Why would you consider it to be unfair?
It is a comment based on my experience in this and other forums.
I've supplied my own results (one wrt coupling capacitors made from different film types, i.e. polyester vs. polypropylene and our preamplifier test results), a long time ago, I've reported the results from an interconnect dbt, done during the high end fair in germany with a larger sample size as usual (~107 participants), we had reports by another guy about dbts they had done on Opamps in different cases (iirc Bob Pease did participate) and we had dbt results on two different preamplifiers supplied by PMA.
Did it change anything?
Jakob -- it presupposes no one ever changes their opinion based on evidence, which *is* unfair. Unfair for all parties.
I personally don't remember seeing those results, then again, there's so much that passes through here and I ostensibly do have a job. 🙂
I personally don't remember seeing those results, then again, there's so much that passes through here and I ostensibly do have a job. 🙂
The annual production of bauxite in Greece is over 2,000,000 tons
MINING GREECE BAUXITE
As 90% of the mining of bauxite takes place in underground exploitations, it’s literally an esoteric activity 😀
Annual orange production is close to 1M metric tons
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainap...Citrus Annual 2013_Rome_Greece_12-17-2013.pdf
George
I think we have a semantic difference here: one has to understand circuit topology to come up with a circuit in the first place, before listening is even possible. This is what I am talking about. Now tweaking afterwards, sure, one would be stupid not to listen to a piece of audio gear after designing it, but that is secondary to proper circuit design in the first place.
Cheers!
Howie
Hey Bob,
And like some others here, you are honest enough to state you do not know the mechanism by which the difference occurred. The fact that you were able to reliably make a change means there has to be a difference.
In order to engineer a solution to the issue you found would of course mean defining the variable, and in general require more than just listening...this is really all I am saying...I am in the same boat at this point in my life...I hear some differences between otherwise respectable gear, but I am too dang busy and don't have the equipment any more to measure all parameters which could effect the change.
This is one of the reason why my contributions here tend to be RHC; in my previous job I HAD to nail down parameters which affected audio quality so I had a pretty great budget for test equipment and personnel to get testing and (re)engineering done.
It doesn't make me any less interested in hearing the results of other's testing these days, hopefully pushing the state of the art ...or even the hypothesizing about potential factors.
Cheers!
Howie
Technical education is good, but without feedback from critical hearing, it can be lost regarding audio design.
And in Guinea, 19.3 million tons, so what? Apparently, all the same, bauxite is just a rock, and oranges are just fruits on trees and not secret esoteric knowledge.
Список стран по добыче бокситов — Википедия
Производство (сбор) апельсинов по странам мира
Works for Paul McGowan, PS Audio, multiple YT videos of him opening identical blank white envelopes containing "can of worms" questions. I'm afraid his videos don't inspire me with confidence, and I can't imagine how they would in any but the most gullible.
And tonal qualities arise as well in monophonic playback systems, where there's no interaural differences to hear, so you'd tend to listen for the sonic character more, because besides dynamics, that's all there is. Trained over years of listening along the tonal aspect, I can well imagine an experienced professional would hear tonal anomalies in my system that I just dont.
I'm a space perspective listener, which requires stereo channels and time-coherent speakers. I can easily be swept into the delight of the panorama of sounds before me, without a care for the some particular tone being a little strident. Or the dynamics being flatter than pondwater (or even the song being that good). I imagine someone like me could be trained to flip the system into mono and listen for this, this, and this - for starters. Then perhaps I'd be able to begin to hear aspects of sound systems others lay claim to be able to.
In my system, I'd have to swap speaker leads to listen in mono, as long as the amp doesnt complain. Maybe should look at it like "fasting" - something you just do regularly.
I'm a space perspective listener, which requires stereo channels and time-coherent speakers. I can easily be swept into the delight of the panorama of sounds before me, without a care for the some particular tone being a little strident. Or the dynamics being flatter than pondwater (or even the song being that good). I imagine someone like me could be trained to flip the system into mono and listen for this, this, and this - for starters. Then perhaps I'd be able to begin to hear aspects of sound systems others lay claim to be able to.
In my system, I'd have to swap speaker leads to listen in mono, as long as the amp doesnt complain. Maybe should look at it like "fasting" - something you just do regularly.
Last edited:
Didn't Mark say he had to learn to hear two channel stereo? That's interesting, and possibly shows how focus can change your perception. However, we have two ears........
Yesterday, my friends and I listened to music through various speaker cables and connecting cables. Amplifier S100 / S200. Speakers B & W804s. CD player - AudioNet. Cables Van Den Hul, ACROLINK, AudioQuest and homemade and factory interconnects. AudioQuest and Van Den Hul cables use carbon black in addition to insulation, as well as a shielding external screen. AudioQuest cables also use mono-conductor wires of different diameters. The difference between all the cables is very noticeable.
No, it doesn't. 🙂
Reminds me to this classic:
YouTube
Not at all; I was just responding to scott wurcer's post (which I've quoted)
and mentioned this kind of discussion in which mainly the same bunch of members is engaged.
I did not intend to speculate about others only reading but not participating, or human kind in general. 🙂
Of course, but now you do know about it, don't you? 🙂
Even like snowflakes. Like sugar crystals, there are actually no identical ones. Even the taste of whiskey is different. And even the taste of vodka and even water from different sources is different.
Magic is not witchcraft. Magic is when you are confident in your feelings and experience. And the devil, as you know, is hiding in small details.
Magic is not witchcraft. Magic is when you are confident in your feelings and experience. And the devil, as you know, is hiding in small details.
Last edited: