rawl99 Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 On 10/06/2020 at 11:00 AM, davewantsmoore said: Art vs science. Objectively in JUST laptime. As you have said, evrything else about the cars is different. Objectivly different. Quantitatively different. Of course, which is why evaluating a car simply on "laptime" is moronic. Why are you even suggesting it? Only an idiot would do what you've suggested. Why did I suggest it? Because it parallels quite nicely with evaluating an audio system (or component) purely on subjective measures. And plenty of people do that it seems Isn’t the key metric for a race car the lap time? If it goes faster and is a pig to drive isn’t that better as an outcome? I would liken that to a super-accurate hyper-detailed audio system —- gotta be better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamaha_man Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 On 12/01/2019 at 1:43 PM, Marc said: Interesting thoughts. Will come back and comment further on this once I have had a good read. Waiting...,,, 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steffen Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 In my experience, storage devices, especially NASes, raise the noise floor. That’s why I keep them out of the listening room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rawl99 Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 On 07/06/2020 at 4:44 PM, aussievintage said: Please calm down. I did not say that at all. “Needs to be conclusively demonstrated first. Why spend time speculating on causes for something based on opinions only?‘ Ok then. Please explain to me what exactly are your words above are saying then? What do you define as conclusive evidence rather than speculation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Marc Posted July 23, 2020 Administrator Share Posted July 23, 2020 Play nice please. It's been proven that it is possible to have differing opinions and to have a healthy debate on StereoNET, if mutual respect is demonstrated. It is possible. @Yamaha_man - never did get around to looking at this more. Soon I will have my reference 2-ch system sorted and can experiment with things like this again. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 2 hours ago, rawl99 said: Isn’t the key metric for a race car the lap time? If it goes faster and is a pig to drive isn’t that better as an outcome? I would liken that to a super-accurate hyper-detailed audio system It's an absolutely woeful analogy. A super accuate hyper detailed audio system doesn't "measure well but sound bad". It measures just like a "super accuate hyper detailed" system. There is a myth which has travelled a very long way that when you remove errors from the playback system so the output signal is a closer resembelence to the input signal (ie. what the artist put on the media) .... then it will sound "bad" "hyper detailed" "cold" "something something". 2 hours ago, rawl99 said: gotta be better Yes, I don't like that sort of error in a playback system either. Levels at anything much below 500Hz are hard to get right in an audio system in a typical room.... and then often above there is where the cabinet diffraciton zone is (more confusion)..... it's no wonder people end up with "hyper detail", or "lack of warmth" ... or "no harmonic body"..... etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 1 hour ago, rawl99 said: Please explain to me what exactly are your words above are saying then? I will translate it as: If the sound changes.... you can demonstrate that it has changed. Just suspend the notion of better, worse, which ones is "correct", etc... for a minute. You can demonstrate that A is different from B. To a zillion times greater resolution than is audible. If it is true, that storage A sounds different to storage B..... then it can be shown. Simply and concicly. "here is the difference". Claims of "you cannot measure everything you can hear" are patently false. Like I said, it CAN be measured..... it may not tell you which is better/worse, etc. or the best choice.... and that may even involve some compromise (as neither may be an accurate copy of the original signal).... but it can be shown. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POV Posted July 24, 2020 Share Posted July 24, 2020 15 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: Claims of "you cannot measure everything you can hear" are patently false. Like I said, it CAN be measured..... it may not tell you which is better/worse, etc. or the best choice.... and that may even involve some compromise (as neither may be an accurate copy of the original signal).... but it can be shown. Absolutely correct! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted July 24, 2020 Share Posted July 24, 2020 8 hours ago, POV said: Absolutely correct! Doesn't mean it's easy.... but if there is a clear audible difference, then it will clearly show up when the signal is recorded. I'd love it if all of these typs of things would change the sound quality. I could put them in the systems I develop, keep them secret, and .... profit?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts