Originally Posted by jwatte
It seems to me that arnyk uses the same kind of arguing to defend redbook, as Rob and others use to defend ridiculous cables.
Then I'm in pretty good company!
It is clear that you have your standards that many of us think are based on prejudice and rumor, and not on any silly thing like proper listening tests or an understanding of the meaning of the reelvant technology.
If I really am sure of my thing, and am comfortable with actual analytical discussion, what I do is meet the discussion on the terms of the discussion, with the actual subject matter, ignoring any small formal failings like typos or whatnot, stating explicitly what I assume, if I have to assume something about a particular claim. I believe I have done this in all of my statements and claims. I wish the same could be said for all the counter-arguments.
The counterpoint is that some find you to be a legend in your own mind. ;-)
If you seriously think you have some kind of superior command of audio technology, then you are in a logic-proof box.
People who argue in the other way tend to set of alarm bells for me -- they are too sure, and too unwilling to discuss the actual claims
LOL! If you want to talk actual claims, then bring them on. I don't know if you are capable of understanding that this of yours post I'm responding to is completely free of significant or relevant technical content. Some of us might consider it to be more like a, well, ahh, err.. Pity Party.
and instead keep veering into semi-related pseudo-arguments.
Or in this most recent offering from you, totally unrelated non-arguments! ;-)
That's a pretty sure sign of dogma (or, if you will, religion,) and actually do nothing to convince me of their position.
You might be unconvincable.
On the relevance of phase, in addition to the difference between linear phase and IIR phase in EQ, I also posit that the ears use phase, even more than loudness, for stereo localization of sounds.
Oh, so now you get to posit your favorite hobby-horse beliefs based on what, and the annals of psaychoacoustics can take a flying leap?
How about some relevant tasty supporting documentation from Zwicker and Fastl?
This has been used and exploited for twenty to thirty years, and extends way up into the treble.
Except for the fact that above a KHz or two, the ears loose the ability to sense phase. They become spectrum analyzers that output just the real part of the transformation. If the phase difference doesn't create an corresponding frequency response issue, then its not very audible or totally inaudible.
Thus, relative phase between the ears matters.
Since nobody in their right mind intentionally puts a IIR filter in one channel and a FIR in the other and expects accurate reproduction, what are you talking about?
Please restrict yourself to common sense situations such as those where people put the most identical filters they can in both channels.
It is an observable truth that phase shift within broad limits is inaudible providing it is identically applied to both channels, which BTW is what most people do in components like digital music players and the DSPs in AVRs.