First cycle distortion - Graham, what is that?

Attachments

  • 03_ideal_tPD-1.5uS_error.png
    03_ideal_tPD-1.5uS_error.png
    21.6 KB · Views: 147
There is one particular area where he does not seem to be highly accomplished, which is careful skilled listening.

What you could say is that I do not claim super hearing abilities like... ahem... and refrain making BS comments like:

since it is a term that some professional engineers think has clear meaning or they wouldn't use it.

I also don't carry any commercial interest in audio (I probably would, if I could see the money, but then I would cleanly disclose it like some fellow members do), don't have any hidden agenda, don't promote any products or audio designers and never claimed anything that cannot be cross verified by anybody willing to engage. Oh, and I'm not trying to get a reputation by massacring otherwise perfectly fine DAC boards.
 
So Mark: what has std torture testing of power amplifiers got to do with cloud cuckoo conjectures on first cycle problems?

In my opinion, this stuff happens because some people listen to amplifiers and hear that somehow the faster ones always seem to sound 'better' to them (which may be in part a product of the specific environmental conditions under which the amps are listened to). Then some of the people go searching for some way to explain the experience to themselves. Often that seems to me where they go wrong. Then if they argue about it too much with other people, the belief can become strengthened. In other words, attempts at debunking may backfire: Belief perseverance - Wikipedia

To be clear, I'm not trying to justify what can happen, only describe it.
 
Last edited:
True. I never have claimed that about myself either.
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ven...i-dual-lps-5v-3a-5v-1-5a-158.html#post6261841

In my opinion, this stuff happens because some people listen to amplifiers and hear that somehow the faster ones always seem to sound 'better' to them (which may be in part a product of the specific environmental conditions under which the amps are listened to).
Correct word is "perceive". Whether they hear or not would come after verification.
 
True. I never have claimed that about myself either. Its your frequent choice of adjectives intended to demean and distort that I object to, not your factual statements.

What about this claim (randomly picked from a big pool of similar claims)

I had H2 and H3 both down around -120dB. From there I could hear 1 LSB change in HD compensation when playing music. 1 LSB was very hard, but a few LSB not hard. However, remember when music is playing the resulting distortion is mostly IMD and IMD is often significantly higher level than HD. That's why I say we measure HD, but hear IMD. Its a shorthand abbreviated explanation for what happens.

Also, my result should not be too surprising since it has been known for a long time that some humans can hear if a CD is made without dither. Since truncation to 16-bits occurs between the 16th and 17th bits, and 16-bits represents -96dB, should be no surprise a few humans can hear below that. Don't forget, I am talking IMD with music, not HD. We only measure a stationary nonlinearity in terms of its HD in most cases because of convenience and because the numbers look better that way in a list of specs.

If this (hearing LSB changes in H2 and H3 both down around -120dB) is not a super human hearing claim, than perhaps Iron Man is your neighbor. Those who wish can follow the context of the above.
 
A proponent is considered someone who publicly advocates something. Why would someone publicly advocate fake science?

Seriously? Ever heard of flat earthers? The main reason is to make money, read a cable advertisement lately?

You misunderstand, in that promoters of fake science do it secretly, not publicly. In other words why would a proponent of fake science publicly proclaim to their followers that the science they are promoting to them is fake.

Love those cable advertisements.