Re: I am start to understand better....now is turning clear
exactly,
and
Agree with Upupa in 100% (even when Chechs do not like Polish because of the 68' when together with Soviet Union entered Chechoslovakia).
Now it is 24 years (13-12-1980) when Soviet Union solders were on Polish border ready to attack...
remember this...
Chechs used to say:" today we, tomorrow you"
and it was true!
Red beast as usual is dangerous!
destroyer X said:
exactly,
and
Agree with Upupa in 100% (even when Chechs do not like Polish because of the 68' when together with Soviet Union entered Chechoslovakia).
Now it is 24 years (13-12-1980) when Soviet Union solders were on Polish border ready to attack...
remember this...
Chechs used to say:" today we, tomorrow you"
and it was true!
Red beast as usual is dangerous!
Re: Re: I am start to understand better....now is turning clear
Sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!
it was 13-12-1981
padamiecki said:
Sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!
it was 13-12-1981
I could made eastern european friend, and i am starting to understand those things
As we had no idea..... we did not know even the countries that was hidden under the enormous red paint on the North , and some eastern European Geo Map.
Now we are starting to know the conflicts, the feelings and those things.
But this is a very slow absortion of data...of informs.... all those things keept hidden for us...and they already try to not publish the true for us...there are some control over communicattion enterprises, forced to give some delirating point of view related many subjects.
Well...i am entering something that forum do not accept...politics and religion are things that start strikes.
So...i am going...bye guys....will not touch this subject again....as forum have also their "rose side"...ahahahaha!
regards,
Carlos
As we had no idea..... we did not know even the countries that was hidden under the enormous red paint on the North , and some eastern European Geo Map.
Now we are starting to know the conflicts, the feelings and those things.
But this is a very slow absortion of data...of informs.... all those things keept hidden for us...and they already try to not publish the true for us...there are some control over communicattion enterprises, forced to give some delirating point of view related many subjects.
Well...i am entering something that forum do not accept...politics and religion are things that start strikes.
So...i am going...bye guys....will not touch this subject again....as forum have also their "rose side"...ahahahaha!
regards,
Carlos
Well, 45 years of history after 2nd world war were not happy in our countries, but I really see no consequence in no adoration of old solid state designs 😀 😀 😀 .
I don't like many of them because I built them and IMHO they cannot compete to well designed up to date circuits.
I don't like many of them because I built them and IMHO they cannot compete to well designed up to date circuits.
But I can see another consequence. Many people of my age are rigid and lazy to learn the new things, new development tools, lazy to study. This is IMHO the main reason of adoration of stone age designs (when they were young, oh, these old days ...) and it does not depend on nationality or country at all, this is just a human nature 😉 .
I warn the young people not to be the same later.
I warn the young people not to be the same later.
Yeah!...you may be rigth...at the end...how know the final and complete truth
I have beeing telephoning to the skies, and he is always busy to answer me those questions.
regards,
Carlos
I have beeing telephoning to the skies, and he is always busy to answer me those questions.
regards,
Carlos
PMA,
You offer many tendentious opinions, most of which are very biased and which ignore a vast body of psychoacoustic knowledge.
You could start with the late Fred Nachbaur's excellent site here:
Fred's Psychoacoustics
So, JLH, Hiraga, Pass, Bailey, these guys have all got it wrong? (I won't even mention the single ended triode fellows like Millett and Polisois, wow, are they ever misguided!).
The preponderance of today's 'adored' designs are all stone age by your standards, and you are saying this is because of the aged laziness of the old faithfuls who designed them?
C'mon, fella, get off the grass! Who are you kidding? What does the market say?
If you design solely for zero distortion, yes, you can justify added complexity to reduce artefacts to unmeasureable levels. You won't eliminate them completely unless you use error feedforward, but, who says the straight wire with grain is the only way?
Unless you open your mind to what people want, and what tickles them about music, and start working on the psychacoustic aspects of music appreciation, you too will be stuck in the stone age of complexity..... There is so much more to amp design than zero distortion and mindless complexity. This is not a field where the usual principles of precision instrumentation necessarily apply.
I can agree with you on some points, notably that the single ended triodes do not handle highly complex orchestral music well, but on jazz they are sublime. I've never heard you admit to this. You cherry pick your opinions carefully, often personalising them with attacks on contemporary design, but always come back to the zero distortion camp, which does not reliably produce a good amplifier, viewed from the market perspective of good sonics.
Recently you had a hand in the refinement of Michael's Symasym, and you did a creditable job. But this was originally a 1972 design from Hitachi published to use their new mosfets, and while Michael has added a nice little cascode on the drone side of the VA, it probably qualifies as a 'stone age design' too. I've built the original Hitachi AN, and I happen to like it. I think Michael's work is praiseworthy, but I just wonder if you are prepared to admit to some inconsistency in your comments.
It's not all bad, Pavel. I applaud your help of DIYers in this forum, and I think you are a good engineer with a genuine interest in audio, but I feel that you should moderate your intemperate comments about stone age designs until you do a little study on psychoacoustics and why people like what they like, rather than flogging to death your notions of zero distortion.
Cheers,
Hugh
You offer many tendentious opinions, most of which are very biased and which ignore a vast body of psychoacoustic knowledge.
You could start with the late Fred Nachbaur's excellent site here:
Fred's Psychoacoustics
So, JLH, Hiraga, Pass, Bailey, these guys have all got it wrong? (I won't even mention the single ended triode fellows like Millett and Polisois, wow, are they ever misguided!).
The preponderance of today's 'adored' designs are all stone age by your standards, and you are saying this is because of the aged laziness of the old faithfuls who designed them?
C'mon, fella, get off the grass! Who are you kidding? What does the market say?
If you design solely for zero distortion, yes, you can justify added complexity to reduce artefacts to unmeasureable levels. You won't eliminate them completely unless you use error feedforward, but, who says the straight wire with grain is the only way?
Unless you open your mind to what people want, and what tickles them about music, and start working on the psychacoustic aspects of music appreciation, you too will be stuck in the stone age of complexity..... There is so much more to amp design than zero distortion and mindless complexity. This is not a field where the usual principles of precision instrumentation necessarily apply.
I can agree with you on some points, notably that the single ended triodes do not handle highly complex orchestral music well, but on jazz they are sublime. I've never heard you admit to this. You cherry pick your opinions carefully, often personalising them with attacks on contemporary design, but always come back to the zero distortion camp, which does not reliably produce a good amplifier, viewed from the market perspective of good sonics.
Recently you had a hand in the refinement of Michael's Symasym, and you did a creditable job. But this was originally a 1972 design from Hitachi published to use their new mosfets, and while Michael has added a nice little cascode on the drone side of the VA, it probably qualifies as a 'stone age design' too. I've built the original Hitachi AN, and I happen to like it. I think Michael's work is praiseworthy, but I just wonder if you are prepared to admit to some inconsistency in your comments.
It's not all bad, Pavel. I applaud your help of DIYers in this forum, and I think you are a good engineer with a genuine interest in audio, but I feel that you should moderate your intemperate comments about stone age designs until you do a little study on psychoacoustics and why people like what they like, rather than flogging to death your notions of zero distortion.
Cheers,
Hugh
Hi folks
I usually don't post anything on this thread, it's not my nature
of expendidng opinions that I'm not even sure about them.
Talk is easy, you know, especially when you don't have anything to say!
I learn with what the others post and I learn a lot, especially with
Hugh Dean. Each post of his has something to ponder about
and so I read them avidly.
However I have to say something about what is called "stone
age designs", I think is too depreciative even to classify those
designs as being too old, as they don't matter anymore. Too
bad some people think that way because the wheel has not been invented recently, all the new designs are to some degree related
to an old one. Why trying to put down this or that amplifier design
just because is old?
Mr. Dean put the finger on the wound, this splendid (explendid)
Symasym is a derivate of an Hitachi amplifier of the 70's (I think)
but more elaborated I believe, but what's the big deal, afterwards
again, the wheel was not been invented yesterday, it was an elaborated precess that has been evolved since its inception,
don't you gyus agree?
Right now I'm working on a quasi complementary design that
has been around since..... I don't know, many years, lately it
has been revived wth Mosfets but I don't want to do that, I'll
stick to BJT's just because I have too many around and I want
to see (hear) if it's true that this design is good enough for
my taste. The excuse was the NPN's, the reason was the desire
to hear the amplifier, "comparable" to any complementary design.
Are you fellows familiar with NAIM?
Needless to say that I assembled already 3 (Three) Symasyms
with a lot of content, I think it's a very , very good amplifier even
though the first one wasn't that good, but anyway, it was the
very first one and later on Mike made a few modifications that
made the amplifier one of the best I've heard. Who cares it
was a derivate of a Hitachi or Toshiba design? It has been
improved thanks to the brilliance of a designer called MikeB....
I agree, music is the bottom line and lately I've listening more
to the amplifiers than music, ashame on me! What about you?
Regards
I usually don't post anything on this thread, it's not my nature
of expendidng opinions that I'm not even sure about them.
Talk is easy, you know, especially when you don't have anything to say!
I learn with what the others post and I learn a lot, especially with
Hugh Dean. Each post of his has something to ponder about
and so I read them avidly.
However I have to say something about what is called "stone
age designs", I think is too depreciative even to classify those
designs as being too old, as they don't matter anymore. Too
bad some people think that way because the wheel has not been invented recently, all the new designs are to some degree related
to an old one. Why trying to put down this or that amplifier design
just because is old?
Mr. Dean put the finger on the wound, this splendid (explendid)
Symasym is a derivate of an Hitachi amplifier of the 70's (I think)
but more elaborated I believe, but what's the big deal, afterwards
again, the wheel was not been invented yesterday, it was an elaborated precess that has been evolved since its inception,
don't you gyus agree?
Right now I'm working on a quasi complementary design that
has been around since..... I don't know, many years, lately it
has been revived wth Mosfets but I don't want to do that, I'll
stick to BJT's just because I have too many around and I want
to see (hear) if it's true that this design is good enough for
my taste. The excuse was the NPN's, the reason was the desire
to hear the amplifier, "comparable" to any complementary design.
Are you fellows familiar with NAIM?
Needless to say that I assembled already 3 (Three) Symasyms
with a lot of content, I think it's a very , very good amplifier even
though the first one wasn't that good, but anyway, it was the
very first one and later on Mike made a few modifications that
made the amplifier one of the best I've heard. Who cares it
was a derivate of a Hitachi or Toshiba design? It has been
improved thanks to the brilliance of a designer called MikeB....
I agree, music is the bottom line and lately I've listening more
to the amplifiers than music, ashame on me! What about you?
Regards
Hugh, are you sure, what people can ? Me not... It is neverending story about superstitions and " washed brains " by manufacturers... Pavel ( and I also 😱) ) can to lead people to honest thinking about problems... Maybe we are crazy, but sometimes it will be broken... 😉
John,
Thank you for your gracious comments, appreciated.
Epops,
Thank you for your courteous question.
Am I sure that the market - cf 'people' - can always pick the best amp?
No, I'm not sure about that, after all, almost everyone with a PC buys Windows! But neither am I prepared to be a hardened cynic and categorically state that people have no idea of what makes a good amp. I'm certainly not willing to deliver something which 'I' believe is best, based entirely on my own beliefs, and I try hard to avoid categoric statements, because someone generally proves you wrong.......
I have built and listened to countless amps over many decades, and passed them around for others to listen to as well. I have a number of golden eared friends, and we all pitch in, sometimes over a long period, and I am very careful to pay attention to what they say. When I have agreement with three or more of them, I take it very seriously. And I always avoid pedantic diatribes about the technology. The techology is irrelevant to most music lovers; they just want the best sound. They want the music to make them weep. Long ago I decided to make my amps into musical instruments, and in contrast to PMA I believe this is a noble ambition, not one to be scoffed at lightly.
None of this is particularly scientific by engineering standards, but it takes special note of the market through a small sample, and the results have been quite consistent with comments passed back to me by my customers. A true assessment of an amplifier is not strictly possible under a week of good listening. I truly cannot ignore the market, as it's the people who pay for the product, not the distortion meter. If they care nothing for the technology, guess what, they base their decision to buy entirely on the sonics!
Finally, be assured I have an array of meters, CROs, function generators, and access to distortion instruments. I have five sets of speakers for listening tests. But nothing can happen without the hard engineering!!
Cheers,
Hugh
Thank you for your gracious comments, appreciated.
Epops,
Thank you for your courteous question.
Am I sure that the market - cf 'people' - can always pick the best amp?
No, I'm not sure about that, after all, almost everyone with a PC buys Windows! But neither am I prepared to be a hardened cynic and categorically state that people have no idea of what makes a good amp. I'm certainly not willing to deliver something which 'I' believe is best, based entirely on my own beliefs, and I try hard to avoid categoric statements, because someone generally proves you wrong.......
I have built and listened to countless amps over many decades, and passed them around for others to listen to as well. I have a number of golden eared friends, and we all pitch in, sometimes over a long period, and I am very careful to pay attention to what they say. When I have agreement with three or more of them, I take it very seriously. And I always avoid pedantic diatribes about the technology. The techology is irrelevant to most music lovers; they just want the best sound. They want the music to make them weep. Long ago I decided to make my amps into musical instruments, and in contrast to PMA I believe this is a noble ambition, not one to be scoffed at lightly.
None of this is particularly scientific by engineering standards, but it takes special note of the market through a small sample, and the results have been quite consistent with comments passed back to me by my customers. A true assessment of an amplifier is not strictly possible under a week of good listening. I truly cannot ignore the market, as it's the people who pay for the product, not the distortion meter. If they care nothing for the technology, guess what, they base their decision to buy entirely on the sonics!
Finally, be assured I have an array of meters, CROs, function generators, and access to distortion instruments. I have five sets of speakers for listening tests. But nothing can happen without the hard engineering!!
Cheers,
Hugh
Superstitions and washed brains.... well maybe a good idea to wash our ideas...
cleaning our brains related many subjects.... all our own superstitions may disappear too...and we will start from zero again to re-evaluate.
I feel Epupa, and sometimes Pavel ideas, a very non sense ideas, some contradictory, something opposed to their real know how...something strange that vision of small degrees....the head that not turn to observe the sides.... some non flexible positions.
There are moments that i think in a roto rooter machine....those used long time ago, to clean home plumbing.... something alike to open those guys ears to listen what others are telling, what the others are saying.... we are old too Epupa, experienced too, those that have different ideas are more than fifty years old...and if you observe the "Curriculum Vitae", of some of us, you will remove your hat in a position of respect, and probably will not look us from a higher point of view or lower point of view...but will perceive our value is almost the same as you have...the situation is faced eye by eye, and some group is wrong, defending wrong ideas.
Can you imagine that the "superstition" can be applied to your ideas?
Also that brainwash can also be applied...to watch only IMD or THD or something alike...when there are many other things to take into your considerations and evaluations.
I suggest once again....find an AKSA....this old, delayed, ancient amplifier....as you may have some immunity to brainwash...compare it with Symassym or other unit you respect.....remember...blind A to B comparison...serious judgement...... having carefull with all details.
Do that!...you will be surprised!..... there are moments that i perceive some loss of something in bass when listening AKSA separated....but when comparing with others..... simultaneous listening and switching A to B..... even comparing with class D reference and my class A reference (now simetrical last JLH model)...also using GEM to compare!...i feel that i may be much more humble than i normally use to be.... and turns clear to me that i was beeing an idiot trying to increase Aksa bass....it really do not need that!
Aksa is not openned to public, but you may have someone around that have an Aksa unit, last week two units was sent to Croatia....maybe more near you, in your own town may have an Aksa to listen and compare.
Do not need to apologize after listening.... already forgiven because you could not listen till those days...so.... cannot have a good idea of how it sounds, only imagination and preconceptions, superstitions ideas, as in the reality, may be talking watching schematics only...and the very basic schematics... as the circuit was not officially published, and are receiving improvements year by ear, because new components, smaller sized and sounding more adequately, and real improvements has beeing made.
The today's superstition can turn tomorrow's reality....the middle age, the ancient Doctors, are convinced that the earth are squared....it may be squared, already, for some guys....hehe...why not?
regards,
Carlos
cleaning our brains related many subjects.... all our own superstitions may disappear too...and we will start from zero again to re-evaluate.
I feel Epupa, and sometimes Pavel ideas, a very non sense ideas, some contradictory, something opposed to their real know how...something strange that vision of small degrees....the head that not turn to observe the sides.... some non flexible positions.
There are moments that i think in a roto rooter machine....those used long time ago, to clean home plumbing.... something alike to open those guys ears to listen what others are telling, what the others are saying.... we are old too Epupa, experienced too, those that have different ideas are more than fifty years old...and if you observe the "Curriculum Vitae", of some of us, you will remove your hat in a position of respect, and probably will not look us from a higher point of view or lower point of view...but will perceive our value is almost the same as you have...the situation is faced eye by eye, and some group is wrong, defending wrong ideas.
Can you imagine that the "superstition" can be applied to your ideas?
Also that brainwash can also be applied...to watch only IMD or THD or something alike...when there are many other things to take into your considerations and evaluations.
I suggest once again....find an AKSA....this old, delayed, ancient amplifier....as you may have some immunity to brainwash...compare it with Symassym or other unit you respect.....remember...blind A to B comparison...serious judgement...... having carefull with all details.
Do that!...you will be surprised!..... there are moments that i perceive some loss of something in bass when listening AKSA separated....but when comparing with others..... simultaneous listening and switching A to B..... even comparing with class D reference and my class A reference (now simetrical last JLH model)...also using GEM to compare!...i feel that i may be much more humble than i normally use to be.... and turns clear to me that i was beeing an idiot trying to increase Aksa bass....it really do not need that!
Aksa is not openned to public, but you may have someone around that have an Aksa unit, last week two units was sent to Croatia....maybe more near you, in your own town may have an Aksa to listen and compare.
Do not need to apologize after listening.... already forgiven because you could not listen till those days...so.... cannot have a good idea of how it sounds, only imagination and preconceptions, superstitions ideas, as in the reality, may be talking watching schematics only...and the very basic schematics... as the circuit was not officially published, and are receiving improvements year by ear, because new components, smaller sized and sounding more adequately, and real improvements has beeing made.
The today's superstition can turn tomorrow's reality....the middle age, the ancient Doctors, are convinced that the earth are squared....it may be squared, already, for some guys....hehe...why not?
regards,
Carlos
Upupa Epops said:
Upupa Epops raised a very good point here. From the moment we are born we a encouraged by our family and friends to adopt the "superstitions" of the culture in which we live. This is done by "brain washing" and the objective is to "fit" into our community. Before the age of about five we are just putty to be molded at the whims of others.
After that, it becomes a little more difficult, but "marketing departments" know how to take advantage of the nature of human beings to promote products.
What has this to do with hifi? Well I believe it explains why we can all have such strong and opposing views and why we never really get to the final answer. We have all been "programmed" differently.
Following on from this, for many of us, amps are more than the box of electronics, it's the "culture" that is surrounds a product. This may be the result of, being an excellent technical solution, the result of good marketing, a link to our childhood (the good old days) or the comradely of a group of like minded individuals. If we think a bit we all probably fall into one or more of these groups.
What do you think? Am I off my rocker or what?
I must build a SysmAsym. 😀
Regards and thanks to everyone
You always have good sense Greg...but there is a point...
What is Hi Fidelity?
When we go out to listen something......let's imagine a band playing.
Well, there are echoes.... reverberations.... automobile horns, children crying...you may be behind the band...and will be listening the drums more strong than the metals.
Wind speed will produce some fluctuations in the tone generated and in the level perceived, you will be crazy to listen to some saxophone of some strings....and nothing....so...you will move yourself to other position....aha!....there's the metals!!!
And were are the drums?
And those guys talking alike parrots near you!
Well, if that material is recorded...many microphones.... 100 channels.....ahahaha!.... and the Sound Studio Enginner "WILL DECIDE" the level of each one of those instruments.... because people have to listen all them...and increase here, decrease there...include reverberation in this point.... delete reverberation in the other point... invert some noise phases to cancel one each other...supress the people talking...cut the automobile horn...use an audio compressor because the volume fluctuations caused by wind or reflections in walls...some echoes re-inforce, others reduce the audio level of drums.... and drums echos have to be erased.
When finished..... something awfull comes from the recorder.... the guy turn crazy to adjust all those levels...and finally he conclude that the result is not real...and use some noise generator.... population noise...claps and something to show that was recorded alive.
Hi fidelity?
In my point of view.... strings streach must squinch!.... drums have to reverberate....saxofone have to sound alike a crashed bamboo...violin can be annoying in some notes....scratching...scriiiinchy sound!...those things, all together, "beating one with the other"...will produce natural harmonics.....nice!...harmonics are precious....must have them.... even some odds, generated by amplifier....kein problem!>..no problem!
Just to produce reflections....hi fidelity?....may hi Fidel and tea...only to Cubans!
regards,
Carlos
What is Hi Fidelity?
When we go out to listen something......let's imagine a band playing.
Well, there are echoes.... reverberations.... automobile horns, children crying...you may be behind the band...and will be listening the drums more strong than the metals.
Wind speed will produce some fluctuations in the tone generated and in the level perceived, you will be crazy to listen to some saxophone of some strings....and nothing....so...you will move yourself to other position....aha!....there's the metals!!!
And were are the drums?
And those guys talking alike parrots near you!
Well, if that material is recorded...many microphones.... 100 channels.....ahahaha!.... and the Sound Studio Enginner "WILL DECIDE" the level of each one of those instruments.... because people have to listen all them...and increase here, decrease there...include reverberation in this point.... delete reverberation in the other point... invert some noise phases to cancel one each other...supress the people talking...cut the automobile horn...use an audio compressor because the volume fluctuations caused by wind or reflections in walls...some echoes re-inforce, others reduce the audio level of drums.... and drums echos have to be erased.
When finished..... something awfull comes from the recorder.... the guy turn crazy to adjust all those levels...and finally he conclude that the result is not real...and use some noise generator.... population noise...claps and something to show that was recorded alive.
Hi fidelity?
In my point of view.... strings streach must squinch!.... drums have to reverberate....saxofone have to sound alike a crashed bamboo...violin can be annoying in some notes....scratching...scriiiinchy sound!...those things, all together, "beating one with the other"...will produce natural harmonics.....nice!...harmonics are precious....must have them.... even some odds, generated by amplifier....kein problem!>..no problem!
Just to produce reflections....hi fidelity?....may hi Fidel and tea...only to Cubans!
regards,
Carlos
AKSA,
I am always being surprised by your unpredictable presumptions. What do you man know about my study of psychoacoustics??????????????????
I am always being surprised by your unpredictable presumptions. What do you man know about my study of psychoacoustics??????????????????
Obviously never had readed nothing..never take a look, or never had any attention....
with the texts i use to write., and i use to repeat what the scientist had found....and psycho, acoustical or not acoustical is "my beach" too!
There are many myths...that need discussion related Hi fidel in tea!
Because if you split some audio information, a very complex audio wave form, in just three other ones.... the subproduct of the main generated wave generated in your audio source...using electronic crossovers for example...you will have three very complex informations.... waving crazy material that is not sinusoidal, not triangle and nothing that can remember something we can describe with a name.
They are different in level and in phase...having different timing, many frequencies all together..... i will be happy to know were's the speaker that can follow that incredible complex thing...when one of the three splited signals goes forward when other goes backwards...and over those two signals another one is waving something that remember a saw tooth...any speaker will follow this!....this is completelly impossible to be followed!....so....one thing is the audio information when observed by instruments...something that has nothing about the reality..... a brain creation, a delirium... related the reality....as speaker will not reproduce...so....humans will not listen....numbers to make instruments happy!.
So, some envelope, some resultant of that complex wave is something that will result in speaker motion...never.....never!... the same you observe in scopes..... what to bother if amplifier can follow those lines...if speaker cannot follow nothing...so...you will hear nothing!
As the envelope is really reproduced, this can explain how the small sample speed used, can register many points, enougth to "re-criate" some sound wave...the digital process do not create the same complex input wave.....only if it is not compled...because beeing complex...the digital to analogue output signal has nothing with any similarity with the audio wave used to first convertion...from analogue to digital and start the recording process.... so.... some copy...something with low fidelity is the result.
The same was done with MP3...they removed the informations that amplifiers cannot follow, the others informations that speakers cannot reproduce, and some psychoacoustics that a man cannot perceive a soft noise made with someone tongue...with a very small amplitude....some milivolts, in the presence of a the sound of the "Thunder" that is beeing reproduced with 80 volts peak to peak!.....MP3 and others compressors just delete those things you will not listen, things that speaker cannot reproduce and things that humans cannot perceive....just that!..... resulting in the same Hi fidel in tea!
There are people snobbing saying that do not like to listen MP3...maybe because pre conceived ideas, some pre existant ideas...something about that may be a "second class sound!" and tests made shown that humans cannot perceive nothing if you make recordings with 320K of sample..... size is reduced, a lot of information trashes are removed, as not to polute our ears with the hi fidelity..... sounds inaudible, never heard, infomations there to shake some pickup needle, to move some waveform monitor or to make EE smile....but normal listeners are not listening absolutely nothing above 16 Kilohertz...and nothing related a two simultaneous sounds with big intensity differences.
Well.... i think many guys do not have readed nothing.....ahahahha.... about the things i use to write, as i am the parrot of the scientists that discovered those things and i am repeating here.
Hi fidel in tea....is Castro, the cuban, in the second floor of some building having tea!
regards,
Carlos
with the texts i use to write., and i use to repeat what the scientist had found....and psycho, acoustical or not acoustical is "my beach" too!
There are many myths...that need discussion related Hi fidel in tea!
Because if you split some audio information, a very complex audio wave form, in just three other ones.... the subproduct of the main generated wave generated in your audio source...using electronic crossovers for example...you will have three very complex informations.... waving crazy material that is not sinusoidal, not triangle and nothing that can remember something we can describe with a name.
They are different in level and in phase...having different timing, many frequencies all together..... i will be happy to know were's the speaker that can follow that incredible complex thing...when one of the three splited signals goes forward when other goes backwards...and over those two signals another one is waving something that remember a saw tooth...any speaker will follow this!....this is completelly impossible to be followed!....so....one thing is the audio information when observed by instruments...something that has nothing about the reality..... a brain creation, a delirium... related the reality....as speaker will not reproduce...so....humans will not listen....numbers to make instruments happy!.
So, some envelope, some resultant of that complex wave is something that will result in speaker motion...never.....never!... the same you observe in scopes..... what to bother if amplifier can follow those lines...if speaker cannot follow nothing...so...you will hear nothing!
As the envelope is really reproduced, this can explain how the small sample speed used, can register many points, enougth to "re-criate" some sound wave...the digital process do not create the same complex input wave.....only if it is not compled...because beeing complex...the digital to analogue output signal has nothing with any similarity with the audio wave used to first convertion...from analogue to digital and start the recording process.... so.... some copy...something with low fidelity is the result.
The same was done with MP3...they removed the informations that amplifiers cannot follow, the others informations that speakers cannot reproduce, and some psychoacoustics that a man cannot perceive a soft noise made with someone tongue...with a very small amplitude....some milivolts, in the presence of a the sound of the "Thunder" that is beeing reproduced with 80 volts peak to peak!.....MP3 and others compressors just delete those things you will not listen, things that speaker cannot reproduce and things that humans cannot perceive....just that!..... resulting in the same Hi fidel in tea!
There are people snobbing saying that do not like to listen MP3...maybe because pre conceived ideas, some pre existant ideas...something about that may be a "second class sound!" and tests made shown that humans cannot perceive nothing if you make recordings with 320K of sample..... size is reduced, a lot of information trashes are removed, as not to polute our ears with the hi fidelity..... sounds inaudible, never heard, infomations there to shake some pickup needle, to move some waveform monitor or to make EE smile....but normal listeners are not listening absolutely nothing above 16 Kilohertz...and nothing related a two simultaneous sounds with big intensity differences.
Well.... i think many guys do not have readed nothing.....ahahahha.... about the things i use to write, as i am the parrot of the scientists that discovered those things and i am repeating here.
Hi fidel in tea....is Castro, the cuban, in the second floor of some building having tea!
regards,
Carlos
Pavel,
I don't know what you know, in fact I don't even know you. But it's clear that you are not aware of what you do not know. That makes you blissfully ignorant - perhaps you should know better....
A very Merry Christmas to you, Sir.
Cheers,
Hugh
I don't know what you know, in fact I don't even know you. But it's clear that you are not aware of what you do not know. That makes you blissfully ignorant - perhaps you should know better....
A very Merry Christmas to you, Sir.
Cheers,
Hugh
Re: Obviously never had readed nothing..never take a look, or never had any attention
I am sorry, Carlos, but you're wrong... This old mathematics "Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier" already knew (around 1831), no matter how "complex" your wave looks, it consist of sinusoidals, all their frequencies within a certain range. The speaker / amplifier CAN follow that. It is only impossible if your wave contain sharp edges, but then it contains frequencies outside the audiorange...
Mike
destroyer X said:
I am sorry, Carlos, but you're wrong... This old mathematics "Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier" already knew (around 1831), no matter how "complex" your wave looks, it consist of sinusoidals, all their frequencies within a certain range. The speaker / amplifier CAN follow that. It is only impossible if your wave contain sharp edges, but then it contains frequencies outside the audiorange...
Mike
Christmas is a good time to read...and i will use it to learn more things....
As is terrible when we do not know something..... awfull those things...i will run away from my ignorance.
Someday, maybe in this life, i will be something reasonable related know how...as it is hard to receive informations...a lot of guys to not loose time to teach things to us...i have to find those things published, as i can find many critics in our forum, but i cannot find people , with patience to explain what is rigth and what is wrong!
Someday i asked one guy that understand deeply computers, if MP3 is really worst than normal CD...the answer was not...that is impossible to perceive differences....they exist, but you cannot perceive....well.... the same guy, when sent me sample data of audio...sent me in wave because wave is better....what a crazy thing....do what i tell you to do...but do not do what i use to do!
regards,
Carlos
As is terrible when we do not know something..... awfull those things...i will run away from my ignorance.
Someday, maybe in this life, i will be something reasonable related know how...as it is hard to receive informations...a lot of guys to not loose time to teach things to us...i have to find those things published, as i can find many critics in our forum, but i cannot find people , with patience to explain what is rigth and what is wrong!
Someday i asked one guy that understand deeply computers, if MP3 is really worst than normal CD...the answer was not...that is impossible to perceive differences....they exist, but you cannot perceive....well.... the same guy, when sent me sample data of audio...sent me in wave because wave is better....what a crazy thing....do what i tell you to do...but do not do what i use to do!
regards,
Carlos
That's rigth Mike.... we are telling the same thing with in different ways
All will be reduced to sinusoidal.
That's it...do not have fidelity related the original...you can produce resultants.... and resultant has not the original shape...loosing fidelity.
regards,
Carlos
All will be reduced to sinusoidal.
That's it...do not have fidelity related the original...you can produce resultants.... and resultant has not the original shape...loosing fidelity.
regards,
Carlos