Burn in for fresh builds?

Jump to Latest
#305
Markw4 said:
I said the process produces evidence (often the evidence is noisy too, but over time it should work out to be the best evidence we have). What's not to trust about strongly supported evidence? It's not a true/false thing. Its a statistical probability thing.

Not only that, but there is the mathematics of Fuzzy Logic, some of the concepts of which can be applied to fuzzy thinking. The idea that things/ideas/objects/etc., can have partial membership in multiple distinct logic sets. The degree of membership is expressed a probability distribution. But its not a probability of true or false. Its more like a probability of a particular degree of set membership.
Click to expand...
Fuzzy Wuzzy was a bear.
Fuzzy Wuzzy had no hair.
Fuzzy Wuzzy wasn't really fuzzy, Was he?
 
#306
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sorenm
#308
I just read this on Facebook...it has to be true.

Breaking News: We have discovered that placing an amplifier on its side sounds 2.46x better with palpable molestation across all frequencies.
You see, the interstitial capacitance modulation of the signal path interacts with the quantum harmonic oscillations within the amplifier’s core matrix, thereby optimizing the electroacoustic transference. This results in a phenomenon known as "perceptual decibel thrombotic male enhancement," where the harmonics undergo a non-linear temporal distortion, leveraging the psychoacoustic thresholds of the human auditory system. By manipulating the phase variance through subatomic flux resonance, these amplifiers achieve an unprecedented level of acoustic clarity and spatial definition, transcending conventional metrics of audio fidelity and entering a domain of perceived auditory transcendence.

Rowan Atkinson and Benny Hill both called me and confirmed the above findings.

Get back to work and stop reading **** on Facebook! Some “haters” think this is for real. It’s sarcasm dumbass!
 
  • Like
Reactions: classicalfan
#311
I think the only thing left for @peterpaan89 to do is to gradually revise the amplifier. And he can document each single step and share his listening experience. If it ends up with a device that equals his ACA and others, then he has reached his "burn in" state - and imagination and desire;-)

I would be happy to help and advise him;-)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Logon
#312
tomchr said:
On the other hand, if I measure -130 dBc THD under some condition, make a change to the circuit, and measure -135 dBc THD under the same conditions, I can say with confidence that the THD has improved by 5 dB, assuming measuring a 5 dB difference at those levels is within the capabilities of the instrument used for the measurement.
I also know from experience that getting to the -130 dBc level takes real work and experience, so I see such numbers as an indicator of good circuit design, in particular if the circuit also performs well on many other parameters. Having the equipment to make the measurement also shows some commitment to quality. Anyone can claim something sounds good. Few can back it up with measurements.

I would love to see a more scientific approach to the subjective side of audio. There are just too many confounding variables in un-controlled tests for me to draw any conclusions from them.

Tom
Click to expand...
Congratulations, if you are versed enough to have clean measurement setups down to -130.

Whenever I change something in my setup I try to measure and listen and take notes. But as the listening part is so fuzzy the best I can come up with are rough ideas that I am unwilling to present as higher truth. And over the years my measurement gear has changes as has what I am taking measurements of....
 
#316
schiirrn said:
I was more thinking about the challenges I have keeping bench noise etc out of measurements on that level. Just throwing random clip leads onto the DUT doesn't cut it.
Click to expand...
Nope! I'm improving my lab setup to be able to reliably measure THD below -130 dBc in power amps. It doesn't take much loop area in the power supply harness to wreck 130 dBc THD at, say, > 10 W (8 Ω).

Tom
 
  • Like
Reactions: schiirrn
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom