear down any edifice of science but I also hope that you understand science is a continual question that needs asking & answering - particularly these questions "are we missing something", "is there any evidence that contradicts the predictions of our model" and others
When something comes along, like Purifi or ABH2? that has much better measurements but one which accepted wisdom say should not make an audible difference & yet it does make an audible difference, it makes me think of those two questions, for a start.
Last edited:
I'm trying to tease out auditory processing - does it work on a series of nerve impulses that represent a sinewave or is it more granular than that?
That's why I talk about the granularity or atomicity of what auditory processing deals with & you guys keep saying "sound is a sinewave, it's a sinewave"
Having a bad day?
Grandchildren are visiting......I don’t share the same enthusiasm as grandma.
Is it wrong to consider choking them out Homer Simpson style?
Ok, but I don't see the relevance regards audio reproduction? Because.......er.....you know.....
Yep but you are not all readers & not the judge & jury - mot know they are not & don't bother to express this, they just quietly judge what they read & pass on if not interesting or read on if interesting
It reminds me of those who report subjective listening impressions - many of us can find that it doesn't resonate with our experience or that it's bat-**** crazy & we just pass on but there are others who always challenge the report & reporter - it's as if they can't allow anything to be expressed which is outside of the religious text
I can't understand why you don't see the connection between the first quote above & what I said (unless you were being sarcastic or dismissive in that first quote)?
Let's for a moment assume that you were serious - if Bruno has produced an amp that sounds better & yet all measurements suggest that it shouldn't where are you going to find the answer to this? Or are you not bothered looking for the why it's better?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.