What kind of qualification would you accept? If I was speaking based on having certain qualifications, wouldn't that make my statement a claim coming from authority? In actuality, its a claim based on observations of physicists' writings.
IOW, you don't actually know any physics, but feel capable of expounding on the subject? Or can you actually set up and solve a basic Schroedinger equation for a physical system?
Well, your guess is wrong. Using two sources, you can locate an object (visually, acoustically, whatever) left-right and front back. About height... (20ft. or 3ft.) no way, unless "height" has a different meaning for the use of high end audio.
And BTW, if you want to be taken seriously, "guessing" is anyway not a good way to proceed.
Dunno how you got that from what I said. More evidence that your perceptual processes are subject to significant distortion I suggest. What do my feelings have to do with the matter?
Nope, unless it was the 'electron in a box' I was taught at undergrad level and I reckon I'd be seriously rusty at that. Why would that inability be in any way relevant?
Speakers, depending on construction, have pretty strange characteristics of radiated power vs. frequency and both vertical and horizontal angle difference from axis. This, together with reflections, makes an impression of 3D localization.
So when I change a component in my system and the image shifts to a lower or higher focal point, or the soundstage depth/width changes, whether it is forward or behind the speaker face shifts, are you saying that the speakers cause this to happen, when they have not changed or repositioned?
Please! Sounds like that system needs some serious attention if these simple things are not evident while listening to music
Physics does not, however, many physicists do.
It seems that enlightened Yogis and Buddhists would agree that subject and object are only one.
Please! Sounds like that system needs some serious attention if these simple things are not evident while listening to music
Running short of arguments Curly?
Argue with you? I thought that you already stated that you are stone deaf
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/154394-hps-4-0-phono-stage-13.html#post1976926
Your words not mine!
Last edited:
You are absolutely right Joshua. Some people have never learned how to communicate with others that do not think like they do. It is sad that with the education we are given that this aspect is often overlooked.
Because you're expounding on something about which you have little knowledge?
I know more about, say, genetics than the Average Joe, but there's no way on a forum devoted to garage bioscience where there are real experts that I'd try telling people about what genetics does and doesn't say, and quote-mining James Watson. But that's just me, feel free to expound, there's no rules against it.
Sociology of physicists
Indeed, and pretty much covered by Smolin's remarks on the sociology of physicists in his book.
Indeed, and pretty much covered by Smolin's remarks on the sociology of physicists in his book.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.