I see you can't provide any links to back up your claim about obtuse research papers or ones which experts argue over
Again, you present just a rant & when asked for some backing you demur
Obviously you can't say anything as you are bereft of logical debate, just inchoate rantings.
Last edited:
I did find this interesting tidbit over there.
"Reminds me of little Johnny's contention about ABX "false positives" and Arny resorting to diabolical cheating by merely guessing.
He posts as mmerrill99 and lord knows who else on other fora these days.
As greynol suggested, rinse and repeat"
Huh......I wouldn’t know enough about high end stuff like that to make any intelligent comments except it’s way above my diminishing return threshold 😛
I wouldn’t refuse a free one, wait a minute.....class D? I suppose I could fire my subs with it😀
Ok, I'll bite; please point me to any of these complete test plans, I must have missed it; "suggestions" and "recommendations" won't cut it. I don't feel like playing hide and seek, so it's either a complete and coherent test case and plan, or it is not.
No, I'm not in that business, I don't have neither the resources or the interest in doing such tests. That's why I asked for a test plan "that anybody could independently reproduce and verify". Or what about you showing some of your results? Wait, they must be confidential, so not an option, isn't it?
That's all you want? Or, upon having a plan that meets with your approval, will you next demand it be carried out with independent proctors monitoring, filming, and transcribing all activities, all for your subsequent approval?
I´m not sure if i understand the question, as the term "ITD" already refers to "L/R"?
In general, at the moment i´d consider experiments using pulse-trains to be in the "onset group".
In fact Nordmark was the one with lowest reported ITD´s detected by his participants in the case of jittered pulse trains. (using headphones)
When using loudspeakers, the numbers are usually higher (one possible reason, i.e. the reflections i´ve mentioned before) and i´ve to search if there were experiments done using pulse-trains.
Overall it is nearly impossible to answer, as there is strong dependance of SPL and other conditions, namely the training effect.
I've read that the smallest detectable angle is 1 degree, which is a suspiciously nice number 🙂
Psycho-acoustics is a huge field. Lots of experiments going on and lots of results - typical of the psychology world. I don't think you can get a 'clear' answer and you have to sift through a lot of data and arrive at your own conclusions. I'd say its a field that is less understood than audio amplifier design as of 2019.
I think Jakob just brings an alternative view that should be considered - he references/cites papers about what we know in that field. All we can do as amplifier designers is make them distort as little as possible (or distort in a nice euphonic way).
I have on my bench right now a solid state amplifier that produces not less than 0.02% t (2nd, 3rd, 4th and just hint of 5th) at near full output power. For most of its output, its produces 2nds and 3rds and above 20 Watts the distortion is never less than 0.01%. It sounds organic and smooth in a way my ultra low distortion designs do not - I have no clue why but I am sure its not to do with the absolute distortion levels.
My point is, when it comes to distortion, single digit ppm only tells you how well the amplifier was engineered. It will for the most part - given similar output levels, frequency response, load drive capability - not determine the quality of the listening experience.
I am an objectivist - so I do measure and I try my best to make sure there are no blatant engineering errors - and I do not claim things that don't stand up to scrutiny.
🙂
Last edited:
You used to be one, many years ago. Now, since retiring and opening your line of audio side business, you are ready and willing to make compromises, per this message (this is only the latest). No problem, good for you and good luck.
Naah - come on Syn08, I keep that side of my life out of here for the most part (except for my signature) and I still support and do DIY.
Answer post 21452 and play the ball and not the man.
Answer post 21452 and play the ball and not the man.
It's more complex than amplifier design but is also intimately connected to the end product of what is produced by our playback systems - a recreation of a soundstream that is believably real
I'm not sure that's all that can be done considering your next couple of paragraphs
I'm not arguing with you but you have made a claim that many would jump on if you weren't who you are - namely, " It sounds organic and smooth in a way my ultra low distortion designs do not"
I hardly need to remind you what the stock reply to this claim is & how the narrative usually progresses from there?
Jakob is an "audio developer" what is that? He has experience of audio testing? Surely describing a protocol would be a simple matter for him, off the shelf even?
Its euphonic Merrill - it does sound good. As do the ultra low distortion ones.
So where does that leave us?
So where does that leave us?
I don’t understand what the problem is with using adjectives to describe a character sound of a piece of equipment......even if 10 people use 10 different words there’s usually going to be commonality enough to paint you a picture.
When we buy a piece of audio gear nowadays it’s usually mail order without a demo......specs only tell that it’s designed well like bonsai said.
And for those that say if your amp sounds different it’s defective I say...BS.
Everything I own has a different sound that even differs more depending on what’s connected to it.
Good to see one of the respected ‘pros’ describing sound.
If you look at upper right corner of the forum page, it shows "Search" and an arrow symbol, when you left click that arrow symbol, it gives you an option to "Advanced Search". If not, you should contact the forum tech staff or your internet provider and find out what's wrong.
Why not link the search result of posts by "Jakob1863"?
I've stated many times that speakers (& room acoustics) are the bottleneck in audio replaying electronics. Speakers do vary sound greatly and have been demonstrated in double blind tests.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.