Joshua_G said:
No ****, Jose, don't worry, you won't
But you are trying to get recognition for your audio knowledge and expertise without one or more of:
a) Any understanding of electronics, acoustics or psychology principles.
b) Any formal education in the above.
c) Building any audio device that would qualify as decent.
d) Any other abilities to distinguish yourself from the crowd.
d) I'll stop here before it gets nasty.
Bascially, you are trying to shortcircuit a body of knowledge that accumulated over the last 100 years and sell yourself as an audio expert based on your own claimed physiological abilities rather than on your knowledge.
Now, why are you doing this here and God knows where else? Because one or more of:
a) An overinflated ego that needs constant attention.
b) A vesting interest and you are desperatrely trying to differentiate yourself from the competitors.
c) I'll stop here before it gets nasty.
If you need more of this, let me know
Joshua_G said:I, for one, am not trying to convince anyone. [are you sure?]
I hear what I hear and I couldn't care less whether others believe it or not. It is by listening that I choose components to my sound system, be it loudspeakers, amplifiers or cables.
Also, I don't know whether the differences I hear are measurable or not and I don't care much about it, since I choose components for my sound system in order to enjoy listening to music, not in order to perform any measurements. [you give the impression of choosing oparts to enjoy listening to the parts] It only amuses me that others deny my experience. [We don't!] I don't listen to what others want me to. [And in the case of the diffmaker tests, probably you are scared of what the results might tell you] I listen to what I care about and to what is useful to me. I don't need Diffmaker or any such thing in order to choose components to my system.
We know all this already, you have told us too many times. PLEASE stop boring us all with your "I don't care what others think about my views". I suspect that if this were really true you wouldn't keep repeating it. It is like you are trying to convince yourself.
bear said:
Yes understand your arguments, and it all seems logical. But observe: GE's can, so they say, reliably differentiate between, say, two cap brands. These are differences that cannot reliably be measured. So we conclude that GE's can reliably hear below the measurement threshold.
Then, if we have something that is such a gross difference that it can be very, very eaily be heard as the difference between two tracks, all those GE's start to tapdance and weasel out.
We therefore must conclude that those GE claims of extremely acute hearing are just that, claims. Because they themselves are not able to reliably demonstrate it to anyone except themselves, and also refuse to take any tests that *could* reliably demonstrate the effect.
But if you try hard enough, there is always a way out, of course. For example, one could always claim that the very subtle differences between two types of caps are much easier to detect than something as gross as a complete sousa band.
Jan Didden
SY, I would like to clarify the situation with the resistors, so that there is no misunderstanding about it, for anyone to misinterpret.
I bought a number of really beautifully made precision resistors that appear to be NASA spec or better, surplus, decades ago. In 1980, I built an early preamp prototype using Levinson modules for the line stage, and a Penny and Giles studio fader. I had cap multipliers for every module, AND I used these RESISTORS for feedback and input resistors.
These resistors are beautiful to behold and accurate too. Many to 0.1%. They appear to be clear glass cased, with heavy gold plated Kovar leads. They are virtually, jewelry.
Now, my listening reaction to the preamp prototype that I made was disappointing, yet it was my 'intellectual' pride-and-joy.
Looking at the simple thru-path, and separately evaluating the Levinson modules (in a JC-2) and the P&G pot separately. It appeared to come down to these exotic resistors as the potential culprit for 'brightening' the sound in an artificial way. Did I run controlled experiments with multiple listeners under double blind conditions? NO, I just ran scared, and used another resistor type, including Owens Corning 'green resistors', and Resista (also picked up surplus) with what appeared, good effect, i.e. no obvious brightness.
These beautiful resistors have been sitting in my lab without anywhere to go, because I have been reluctant to further use them in critical projects.
However, you, SY, a true non-believer in the 'witchcraft' of resistor differences, would be a wonderful second test for these resistors. Perhaps they had been unfairly singled out, and perhaps it was the selector switches, instead, that were the problem? As I had sold to you, SY, various quality resistors, before (volume pots), and you and I met, face to face, once in a while, it was easy to give you a sample of these exotic resistors to try. Especially 47K, as this is a standard input value, and can easily be swapped into many preamps.
Now, I am not on any timetable with these resistors, but if you really liked them after trying them, then I could have further feedback about these resistors, and maybe you or your friends might want to take them off of my hands at a relatively modest price. If you didn't like them, then maybe you would have learned something new about resistors, such as 'Your eyes can deceive you'. Then, even if you declined any more resistors, I still would have learned something.
Still, this takes more than a casual observation than you tried one of these resistors or a near relative, once 'many years ago' as a plate resistor. This is because many precision resistors behave 'noise-wise' and as resistors in general, within good specifications. This is not a listening test, at least, not one to my 'casual' standards. I have to listen, over a reasonable period of time, actually 'live with' the component in my audio system, before I make any judgement. This is my minimum standard, that may not meet the ABX standard, but it certainly is something that I can work with.
I bought a number of really beautifully made precision resistors that appear to be NASA spec or better, surplus, decades ago. In 1980, I built an early preamp prototype using Levinson modules for the line stage, and a Penny and Giles studio fader. I had cap multipliers for every module, AND I used these RESISTORS for feedback and input resistors.
These resistors are beautiful to behold and accurate too. Many to 0.1%. They appear to be clear glass cased, with heavy gold plated Kovar leads. They are virtually, jewelry.
Now, my listening reaction to the preamp prototype that I made was disappointing, yet it was my 'intellectual' pride-and-joy.
Looking at the simple thru-path, and separately evaluating the Levinson modules (in a JC-2) and the P&G pot separately. It appeared to come down to these exotic resistors as the potential culprit for 'brightening' the sound in an artificial way. Did I run controlled experiments with multiple listeners under double blind conditions? NO, I just ran scared, and used another resistor type, including Owens Corning 'green resistors', and Resista (also picked up surplus) with what appeared, good effect, i.e. no obvious brightness.
These beautiful resistors have been sitting in my lab without anywhere to go, because I have been reluctant to further use them in critical projects.
However, you, SY, a true non-believer in the 'witchcraft' of resistor differences, would be a wonderful second test for these resistors. Perhaps they had been unfairly singled out, and perhaps it was the selector switches, instead, that were the problem? As I had sold to you, SY, various quality resistors, before (volume pots), and you and I met, face to face, once in a while, it was easy to give you a sample of these exotic resistors to try. Especially 47K, as this is a standard input value, and can easily be swapped into many preamps.
Now, I am not on any timetable with these resistors, but if you really liked them after trying them, then I could have further feedback about these resistors, and maybe you or your friends might want to take them off of my hands at a relatively modest price. If you didn't like them, then maybe you would have learned something new about resistors, such as 'Your eyes can deceive you'. Then, even if you declined any more resistors, I still would have learned something.
Still, this takes more than a casual observation than you tried one of these resistors or a near relative, once 'many years ago' as a plate resistor. This is because many precision resistors behave 'noise-wise' and as resistors in general, within good specifications. This is not a listening test, at least, not one to my 'casual' standards. I have to listen, over a reasonable period of time, actually 'live with' the component in my audio system, before I make any judgement. This is my minimum standard, that may not meet the ABX standard, but it certainly is something that I can work with.
janneman said:
Yes understand your arguments, and it all seems logical. But observe: GE's can, so they say, reliably differentiate between, say, two cap brands. These are differences that cannot reliably be measured. So we conclude that GE's can reliably hear below the measurement threshold.
Then, if we have something that is such a gross difference that it can be very, very eaily be heard as the difference between two tracks, all those GE's start to tapdance and weasel out.
We therefore must conclude that those GE claims of extremely acute hearing are just that, claims. Because they themselves are not able to reliably demonstrate it to anyone except themselves, and also refuse to take any tests that *could* reliably demonstrate the effect.
But if you try hard enough, there is always a way out, of course. For example, one could always claim that the very subtle differences between two types of caps are much easier to detect than something as gross as a complete sousa band.
Jan Didden
Let's skip what "GE's" (golden ears) can or can not hear.
They're not here.
You have failed to address the plausible theory that I suggested as to why the Sousa band is not "audible" but the cap may be.
The Souas band, to go one step farther, is uncorrelated to the main program material, but the "difference" between caps is correlated directly to (arguably) the most critical aspect if the program!!
Furthermore, the Sousa band likely contains (broadly speaking) spectra that we know is non-objectionable. In addition any objectionable harmonics from that Sousa band - even if the recording media supported it would be many many dB down from the main Sousa program, that already being many many dB down from the main program itself. Then we run into the truncation of the data of the Sousa band being that it is down at the 16bit limit of the the media... which actually is more or less like noise riding on top of the main program signal.
Does this help?
_-_-bear
Edmond Stuart said:
If that's really the case, what are you doing here on this forum anyhow? Why don't you
I'm here to learn and I keep on learning here.
syn08 said:
That I'm here in order to get recognition is your erroneous assumption, not my aim.
alansawyer said:
Skip my posts and save yourself bordom.
janneman said:
And you said that no one denied my experience?
Joshua_G, they are attacking you as an example of a 'subjective' yet technical, listener. I think that they are 'way out of line'. I would just LOVE to attack them with the same 'mean-spiritedness' that they are attacking you, but I tried it here, once, and they 'binned' me. I just keep taking my Prozac, and hope for the best. We do make progress here, sometimes.
bear said:
Yes it helps. Every psycho-acoustical study I am aware of makes the point that correlated differences are much more difficult to detect than non-correlated ones.
A complete sousa band under a classical choir is about as uncorrelated as it gets,so it should be much, much easier to detect.
Jan Didden
john curl said:
That is not true.
Have you not noticed that those 'attacking' posts are always a reaction to so much more BS?
I told Joshua that nobody denies his experience. He keeps on telling that it IS denied, but doesn't come up with anything to support that; he can't because he is wrong. Why does he continue to come up with such nonsense again and again?
Jan Didden
GRollins said:
You took me out of context, I have never done something, for instance like changing silver for copper wire, and heard a difference that I could never explain.
On nano-stuff...
"(d) Real time signals of the input voltage of the four-layer CNT thin film loudspeaker
and the output sound pressure from the microphone, indicating that the frequency of the sound pressure doubles that of the input voltage."
On downloading the whole thing it is just a thermo-acoustic transducer, nothing unexplained.
Nelson, one less component to the ZEN, the driver is the load.
Joshua_G, I really don't see why people continue to attack YOU. What did you do wrong? Believe in your own listening experience? Wow, what a concept!
I suspect that they consider you an easy target. Please keep that in mind, and deprive them of 'ammunition' to use against you. I HAVE to represent myself here in order to explain Blowtorch principles, but as you and I have personally talked together, you know that I don't tell them everything that I consider important to audio quality or life, in general. It just isn't worth it, because the mean-spirited here will defame you, if they can. They certainly do that to me. I can make the most honest and virtuous statement that should not offend anyone, and they will laugh at me for it, implying that I am NOT honest and virtuous. Just look at some of the latest messages regarding me, on this thread. And all that I said was that I didn't want to waste any money on useless 'upgrades'.
I suspect that they consider you an easy target. Please keep that in mind, and deprive them of 'ammunition' to use against you. I HAVE to represent myself here in order to explain Blowtorch principles, but as you and I have personally talked together, you know that I don't tell them everything that I consider important to audio quality or life, in general. It just isn't worth it, because the mean-spirited here will defame you, if they can. They certainly do that to me. I can make the most honest and virtuous statement that should not offend anyone, and they will laugh at me for it, implying that I am NOT honest and virtuous. Just look at some of the latest messages regarding me, on this thread. And all that I said was that I didn't want to waste any money on useless 'upgrades'.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.