Actually
I believe he has pretty much always been able to do so, and put the asteriks in his sig on his own.
🙄
Ken L
I believe he has pretty much always been able to do so, and put the asteriks in his sig on his own.
🙄
Ken L
Only Joking
Yeah I know - I was just making a little joke about it.
Rodd put in the **** after I made a previous joke about it.
Eric.
Yeah I know - I was just making a little joke about it.
Rodd put in the **** after I made a previous joke about it.
Eric.
Subjective vs. Objective
When I was attempting to create a solid state amp that really satisfies musicians I began by following my engineering training and experience. When things were not working I checked my engineering experience for the logical rigor of theoretical mathematics. As you might expect, engineering runs out of rigor shortly after circuit and signal analysis. The rest is opinion and consequently subjective.
It is curious that engineering theory was being created at the height of the Behaviorist philosophy movement - which claimed the subjective was no good and only the objective is worth while. Of course, this let engineering eliminate the non-linearity inherent in hearing and concentracte on accuracy. That leads rapidly to linearity and that leads to mathematics which is much more managable than non-linear differential equations. (Remember back then analysis was by solved equations or graphical.) Even though the Behaviorist movement died about 50 years ago, its effects are still around.
On the other hand musicians can hear differences although they do have trouble communicating what they hear partially because engineers have a view point annointed by academia. I claim that if you can really hear it then it can be measured and created a number of novel tests to measure certain aspects of amps.
I find that the objective view is based upon a subjective characterization (at least the approximation that hearing is linear) and is consequently is subjective itself...
When I was attempting to create a solid state amp that really satisfies musicians I began by following my engineering training and experience. When things were not working I checked my engineering experience for the logical rigor of theoretical mathematics. As you might expect, engineering runs out of rigor shortly after circuit and signal analysis. The rest is opinion and consequently subjective.
It is curious that engineering theory was being created at the height of the Behaviorist philosophy movement - which claimed the subjective was no good and only the objective is worth while. Of course, this let engineering eliminate the non-linearity inherent in hearing and concentracte on accuracy. That leads rapidly to linearity and that leads to mathematics which is much more managable than non-linear differential equations. (Remember back then analysis was by solved equations or graphical.) Even though the Behaviorist movement died about 50 years ago, its effects are still around.
On the other hand musicians can hear differences although they do have trouble communicating what they hear partially because engineers have a view point annointed by academia. I claim that if you can really hear it then it can be measured and created a number of novel tests to measure certain aspects of amps.
I find that the objective view is based upon a subjective characterization (at least the approximation that hearing is linear) and is consequently is subjective itself...
Mentalists
I forgot to mention that if the Mentalists who held sway some 50 years before the Behaviorists, had been dominate at the time of the the foundation of electronics, attitudes would be substantially different.
I forgot to mention that if the Mentalists who held sway some 50 years before the Behaviorists, had been dominate at the time of the the foundation of electronics, attitudes would be substantially different.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.