I'm aware of the usefulness of sims, but it often looks to me as a replacement of the real thing.Pavel said:
May I write what Diyaudio means to me?
It's a hobby. It's about having fun. I like to build things. I like to touch parts, smell solder fumes, cut my fingers at sharp edges or occasionally burn them!
Sometimes I can't hold my feet still and take cheap shots at someone or drop a witty comment...this is ok for me and part of the game.
Nothing against theory and intellectual debates, sometimes I like it.
But if it perverts to babbling and purely keyboard bending I'm out.
What about you? Quo vadis diyaudio.com?
Regards
The song doesn't change. You change! In fact you get more familiar. This means that your perception is never the same. What if you are in a good mood or if you are in a bad mood? Is it the same? And so on....
There are too many uncontrolled variables to be repeatable and thus scientific.
Last edited:
So we get a panel of trained listeners to tell the rest of the world what is good. B*** comes along, get's it's own panel of trained monkeys, oops listeners, and says the NEW octagonal tiny thingies are the best loudspeakers since God gave us a voice and you are bach to square one.
The journey here is as important as the destination and we are all on different tracks!
Terry
The journey here is as important as the destination and we are all on different tracks!
Terry
There's a difference in sound perception and how we react on an emotional level. Audio reproduction has nothing to do with the latter. You might want to visit Sean Olive's blog for some very good readings: Audio Musings by Sean Olive
Best, Markus
Terry I understand what you are saying, but there are a great many "classic" designs that still today are highly sought after like the ARC SP-10, the first Krell amplifers to name just a couple. These are even brought back as DIY projects (see the Krell KSA-50 and KSA-100 threads here on DIYAudio) because of their superior performance and differences vs the rest that is and was available. Not many audio components can say this, not even ones from the said companies above. Somehow magic happens and it is not truly understood completely or else these companies would expand upon it. These are the types of things that need to be looked at in depth to find out why they are still so revered, even after all of these years have passed. There is something in there that was accidental at best, but did make a huge difference somehow that is not obvious to anyone.
Some things are just so much better than the norm that they never lose their value or interest in them because they are that much better to a great number of people. Those designs reached their status because of their sound, not because of anything else.
I feel a compulsion to "chum the board" with this quote; it makes me laugh so hard that I cry. 😀
Failing that... use retail employees 🙂
(that graph in Toole's book cracked me up 😀 )
Cheers!
And money are donated so that the hard working forum management can keep up with speed, and make a place fore pictures, schematics, and all the other stuff of real value
And now this
Yet another pointless thread with useless arguments
Issues covered over and over again in other long threads
In plain american english, I think it sucks
Well, if its about being bored, why not do or say something that at least makes sense
I wouldnt mind if threads like this would not only be closed, but to be completely deleted, forever
And now this
Yet another pointless thread with useless arguments
Issues covered over and over again in other long threads
In plain american english, I think it sucks
Well, if its about being bored, why not do or say something that at least makes sense
I wouldnt mind if threads like this would not only be closed, but to be completely deleted, forever
Last edited:
The audio chain is invariant without the listener. So you can apply all the physical/mathematical science you like. However a microphone, an oscilloscope or any other instrument don't know what music is. It's just a physical signal without any additional meaning. This is audio reproduction if you like but it is not music! I am not interested in this subject alone.
It is different if you consider the listener in the chain.
The listener makes the system time-variant. So physics declines because the fundamental requirements for its application do not exist anymore.
Music is emotion and music reproduction is like live music. Although not exactly the same.
P.S.
That approach for room correction is surpassed for me.
I am not saying that. Rather the contrary.
The software should (and could) be massively improved, for example.
Nowadays some vinyls from the 50's-60's are still the best. Maybe those sound engineers where genius however they didn't have too many tools to make "mistakes".....
Last edited:
I, personally, like these types threads. They provide insight into the personalities that post. They bring out questions that I might never consider on my own. They provide answers that might inspire more questions.
I would hope that these types of threads would inspire self exploration by individuals to make their own decisions, instead of those made for them by others. Audio reproduction while defined by science, is still in many ways an art when it comes to subtle aspects of the parts that make the whole.
Maybe what happened in my last thread is what is perplexing some people. I posted on the 5th Nov. about Loudness Controls and during the course of the thread Don Hills posted and I believe said that he believed that Loudness controls should always be used in the playback chain. Don has been very helpful in this thread but I thought that his opinion about the playback chain may open a can of worms as so many these days want as little as possible in the signal path. I thought this would lead to much discussion and probably some good ideas. After all it was a practical, do it yourself kind of question.
That thread is now on page four whilst this one rambles on, spreading across the spectrum like an algal bloom. It is not the first time that practical questions have met with nil to virtually nil response and I know there has been other comment on this in the past. My 2 cents worth.
jamikl
That thread is now on page four whilst this one rambles on, spreading across the spectrum like an algal bloom. It is not the first time that practical questions have met with nil to virtually nil response and I know there has been other comment on this in the past. My 2 cents worth.
jamikl
No! Just a loudspeaker that can preserve the original music in my conditioned room. Conditioning means the room does not add anything otherwise it is no more high fidelity!
IMO there is only one way for conditioning: passive absorption. The other known methods do not comply with the concept of high fidelity.
The quality of the software is very important obviously but is also an "independent" matter.
Cheers,
45
Last edited:
I thought that there might be some interest in that thread as well and was surprised when there was not. I was interested in seeing if anyone had any practical approaches to it. The fact that we are so aware of the Fletcher-Munson effect in our hearing and that it makes it virtually impossible to create any speaker system that will sound the same to any person at all volume settings ought to make it of more interest. I know that I listen at varying levels, not just "concert" level. Yet this thread gets the activity. Go figure.
Dave
I like the Wikipedia definition of music (although not the English version):
"Music is the art of organizing sound structures in time, which affects the human psyche.
Sound structures are made of acoustic waves with properly selected frequencies and amplitudes, and the silence between them. The purpose of music is to impact the consciousness of the listener. It is the phenomenon perceived subjectively, depending on the individual preferences, past experiences, social values, current mood and many other factors."
Google Translate
"Music is the art of organizing sound structures in time, which affects the human psyche.
Sound structures are made of acoustic waves with properly selected frequencies and amplitudes, and the silence between them. The purpose of music is to impact the consciousness of the listener. It is the phenomenon perceived subjectively, depending on the individual preferences, past experiences, social values, current mood and many other factors."
Google Translate
- Status
- Not open for further replies.