Are you kidding? JMFahey, one of the most sensible people posting here, being extreme. And you not! You certainly have that backwards.
But it's not surprising given your lack of understanding of what does and doesn't affect audio sound quality.
An analog spectrum analyzer will do a champ of a job, but slowly. That's why my HP3577a hasn't gone to the scrap heap.
The skirts, it would seem, do not solely represent noise, but intermodulation effects, amplification of artifacts on a high gain positive feedback loop, and uncertainty.
Speaking of that, seems it once had a definition:
"Floobydust" is an old term that was invented here at National, a phrase coined by Dennis Bohn, meaning "miscellaneous" or "potpourri" - a "Mixed bag."
https://www.electronicdesign.com/archive/article/21799032/whats-all-this-floobydust-stuff-anyhow
Could be various things that lead to frequency components very near to an expected frequency.
One set of measurement posts, including a link to another post:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/phase-noise-in-ds-dacs.387862/post-7063038
Last edited:
Do you know how long it took to prove Lyme Disease was not imaginary? Do you know how long it took to prove soliton waves were not imaginary? How long it too to prove tetrachromatic vision was not imaginary (thanks, Bill!)? It may take some time, yet eventually it will be shown that not everyone is as hearing challenged as some people in denial. That's my opinion, just as valid as yours.
And if you want to call names, maybe you are coolaid drinker? Its a better fit for you than snake oil for me... 🙂
That said, I would suggest we desist with the name calling. Its only end result will be to get the thread closed, if not worse.
Last edited:
So what?
Proving/disproving other completely unrelated stuff does not prove your Spam.
Hint: un-re-la-ted .... get it?
No, of course you don´t, but that´s not the point anyway.
Here, I found it for you:
Unrelated Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
unrelated
adjective
un·re·lat·ed ˌən-ri-ˈlā-tədhttps://www.google.com/search?q=who...gBwSmSAQYxLjM1LjKYAQCgAQGwAQA&sclient=gws-wiz
: not related: such as
: not connected in any way : discrete, separate
an unrelated incident
So now YOU are the Gold Standard and World Reference, setting the bar height.
Of course you can prove none of that.
Contrary to what thousands of indefatigable Scientists and Researchers found along DECADES of testing and measuring.:
https://www.google.com/search?q=who...gBwSmSAQYxLjM1LjKYAQCgAQGwAQA&sclient=gws-wiz
No, your "opinion" reputation has been burnt to cinders ... all by your own efforts of course.
Snake oil peddler fits like a glove.
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
SNAKE OIL
/ˈsneɪk ɔɪl/
noun informal •North American
noun: snake oil; noun: snakeoil
a substance with no real medicinal value sold as a remedy for all diseases.
a product, policy, etc. of little real worth or value that is promoted as the solution to a problem.
Rereading this, maybe we could shorten that "non-solution for a non-problem" to "Shunyata" .... what do you think?
By the way, coolaid drinker too, go figure.
Kool-Aid drinker - Urban Dictionary
https://www.urbandictionary.com › define › term=Kool...
Someone who believes what they are told without thinking for themselves.
That must be a rare record.
Last edited:
Point was in response to the post immediately preceding mine. A style of argument seen from time to time.
So you try and assert intellectual superiority by cut and pasting some very chewy philosopher’s prose at someone for whom English is not a first language? That doesn’t make you look willing to actually discuss anything.
I have tried rational discussion. Certain people deconstruct the words of people they don't like into something else entirely. My description was probably a bit euphemistic. Naming it more bluntly could more likely have been viewed as disrespectful. That might have also invited another volley. Therefore I tried to use somewhat more respectful language, perhaps giving the person more intellectual credit than was deserved.
Last edited:
Typically, an oxymoron is seen as two words put together that have opposite meanings, like jumbo shrimp, friendly takeover, same difference, pretty ugly, or even army intelligence..(apologies to those who served...I am humbled by your work and sacrifice).
Rarely do I see an entire sentence constructed as an oxymoron. Perhaps a little brush up on people skills is warranted?
John
It was intended to mean there could be a side-effect to being respectful when such respect was not deserved. As I said, I could have been blunt and disrespectful from the beginning. Maybe that would have been more on target. We aren't supposed to do that here though, are we? Being put on the spot to explain intent made a bit of the underlying reality more clear. IOW the sentence is true as to what happened in the past, then followed with commentary as to whether or not it was deserved. I was starting to get more blunt.
Last edited:
What a convoluted justification.
To quote that famous announcer (Bob Uecker) in Major League.. "Sometimes less is more."
I am rarely in the position of requesting anybody exhibit people skills. It usually means I am in the wrong place.
John
To quote that famous announcer (Bob Uecker) in Major League.. "Sometimes less is more."
I am rarely in the position of requesting anybody exhibit people skills. It usually means I am in the wrong place.
John
Why don't you comment on the people who bluntly attack me and or Rick Miller? A bit inconsistent on your part, isn't it?
To be clear, I am not selling anything. When it comes to audio I tell the truth as I see it. When it comes to trying to follow the forum rules, I try not to go out of bounds. Other's don't seem to try nearly as hard when they attack people they disagree with. What do you think is fair then? The other side gets to be rude, and I if try to be more diplomatic than those people, it gets picked apart and criticized? Why is that okay? IMHO it isn't.
To be clear, I am not selling anything. When it comes to audio I tell the truth as I see it. When it comes to trying to follow the forum rules, I try not to go out of bounds. Other's don't seem to try nearly as hard when they attack people they disagree with. What do you think is fair then? The other side gets to be rude, and I if try to be more diplomatic than those people, it gets picked apart and criticized? Why is that okay? IMHO it isn't.
Last edited:
Perhaps having seen your post over the years with your normal demeanor, I hold you to a higher standard??
Let's face it. You and Rick claim to hear things others can't. That may be true, but you have no measured proof of such.
When questioned, it goes back and forth a while, then the conversation tends to go downhill. Philosophical cut and pastes certainly don't float my boat..
Over the years, I've provided theory and measurements which can indeed support some of the claims, such as the characteristic impedance of a speaker cable affecting imaging, biwiring actually fixing dissipation errors, and power cords affecting sound via ground loop.
I've taken a beating from some "objectivists" via PM because I present engineering expertise that is consistent with the claims of "subjectivists".
I was quite surprised that on this thread, when I discussed how that video Rick posted (whatever one it was) was absolutely consistent with the engineering aspect of ground loops in an audio system, that I received ZERO hate mail messages. I (wishful thinking) began to think that the members here had finally risen above the previously accepted level of discourse (a low bar as it were.)
I can always hope.
ps... "other side"?? really? I reject that world view. Perhaps I thought of the world as "us vs them" a long time ago when I was young and stupid, but I am now much older.. (Yah, I know, I said that a while ago as well).
John
Let's face it. You and Rick claim to hear things others can't. That may be true, but you have no measured proof of such.
When questioned, it goes back and forth a while, then the conversation tends to go downhill. Philosophical cut and pastes certainly don't float my boat..
Over the years, I've provided theory and measurements which can indeed support some of the claims, such as the characteristic impedance of a speaker cable affecting imaging, biwiring actually fixing dissipation errors, and power cords affecting sound via ground loop.
I've taken a beating from some "objectivists" via PM because I present engineering expertise that is consistent with the claims of "subjectivists".
I was quite surprised that on this thread, when I discussed how that video Rick posted (whatever one it was) was absolutely consistent with the engineering aspect of ground loops in an audio system, that I received ZERO hate mail messages. I (wishful thinking) began to think that the members here had finally risen above the previously accepted level of discourse (a low bar as it were.)
I can always hope.
ps... "other side"?? really? I reject that world view. Perhaps I thought of the world as "us vs them" a long time ago when I was young and stupid, but I am now much older.. (Yah, I know, I said that a while ago as well).
John
Last edited:
John, if some of these things were easy to measure with standard tools (e.g. steady state FFTs), then there would never be these arguments. Also, even good measurement are likely to show small-ish numbers. If they didn't then there would never be these arguments either. But small numbers don't necessarily mean inaudible. A measurement method may be insensitive to certain audible effects. I have tried to explain some clear examples of why many times. The explanations are rejected out of hand without any serious thought and forgotten. We keep starting over from scratch again and again. Also I have tried to explain why ABX DBT is costly, time-consuming, and tends to require a lot of practice and endurance on the part of the test subject. Respected forum member PMA found the same when he learned to pass ABX. It gets frustrating.
Regarding your claim that Rick and I hear things others can't, maybe so. That's doesn't mean the things are very, very quiet. Hardly that. More likely it means most people's brains ignore such things. Again, we all accept some people hear perfect pitch and others don't. Clearly its a matter of how the brain processes easily audible information. That is, for some people it is meaningful information, and for others it is more like a kind of blindness (for the tone deaf, that is). Most or all this stuff in dispute is like that. Come visit Auburn sometime and lets see if your eyes don't get opened. I'm dead serious, too. I really mean it.
Also, yes, I understand I may be held to a higher standard by some. Yet at some point I object to having my reputation and credibility attacked. John Curl didn't fight back strongly enough and suffered badly for it. IIUC Walt Jung left this forum and withdrew his published work from the public domain after similar types of attacks and criticism. He had enough. At some point a man has to stand up. If and when that point is reached, then other other side may have to suffer some attacks as well. Always being on the defense is a losing place to be in the long run.
Regarding your claim that Rick and I hear things others can't, maybe so. That's doesn't mean the things are very, very quiet. Hardly that. More likely it means most people's brains ignore such things. Again, we all accept some people hear perfect pitch and others don't. Clearly its a matter of how the brain processes easily audible information. That is, for some people it is meaningful information, and for others it is more like a kind of blindness (for the tone deaf, that is). Most or all this stuff in dispute is like that. Come visit Auburn sometime and lets see if your eyes don't get opened. I'm dead serious, too. I really mean it.
Also, yes, I understand I may be held to a higher standard by some. Yet at some point I object to having my reputation and credibility attacked. John Curl didn't fight back strongly enough and suffered badly for it. IIUC Walt Jung left this forum and withdrew his published work from the public domain after similar types of attacks and criticism. He had enough. At some point a man has to stand up. If and when that point is reached, then other other side may have to suffer some attacks as well. Always being on the defense is a losing place to be in the long run.
Last edited:
Fascinating. I never heard of him, googled and read some really interesting things about him. I sit here astonished that you came up with that, and even moreso that the writers of a movie of that caliber had writers who knew of that phrase and used it.
I follow his style in my home living spaces, with the exception of my basement and attic. Basement tools and equipment, constantly trying to fit everything in place while retaining usefulness, living space needs to be simple.
John
I've been around architects since I was born and when I worked for my dad -- he was the electrical engineering partner in an architectural-engineering firm -- my friends were all young architects. Mies was an iconic figure in their culture; less is more, a daily aphorism. One of my favourite buildings in Toronto is the Toronto Dominion Centre for which he was the design consultant and I often took my lunch to eat in the plaza.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.