For the record, I greatly respect the engineering and manufacturing quality of the Benchmark products, and I read about everything that their principal engineer publishes.
However, this comparison appears to be between the Sabre series of DA's vs the latest offering from a competing manufacturer, and the latest offering won out. That's what we call 'progress' in audio design.
However, this comparison appears to be between the Sabre series of DA's vs the latest offering from a competing manufacturer, and the latest offering won out. That's what we call 'progress' in audio design.
I could tell you the most obvious things that sound different. If you would like my opinion on that you would be welcome send me a PM 🙂
A difference is often perceived as better, that's true...........for a while.
Sometimes different is worse, Sometimes better, sometimes different is just different.....it ain’t rocket science.
Then double blind listening test should reveal that. I doubt his claims are based on such test.
Oh please we have not even gotten close to approving any of those, I mean participating in poorly controlled DBT's can lose you your ability to hear subtle differences.
Oh my god the test was so poorly set up I completely lost my ability to hear the sub audible!🙄
Yes, I've heard that classic rebuttal in audio businessman club playbook. When asked which method would be approved by him, even "the father of it all" couldn't / wouldn't answer.
abraxalito,
It seems to me that you have far better philosophical skills than circuit design skills.
I don`t know how "illusion, delusion, hallucination" are defined in psychology and I am not especially curious about it either, but in supplying our reality, the brain normally creates impressions without any sensory input. We have no (some kind of exclusive direct) access to the material world.
Yes, "proof" is an utterly misplaced term here.
It seems to me that you have far better philosophical skills than circuit design skills.
I don`t know how "illusion, delusion, hallucination" are defined in psychology and I am not especially curious about it either, but in supplying our reality, the brain normally creates impressions without any sensory input. We have no (some kind of exclusive direct) access to the material world.
Yes, "proof" is an utterly misplaced term here.
What's your exposure to my circuit design skills? I have a blog on DIYA, have you read that?
Quite so, hence its a misnomer to call it a 'material world' - in truth we don't know what form it takes. But we do know our reality is a material one.
As textbook an example of a deflection (ego defense) as any in my interactions with @soundbloke.
abraxalito,
your parallelled TDA1543 DAC project is not a hit.
We can know the bare existence of a material world by inference and reasoning, but our reality is a cognitive one, a mental representation.
your parallelled TDA1543 DAC project is not a hit.
We can know the bare existence of a material world by inference and reasoning, but our reality is a cognitive one, a mental representation.
I have no paralleled TDA1543 DAC project.
In terms of reality, no there is no 'representation'. Our cognitive processes dealing with the senses of vision and hearing simply present, not represent reality.
In terms of reality, no there is no 'representation'. Our cognitive processes dealing with the senses of vision and hearing simply present, not represent reality.
Qualia (sense qualities of experiences) are the properties of the conscious mind. For an amoeba with an autonomic unconscious nervous system all that is pretty much a nonissue.
My use of the word proof was qualified. I deflected nothing, you changed your position as the interaction continued.