I think it is the other way around: high end audio does not care about science, in fact it hates science and uses it just as a source for buzzwords (just check the amount of mentions to quantum mechanics in woo woo audio companies)
Agreed. If the high end reviewers relied on scientific bias-controlled listening tests, they would lose their control over their review process. Science would point the direction, not their commercial needs and egos.
I learned a LOT from careful study of Don Keele's audio reviews. Sad to see that nobody is carrying that torch. No woo woo there at all, and that is probably partly why the magazine folded. The people spending real money on audio are more impressed by colorful BS like you see in stereophile or other mags.
Harman (Toole, Olive, et al) are at least putting forward some science for comparing loudspeakers that appears to correlate to something. It is always likely that the audiophiles will say they are training people to hear what they want them to hear.... That sort of woo is self sustaining, like the natural supplements industry.
Stereophile has had at least one controversial (CD players) failure with ABX. I pretty much stopped reading it when it changed to the bigger size so I don't know if they have tried any more.
You can't blame a guy for trying to make a living. If he has to peddle audible books or freaking Bisquick or whatever to do what he loves doing - and does well, I might add - so be it. He does fascinating talks on what is a fairly "soft" science.
Besides, this is the "21st Century", aren't you pretty much immune to advertisements by now? 😉 On most webpages anything that flashes or moves is something I don't even notice anymore, to the extent that if that sort of device is something I need to interact with, I generally get frustrated and leave.
Bisquick haha
you'd think so, but I'm still surprised everyday it seems. Like when 'the man' forces low level bank employees to push product, it can catch you off-guard and even becomes surreal at times. The visual stuff I'm more tolerant, but on audio podcasts it becomes tiresome esp. before any of the 'meat' is given out.
Sure I can. Depends what he does to make that living.
If its illegal and in particular if it impinges on my welfare or that of my family, are you going to fault me for faulting his chosen means of income production?
I think you need to take a time out and calm down before you injure yourself with one of these apoplectic fits of yours.
What you have done here is take a statement completely out of context and manufactured a reason to be indignant and bombastic. Get over yourself already....
Last edited:
Thank you for faulting me for faulting people who support themselves with illegal acts and in particular acts that impinges on my welfare or that of my family.
That's it, man. Dig in your heels because you know you went far beyond what is reasonable. Show me one thing that David McRaney is doing in his podcast that is illegal and infringes on you and your family.
If you can't find anything, maybe you should tone it down a notch, or ten.
I would imagine that you can't grasp what is logically wrong with the post.
You probably are in a state of mind where you can't tell that the post is almost 100% OFF TOPIC and OUT OF CONTEXT.
I don't even know who David McRaney is, so he's your baggage, not mine.
However, I did check his name and writings out a little, and frankly a lot of what he says seems very helpful and not the least harmful, so now you really have me mystified.
You are starting to catch on, padawan. I posted about a podcast on susceptibility to BS - tangentially relevant to audiophoolery. infinia objected to the ads in David M's podcast. I implied David has to do what he has to do in order to deliver the content for free. Then you took me out of context and exploded in apoplectic rage and I corrected you, whereupon you became even more indignant.
Are we on the same page now?
No, the above paragraph looks to me like it came from outer space.
Your whole interchange with Infinia, and the matter of David M has nothing that I can see to do with the costs of audiophoolery.
That it is somehow centrally relevant to our conversation as you seem to have made it here, suggests to me that I'm never going to be able to converse rationally with you.
There was no distorting of your viewpoint by means of selective quoting as you seem to be suggesting here that you have actually shown.
Other then your anger over what???, there's nothing to see.
Sloppy attempt at deflection, have you had any cognitive tests recently? You might wish to look into it.
...or anyone, apparently. Sad really.
indeed, these are not the droids you are looking for. Move along.
Sure but it is good that they do report.
Then you can be alerted to publications u may not be watching and knowing that go find the publication and read what was actually said and further articles from the authors.
yup
all he ( and any other trolls) is doing is trying to drain your time and energy away from helping other forum folks who could use your knowledge and experience. IGNORE the troll
arny may I suggest you start your own thread about psychoacoustics or whatever and stay out of 'normal' threads for a bit.
since you never got the "plays well with others" box checked off in school or anyplace else I can see.
Last edited:
Yup, its open season on insulting Arny. Everybody pile right on!
Here's a relevant item:
http://archimago.blogspot.com/2016/01/measurements-asus-xonar-essence-one-dsd.html
"
I could tell you that the bass line on "My One & Only Love" on Oscar Peterson Trio's We Get Requests sounded phenomenally deep with immaculate control after I plugged in the MUSES 02. I could say that listening to Ben Webster's tenor sax on "When I Fall In Love" (from The Soul of Ben Webster) sounded remarkable smooth with excellent tonality, as fine analogue recordings and playback should 🙂. I could tell you that Philippe Jaroussky's voice on Caldara In Vienna (Forgotten Castrato Arias) sounded beautifully other-worldly and "present" after inserting the MUSES opamps. I could say that those chaotic bells and chimes on Pink Floyd's "Time" (Dark Side Of The Moon) was fantastic in terms of how palpably real and how wonderfully open the soundstage was. I could say the MUSES 02s were a real improvement over the LM4562NA chips they replaced and how they elevated the standard of the DAC from something that sounds like a US$500 unit to something competing at the US$1000+ level! Yes, I could say all these things because these ideas came to mind while listening here and there over the last 3 months, as I mulled over how I was going to describe what I heard.
But I will not say those things above 🙂. Seriously folks, without the ability to switch between two identical DACs with different opamps installed, the subtle differences I thought I heard are likely the result of selective attention and limitations of echoic memory rather than correlating with objective reality. As Nobel prize laureate Richard Feynman wisely reminded us: "the first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool." That's just the nature of subjectivity. Of course that's not to say subjective opinions are useless, rather, I think it's an acknowledgement that there is a "gradient of certainty". Some things are reasonably obvious and clear without needing to double check as in an A/B test, but when differences are at best subtle, it's honest to not get ahead of ourselves with proclamations of significant differences and flowery language. The music and DAC sounded great before, and certainly I'm quite happy with the sound after the MUSES 02.
"
This is how a well-informed audio experimenter who has his man pants on works under suboptimal conditions.
[/quote]
That would be just what you want - an open forum to spread whatever you weirdness that you make up.
That's because you can't see reality. I've been committeeman and elected officer of fraternal organizations, professional organizations, and municipal boards, for example.
I've been married to the same woman for almost 50 years (odds are you haven't), and have great relationships with my adult kids who in turn have great professional careers and families. I've also been part of the management team where I worked.
Thanks for the insult. Proves one of my points about subjectivists...
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.