What is his credential in audio electronics?and apparently (according to Markw4) we can even significantly improve CD, even with its low sampling rate. I hope, in future, to try what he suggests,
You mean the ADC thread, yes he seems to be behaving himself there, which has to be a good thing.
Interesting, are you qualified, entitled, or feel an urge to quantify and/or otherwise evaluate other peer members activity on a public forum? We use to say here "mind your own business, please".
IMO there is still some need for subjectivity in audio design.
What would you mean by that?
I was more thinking of the MC headamp thread. Whilst I understand that chasing SOTA noise figures for enjoyment of obsolete formats is a fringe part of the hobby there was a lot of good discussion and debunking the theory of LED driven solar panels as a low noise power source. [/quote]The ADC thread?
I only follow selected things. It's a big forum after all.I just don't have the time to follow most of that is happening here and as you
will notice I'm happy to be corrected WRT things I have missed.
I've been a member here 12 yrs longer than you, generally speaking, the
place used to be a lot more tolerant. Higher S/N. We've lost quite a few
because of that.
The intolerance runs both ways and we've lost people from the objective side as well who have been hounded off the forum. Sad really given it's only a hobby.
What would you mean by that?
I'm also slightly confused. If I state that soundstage depth is increased by wearing nipple clamps should I be taken seriously?
OTOH I will defend people's rights to prefer their own particular non-transparent presentation of audio behind closed doors.
He's achieved a lot more than you in audio electronics and he's brought a lot
more to the forum.
What you bring here is mainly a negative attitude ready to tear anyone down
at first opportunity.
TCD
I beg to differ. I'm not exactly SYN08's best buddy, we had discussions where
we had opposite points of view, as far as is possible on a rational ground, but
still we had a common ground. I think we could meet in a pub and get out
alive, both, with one or more to the good.
Not so with JC. Really, what are his achievements? That blowthing? A self-
fulfilment job with just enough market penetration that each of the project
participants had one or two, plus a few to bribe the reviewers? Was there a
single one that was sold at the published price? OK, a friend of mine used
to say, "The dumb one who buys it is already alive." There might be a dozen.
And you say, "achievement in audio electronics" as if that was something
wonderful. High Priests of a low cult. Is there anything that makes audio hard?
Other than dowsing rods? When I look for achievements, I look for Dobkins,
Bob Widlar, Barry Gilbert, Jim Williams, Stavic, Hollister and rest of the TEK crew.
And others I don't want to draw into this. People who changed the industry with
their ideas.
Face it. Audio electronics is an entry level playground. 16 year olds can have
some success, feel as gurus at least subjectively, and subjective success is
all that counts here, doesn't it? The Pros are subjectively even better, but would
you feel comfortable if you knew they had been retargeted to build the electron
spin scanner to decide if you really have pancreas cancer?
And what did HE ever bring to the forum other than pontificating? The original
poster of the Blowtorch thread is still waiting for his answer. Or probably not.
It seems he has given up after 10000 empty blablas.
Gerhard
Not so with JC.
Wasn't Terry talking about JW though? At least syn08 was.
I beg to differ. I'm not exactly SYN08's best buddy, we had discussions where
we had opposite points of view, as far as is possible on a rational ground, but
still we had a common ground. I think we could meet in a pub and get out
alive, both, with one or more to the good.
And certainly not sober.
Building a new DAC can be completely justified because it's fun.
This is exactly it. And to the DAC chip designers coming up with a way to push the state of the art is no doubt highly fulfilling too.
Face it. Audio electronics is an entry level playground. 16 year olds can have
some success, feel as gurus at least subjectively.
Gerhard
It's the 16 year old whom I would have far more trust in on this front too.
I find it laughable that anyone would take the subjective impressions from anyone relatively old seriously. At least without a high grade hearing test to see where their faculties are at.
It's like oh look another old man giving a subjective review on stereophile. Definitely best to avoid that.
About 20 years ago, I still had that view, but I had dinner with a well known recording engineer with Chesky Records, and he told me (for example) that 196K was important, even then.
I remember that the difference between 96K and 192K was much larger 20 years ago. I'm not sure if I can hear the difference of current top converters today...
I was shocked with the difference between DSD and PCM mode of EMM AD/DA converters 20 years ago. PCM sounded like a garbage compared to DSD. It was probably because of the intention of EMM to promote DSD. Another conspiracy theory.
I know, it is funny and a little sad that they think they have good enough hearing to be taken seriously, they say it doesn't matter, but they would wouldn't they?It's the 16 year old whom I would have far more trust in on this front too.
I find it laughable that anyone would take the subjective impressions from anyone relatively old seriously. At least without a high grade hearing test to see where their faculties are at.
It's like oh look another old man giving a subjective review on stereophile. Definitely best to avoid that.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- If it's purely an engineering challenge why bother designing yet another DAC?