I know I do and given the known nature of our hearing perception and how it has evolved I assume this is a common experience unless I see evidence to the contrary from individuals who believe their perception is different.
They do not understand perception, so you can't reason with them based on perception.
It is anyway impossible to reason someone out of an opinion they did not arrive at by reasoning ((c) SY).
Jan
It is anyway impossible to reason someone out of an opinion they did not arrive at by reasoning ((c) SY).
Jan
My AP is showing the same numbers as well , day in/out. THD+N numbers to be exact . Do you see any correlation between SQ vs THD ?
Our AP machines says , in fact , to throw all vinyl , tubes to the garbage . Very bad numbers .. yet the majority of people keep them and enjoy them very much .
Are they all wrong... and THD is king ? Not to me and yet I strive to design over -110 THD+N unweighted .
I know what I read and I have done my homework . There is a clear correlation between noise on the input and SQ. In fact at high levels I am able to see harmonics increasing (h5 and higher)
Which misses the point.
I wanted to remind to the fact that often - like in the other cases I've mentinoned - people (well educated on some matters) erroneously concluded from technical details, protocols and data integrity to the alleged impossibility of an audible difference.
Obviously they had a certain model in mind, but from the various discussion it seemed that they often did not realize that a whole range of premises must be true to allow the conclusions to be true either.
Therefore methinks it is generally a good idea to take a statement like "I changed the ethernet switch and it sounded different/better" not as a statement about "ethernet audibility" but as a statement about a difference after changing a device in a system.
Last edited:
Jakob2, draw a network plan and place a DAC in it for a scenario where a switch or a router matter. Just so that we have one example. Add the technical details and circumstances so that the case can be understood, using the drawing. We debate over a thing that has not even been described properly.
//
//
Nice claim, but you've just listed a subset of possible influences human perception but where is the argument? 😉
Humans are humans and it often seems nearly impossible to reason someone out of an opinion they did arrive at by incorrect reasoning. IME former "golden ears" illustrate that very often.
Poor argument. Vinyl is poor compared to digital. Enjoyment and sound quality are two different metrics. I love vinyl but know its a very poor cousin to good digital.
No one said that.
What input, show us the schematic and where and how you changed the noise and then we might have something to discuss?
Particularly if/when they want to. This cannot be understated. The human brain's capacity to change its own perceptions and memories is vast and well documented.
This is exactly why (for example) double-blind tests consistently show that humans (yes, even "golden ears") cannot hear the difference between 16/44 and 24/96 audio - yet we have constant claims to the contrary.
Could be so, but does it really help to argue always with the most extreme fellows? I mean, we both know that there some of this kind in every game on every side.....
@cogitech,
Or if they don't want to. This cannot be understated either.
Seems to be true; that's the reason why it is so difficult to design sound experiments and execute (and analyze) these propperly.
It is the reason why some people think that "double-blind tests" have "consistently shown that....." while in fact they have not, at least not consistently. 😉
Last edited:
Oh dear, who to trust, well I just don't know........reading the first post, who trusts what the OP is saying?
It is necesary to push back against them. We may not convert many but there need to be both sides of the argument. Plus there is the offchance something useful will come of it.
Not I. However, my understanding of the word "restitution" seems to be quite different than that of the OP. Also, if I assume that word is a substitute for something more appropriate and meaningful, it still makes zero sense and inspires laughter, not trust.
And so it goes on.....yet again.......
The lovely internet, with all its wonders, all its worldly information.....
Leading the masses into depths of misinformation most likely dreamed up by a teenage high school dropout.
I suspect that like some popular video game, some of these "dreamed up" and amazing findings spewed forth from anonymous sources at the other end of the internet are designed to intrigue and lure the unsuspecting into a fog that nuts their brain, and perpetuates the stories for decades.
For those educated enough to know better, call out these annoying purveyors of slop-facts, fallacies and help to keep the internet masses from losing their minds.
The lovely internet, with all its wonders, all its worldly information.....
Leading the masses into depths of misinformation most likely dreamed up by a teenage high school dropout.
I suspect that like some popular video game, some of these "dreamed up" and amazing findings spewed forth from anonymous sources at the other end of the internet are designed to intrigue and lure the unsuspecting into a fog that nuts their brain, and perpetuates the stories for decades.
For those educated enough to know better, call out these annoying purveyors of slop-facts, fallacies and help to keep the internet masses from losing their minds.
Vinyl is "poor" only by THD+N thats the reality . In fact the SQ of vinyl is very good and a big body of evidence (many people love it despite the fact that they are all subjective listenitngs) exists , even though we have no " test data" that shows it .
There is no "metric" on enjoyment / sound quality ...no test , no number , no AP.
Now extend Vinyl to our present thread .. we have no test that shows low noise digital input (lets say USB) has an impact on SQ.
I have spoken to a lot of people and read many threads . The evidence clearly points (for me) in one direction ...low noise digital input = better SQ
And again , sorry no test data to back it up . Can you show me test data on why you (and many others) "love " Vinyl ?
You just do and you just know it sounds good 🙂
Post removed, points if this continues.
Vinyl SQ is very bad if you go by the general accepted definition of quality. It distorts, crackles, adds stuff that never was part of the music. It sucks.
It only is good if you interpret quality as 'I like it'. That's fine; I like my vinyl as well, but lets have that out then.
Jan
Or none. I have been part of a listening test where we were to judge whether a 6dB/oct or 12dB/oct roll off of the sub would be preferable. Clear preference for 6dB roll off.
Only after the test we discovered that the switch had been disabled and the thing had always run in 6dB roll-off.
The group dynamics here were fascinating.
Jan
- Status
- Not open for further replies.