This is just a misunderstanding of terms - I'm using mechanical in the sense of anything that is not 100% human, however it may be constructed. The days of something being 100% "mechanical", as in the steam age days, are long gone ...
No-one is 100% "perfect" - I can be fooled into thinking that 2 versions, A and B, are the same, even though coming afresh to the situation they are obviously different; I've done this to myself many times - the brains adapts, it attempts to correlate between the two, and decides they're close enough to ignore the difference.
The difference between convincing and non-convincing sound, however, is too great - a good technique when the sound is working well is to deliberately try and persuade yourself there is something wrong with it, you consciously make an effort to lock in your mental focus to possible flaws - and it doesn't happen, the brain won't see a 'problem' with the sound.
No,
so if someone claims that he can reliable distinguish very subtle sound differencies, as first he must proove quality of his audio "sensors"- blind test results, ability of ears only to reliable distinguish. No need to see nor know what I am hearing. Other way his "processor" is only fooled by many other input variables.
The listening process is merely to note if there is a difference - then decide whether that difference is meaningful in a quality sense.
As a sight analogy, consider some paint colour samples: 9 are the identical colour, 1 is very slightly different in some sense. Lay them on the table so they form a tight patchwork of colour - the odd one out will scream at you. However, get 1 of one colour, A, 1 of the slightly different shade, B; then flash them up again and again and again in a random order - what do you think your chances are of picking the sequence. For me, I would say zero - so that "proves" I can't distinguish the colours ...??
As a sight analogy, consider some paint colour samples: 9 are the identical colour, 1 is very slightly different in some sense. Lay them on the table so they form a tight patchwork of colour - the odd one out will scream at you. However, get 1 of one colour, A, 1 of the slightly different shade, B; then flash them up again and again and again in a random order - what do you think your chances are of picking the sequence. For me, I would say zero - so that "proves" I can't distinguish the colours ...??
Yeah sure, but those were designed to crash... Duh.
When I was still in air defense, we had a switch on the main command console labeled 'RTL'; was some anti-jamming circuitry you could call up for the acq. radar.
We used to tell newbees it stood for Return To Launcher. Like you fire a missile and suddenly saw the target was a friendly, you switched the RTL and the missile would return to it's launcher ready for the next shot.
You'd be surprised how many fell for it, especially when delivered by someone with a bunch of stars and an impressive hat.
Jan
Your assessment is that the difference is very minute - my experience is otherwise.
The tend to know that, hence why they are designing the electronics, sheesh it is getting rather silly your view of design.
WRONG, the difference is if we think we hear a difference we investigate because we know that the ear/brain can be fooled, so we approach things as scientifically as we can, that means investigating every aspect of it from our we being fooled, to if not investigating the cause...
Not thinking that every time we listen there is some problem and waving our hands and guessing what is wrong with ne measurements of clue as to the cause.
Went to a pro supplier for a canare 75ohm s/pdif cable , figured the shortest necessary length would be best. The "cable guy" was pretty insistent I should have him make it as a 1.5metre length.
Because everyone (except me) knows this will sound better than any other length. Better than 50 cm. better than 100 cm. better than 152 cm.
When I asked why he asserted this is so , he just said it is what it is.
I took this as his way of saying I was too dumb to spend money in his store, and left.
Anyone else have an idea what this fellow was on about? Or on?
Yes, another audiophile myth, based on some comments and beliefs regarding reflections and their supposed attenuation, gate opening times etc...also people looking at digital waveforms and attributing analogue problems to what they see. A couple of recent threads on SPDIF cables and waveforms discussed this in detail. It is a non working solution to a perceived problem that has a proper engineering solution (that most times isn't necessary) of terminating the SPDIF line properly. I will try and find the threads.
The problem is that consumer SPDIF cannot be terminated correctly because it is typically using RCA connectors......BNC yes.
Jocko had plenty to say about this, including optimal cable lengths.
The optimal cable length is of course dependent on cable characteristics.
Dan.
I missed the recent threads....links, yes please.
Last edited:
RCA or BNC doesn't make a difference to termination, just slap in a 75r resistor.
The best cable is the shortest (general rule for digital, including PCB traces), everything that I read regarding cable length was so different to what is taught regarding digital transmission and controlling the line with terminations.
It is not just the cable characteristics, its the driver and its current drive capabilities, the receiver and its sinking abilities and any other bits added, such as isolation transformers etc.
Yes, and if someone can not hear ( by ears only..) differencies at blind test, so it is nonsense then to decide, what "sounds" better in sighted test.. Only fool yourself.
Your color analogy is nonsense, you can not hear at once two sources of sound. Or you can, but it will be than quite different "music", you get mix of both.
I think you misunderstood my intent - John Curl is a good example of someone who understands the need for balancing both the stated and the unstated requirements of the equipment - the manufacturer may say, it just has to have measurements as good as these, and I don't care what it sounds like; Bryston is a good example of a company who made products that were well built, but had a so-so reputation amongst audiophiles - something that has now changed ...The tend to know that, hence why they are designing the electronics, sheesh it is getting rather silly your view of design.
Anywhere, at the speed SPDIF runs at BNC or RCA as connectors is not going to make much difference to the signal integrity.
How to do that with sound is to repeat the A excerpt a number of times so that the mind tunes into the rhythm, the texture of the sound, the repetition reinforces the 'sense' of it; then, the switching to the B version will 'jar' the hearing as being different, the pattern of the sound is broken.
I mentioned using this as test technique, invited comments, and got nothing ... did I mention the word "lazy" recently,
?
I use this method all the time.How to do that with sound is to repeat the A excerpt a number of times so that the mind tunes into the rhythm, the texture of the sound, the repetition reinforces the 'sense' of it; then, the switching to the B version will 'jar' the hearing as being different, the pattern of the sound is broken.
I mentioned using this as test technique, invited comments, and got nothing ... did I mention the word "lazy" recently,
Repeated A plays to get a proper handle on the A sound.
Repeated B plays to get a proper handle on the B sound.
Then A then A then A then B then B then B then A....
Then switch A then B then A then B etc.
Very useful to discriminating and identifying fine differences.
Works for me.
Dan.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.