Stupid question regarding speaker wire... - Page 6 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 206 Old 05-02-2012, 08:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 6,306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by dknightd View Post

Some babies maybe - but not all. and what does this have to do with the OP's ? ????????

I think we scared the OP away a long time ago...this thread has been rambling for quite a while. I'm just responding to another post. Ignore it if you like...

lovinthehd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 05:00 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyfi View Post

And I suppose your in the Everything sounds the same camp?

As compared to being in the "Everything sounds different" camp?

Quote:
A $100 AVR will sound every bit as good as a $1000 amp.

It might, or it might not. Why does a difference in price tag necessarily cause the sound to be different with the more expensive equipment providing the better sound?

Are aware of the cases where some expensive products turn out to be far less costly products with different labels or different cases?


Quote:
Again, great, your audio hobby is on the cheap and you can't hear the differences anyway.

So you want to play the class warfare card?

Are you unaware of the scientific evidence that shows that one performance reaches certain now readily achievable levels, both differences and improvements can't be heard?

Quote:
I have 3 different amps that when placed between the same pre and speakers using the same CDP and music, produce different sounding output, regardless of the specs, price, or quality of amp.

A meaningless exercise unless levels are matched closely and the identity of the alternatives is concealed from the listener.

Quote:
I won't use the word "better" here, just different and 3 different people will prefer 3 different sounding outputs. Why? Because we all hear the same things a little differently.

As individuals we hear the same things differently, depending on the circumstances. This is where many perceptions of audible differences that defy science come from.

Quote:
You know as well as I do that is is an ongoing and never ending argument.

For many, the argument ends with a proper inspection of the relevant facs.

Quote:
Nobody can prove that numbers on a paper sound better than certain gear with lesser numbers.

That is a false claim, depending on which numbers and what range of values you are talking about. The irony of present technology is that often expensive equipment measures far more poorly.

Quote:
What do you use to listen to music? Only one correct answer, your ears.

The above seems to be a very naive and is certainly a very incorrect answer. In fact we hear with our brains, with the ears only acting as intermediaries. The brain is arguably the most powerful organ in the body. It interprets the senses in conjunction with past experiences including what we think we have learned.
arnyk is offline  
post #153 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 05:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chikoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragonfyr View Post

"Tim Cook: iPhone Has 5% Of Mobile Phone Marketshare Worldwide"


Whoopie...

I really don't care what the local 'neighborhood' penetration is - especially considering the Much larger world market where cell phones play an even larger societal role and considering the absurd price differential for Apple products that will insure their niche performance for years to come..


And thanks to Apple's elitist marketing schema for computers they are literally squandering that market opportunity as well.

u think I don't know how to read?
5% of all mobile phones, which includes regular mobile phones as well
chikoo is offline  
post #154 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 06:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Are you unaware of the scientific evidence that shows that one performance reaches certain now readily achievable levels, both differences and improvements can't be heard?

I seem to recall having read and heard that statement about 40 years ago, scientific evidence and all.

They were incorrect back then, how can we be sure now?

j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #155 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 06:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 260
Quote:
But the question still remains : if a products fails known specs and measurements, is it a poor performer and not worth going after?

What does "fails known specs and measurements" mean? You continue to demonstrate that you have no real grasp of the issues you're straining to discuss.

If you need a product to meet a certain technical performance standard, then any product that fails to meet that standard should not be considered. For products that exceed that standard, the extent to which they do so is often irrelevant.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #156 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 06:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Are you unaware of the scientific evidence that shows that one performance reaches certain now readily achievable levels, both differences and improvements can't be heard?

I seem to recall having read and heard that statement about 40 years ago, scientific evidence and all.

40 years ago was 1972. We started doing ABX tests in 1975 and found that it was often true. By the 1990s we found that it was true for many kinds of components almost all the time.

For example:

http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/ba...l_thinking.htm

What reliable counter-evidence do you have?
arnyk is offline  
post #157 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 07:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

40 years ago was 1972. We started doing ABX tests in 1975 and found that it was often true. By the 1990s we found that it was true for many kinds of components almost all the time.

"We"...as in you represent the entire scientific and engineering community?

"We" are mimicking that wise sage who once proclaimed that the patent office can be closed because all that can be thought of and patented has been?

I note you used the weasel word "almost", whereas you actually posted an absolute...and I quote:

Quote:
both differences and improvements can't be heard?

That's pretty absolute, it's good to see you backing off that and instead now claiming "almost".

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

What reliable counter-evidence do you have?

Do you think that question absolves you of supporting your statement?

Your schtick is to always flip the argument rather than prove something.

I'm onto you. It ain't working.

Cheers, j

ps..arny, your link..would you elaborate on why you believe it is a counter argument. All I see is discussion of stats...we all know there's lies, D### lies, and statistics..

pps. I almost forgot to mention...you presented a strawman argument as proof of your statement? Please, that's just too obvious.

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #158 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chikoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

What does "fails known specs and measurements" mean? You continue to demonstrate that you have no real grasp of the issues you're straining to discuss.

If you need a product to meet a certain technical performance standard, then any product that fails to meet that standard should not be considered. For products that exceed that standard, the extent to which they do so is often irrelevant.

Actually, it is the opposite. I am so far ahead in thinking that technical folks who are tied down to specific specs, parameters and measuring equipment fail to grasp the holistic picture I am trying to paint here. Not the first time, and I am not fazed by this abuse either.

For example: Hot peppers.
Every one has been assigned a number on the Scoville scale.
It doesn't mean that this is to be used to determine which one is a better or worse pepper. You can only determine which one is hotter, a relative term.
There are many other parameters that control the overall taste of the pepper, but are mostly never taken into consideration. That is where I am trying to emphasize. The specs and measurements are focussing on what has been pushed over the years as the determining factors. What if somebody has tweaked a not so popular or hidden(not yet publicized) parameter to make a speaker/amplifier sound better at the cost of degrading an existing parameter that everybody is measuring?

Which is why I keep on repeating that scientists have not yet fully grasped how we listen (blasphemy). It is still evolving. I believe that there are many more parameters which have yet to be discovered, or have been discovered that for whatever reasons the scientific community has chose to disregard those. It is possible that somebody has stumbled upon what they have not yet discovered, or chose to disregard as the key to improvement and is using it to get the edge on the competition, even at the risk of getting jeered at by the technical community who are stuck with looking at measurements for the publicized parameters and putting down the product because it measures inferior to other products out there.

Essentially, it is a magic trick. Everybody is staring at the girl in the leotard while....
chikoo is offline  
post #159 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 10:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by chikoo View Post

Which is why I keep on repeating that scientists have not yet fully grasped how we listen (blasphemy).

Unless there is someone who has fully grasped how we listen, you using as some kind of standard would be an example of an excluded middle argument.

Quote:


It is still evolving.

That happens to be the nature of science - all findings of science are provisional until we find something better. You seem to be agreeing with science, which seems strange since you were just criticizing it quite forcefully.

Quote:


I believe that there are many more parameters which have yet to be discovered, or have been discovered that for whatever reasons the scientific community has chose to disregard those.

That would be a truism because knowing all of the parameters requires omnipotence.

I think that pretty well sweeps away your argument. ;-)
arnyk is offline  
post #160 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 10:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chikoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Unless there is someone who has fully grasped how we listen, you using as some kind of standard would be an example of an excluded middle argument.



That happens to be the nature of science - all findings of science are provisional until we find something better. You seem to be agreeing with science, which seems strange since you were just criticizing it quite forcefully.



That would be a truism because knowing all of the parameters requires omnipotence.

I think that pretty well sweeps away your argument. ;-)


Yes. I do agree in science. I have a background in science. Enough to know that we are not omnipotent, as you said. Good word there. Even doctor's who can save a man from dying or give him a new lease on life, whole heartedly agree that they can only do so much and leave the rest to God. No I don't necessarily subscribe to belief in God's existence but it does provide an insight to how much we have learnt and how much we still do not know.

There is a lot to learn. My stance is before blowing away anybody, it is worthwhile to be a little humble and maybe try to glean more information on why they believe in what they believe, even if it is contradictory to what is the expected norm. Is that so wrong?
chikoo is offline  
post #161 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 10:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

That happens to be the nature of science - all findings of science are provisional until we find something better.

We are in complete agreement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

You seem to be agreeing with science, which seems strange since you were just criticizing it quite forcefully.

Actually, he said:
Quote:


I believe that there are many more parameters which have yet to be discovered, or have been discovered that for whatever reasons the scientific community has chose to disregard those.

So he is not bringing science under scrutiny, just the scientists in the community.


Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

That would be a truism because knowing all of the parameters requires omnipotence.

He did not say "all the parameters". He said "many more parameters". A statement of "omnipotence" is simply a diversionary tactic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I think that pretty well sweeps away your argument. ;-)

Actually, you failed to do that.

j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #162 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by chikoo View Post

There is a lot to learn. My stance is before blowing away anybody, it is worthwhile to be a little humble and maybe try to glean more information on why they believe in what they believe, even if it is contradictory to what is the expected norm. Is that so wrong?

Which..the humble part, or trying to glean more information? Because, if I recall the definition of "humble", this gem doesn't actually fit very well..

Quote:
Originally Posted by chikoo View Post

I am so far ahead in thinking...

BTW, don't let the fact that I happen to agree with a lot of what you said lull you into thinking that I won't bust your chops if I feel ya needs it..

j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #163 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 10:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chikoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

Which..the humble part, or trying to glean more information? Because, if I recall the definition of "humble", this gem doesn't actually fit very well..



BTW, don't let the fact that I happen to agree with a lot of what you said lull you into thinking that I won't bust your chops if I feel ya needs it..

j

Humble as I intend to be, the online discussions do get the worse out of me sometimes. Apologize sincerely if that has happened. Not intended, yet guilty.

anyways, I was reading the Richard Clark webpage and this caught my attention

"The EQ is most likely to be used when comparing a tube amplifier (which exhibits slight high frequency rolloff) to a solid state amplifier ."

So differences do exist in SQ between the tube amps and Solid state amps.

But what made me smirk was how non-nonchalant was the approach in which the offer to make them sound similar was made before making the ABX test. Hello...come again. If you are going to make them sound almost the same, what is the point of the test?
chikoo is offline  
post #164 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 11:54 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by chikoo View Post

Humble as I intend to be, the online discussions do get the worse out of me sometimes. Apologize sincerely if that has happened. Not intended, yet guilty.

Do you know the antonym for humble? Here's a post that defines it. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=707
diomania is offline  
post #165 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 12:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post

Do you know the antonym for humble? Here's a post that defines it. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=707

Hey thanks...I forgot that I stated that I will speak as an expert only on topics in which I am an expert...a rule you clearly see no need to follow.....

You forget the best parts, you know..the ones where you spout sillyness and useless verbage..like this current post.

You really do need a life..playing the fool on an internet forum is not a life..comic relief for us yes, but not worth consideration.

j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #166 of 206 Old 05-03-2012, 12:34 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by chikoo View Post

anyways, I was reading the Richard Clark webpage and this caught my attention

"The EQ is most likely to be used when comparing a tube amplifier (which exhibits slight high frequency rolloff) to a solid state amplifier ."

So differences do exist in SQ between the tube amps and Solid state amps.

There are so many different kinds of amplifiers, some well designed, some poorly designed, at all power and price levels, that the idea that they all sound the same is obviously untrue. People like Richard Clark have never denied that some amplifiers sound different.

Rather, the question that is being studied is whether or not there are mysterious or remarkable instances of amplifiers sounding different. By mysterious, it is meant that there would be audible differences for which Science has no explanations. There are some who claim that such audible differences exist.

It is well known that sufficiently large frequency response differences cause equipment to sound different. After all, there are audio production devices called equalizers whose purpose in life is to change frequency response in audible ways.

Some amplifiers, particularly tubed amplifiers that lack a technical feature that is known as loop feedback, may provide a high source impedance to the loudspeakers they drive, which results in varying frequency response that depends on the impedance curve of the loudspeaker. Audible variations due to this cause are generally considered to be design faults.

Quote:


But what made me smirk was how non-nonchalant was the approach in which the offer to make them sound similar was made before making the ABX test. Hello...come again. If you are going to make them sound almost the same, what is the point of the test?

This comment suggests to me that you don't understand the background of this controversy. It has been a claim by some all along, that there are amplifiers that "measure the same, but sound different." This is another way of claiming that the amplifier has mysterious performance characteristics.

If adjusting away obvious and easy-to-measure characteristics like in-use frequency response eliminates audible differences, then the audible differences are explained by Science and are therefore not mysterious or exceptional in any way.

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

"His challenge is an offer of $10,000 of his own money to anyone who could identify which of two amplifiers was which, by listening only, under a set of rules that he conceived to make sure they both measure “good enough” and are set up the same. Reports are that thousands of people have taken the test, and none has passed the test. Nobody has been able to show an audible difference between two amps under the test rules."
arnyk is offline  
post #167 of 206 Old 05-04-2012, 06:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Nice post...some comments..

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Rather, the question that is being studied is whether or not there are mysterious or remarkable instances of amplifiers sounding different. By mysterious, it is meant that there would be audible differences for which Science has no explanations. There are some who claim that such audible differences exist.

I would further break "mysterious" into at least three categories.

1. Explanations which do indeed exist but have not been considered.

2. Explanations not yet understood and needing research.

3. Magic. Not Arthur Clark's magic, Uri Geller's.

In case 1, EMC and loop coupling problems can rear their ugly head, causing system response deviations which are found on the test bench because the setup is significantly different from the final system arrangement. Such is the destiny of unbalanced interchassis connections, as well as inadequately designed balanced. Bench testing may also be less sensitive at finding amp anomolies created by four quadrant operation with real speakers. Be wary of placing case 3 and indeed case 2's into this.

In case 2, well, how does one explain what is not understood?? One must be wary of placing case 3 scenarios into this. I've seen many "subjective" types do this.

In case 3...this is the case which many people who consider themselves "objective" will use a knee jerk reaction to categorize case 1 scenario's.

Your previous link which included the green felt tip pen CD tweak? I've admitted in the past that whoever thought that one up really did do some homework on propagation velocity and wavelength when it comes to the polycarbonate of the disk. So they did choose the correct color for the "free space wavelength" at that velocity within the polycarb, but not at that frequency. Absorbtion at the correct frequency outside the polycarb requires the correct color/frequency, as the green pigment does not care what the wavelength of the light is in the attached media. This was a case of misapplication of some really good physics.

Cheers, j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #168 of 206 Old 05-04-2012, 06:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post


I would further break "mysterious" into at least three categories.

1. Explanations which do indeed exist but have not been considered.

To me that is about personal education. IME most of the people who raise this issue are they themselves not well-informed about what we already know.
Quote:



2. Explanations not yet understood and needing research.

While these always have the potential to exist, how much attention needs to be paid relates to how severe and frequent they actually are.
Quote:



3. Magic. Not Arthur Clark's magic, Uri Geller's.

I lump that with (1&2)
Quote:



In case 1, EMC and loop coupling problems can rear their ugly head, causing system response deviations which are found on the test bench because the setup is significantly different from the final system arrangement. Such is the destiny of unbalanced interchassis connections, as well as inadequately designed balanced. Bench testing may also be less sensitive at finding amp anomolies created by four quadrant operation with real speakers. Be wary of placing case 3 and indeed case 2's into this.

IMO it is up to the test bench and its users to understand and manage any and all asymmetries between the bench environment and actual use.

IME this is a two-way street. IME, once the test bench is set up so that it doesn't add any grounding problems, it may actually be more favorable to the UUT's with grounding problems than real life.

Metallic unbalanced interconnections are IME always a grounding problem waiting to happen. In many cases its hard to find a power amp or receiver that won't knock a media player's dynamic range below spec just because of grounding problems.

The trend in home audio systems appears to be minimize grounding problems by switching over to digital interconnections that they themselves are resistant to nominal grounding problems.

We both know that HDMI interconnections are balanced at the physical link level. Toslink has always been inherently resistant to grounding problems. SPDIF was always supposed to be used with transformers and often is.

Finally, the classic solution to analog grounding problems has long been transformers. Radio Shack and many stores like them sell appropriate transformers with very useful performance for reasonable prices.
arnyk is offline  
post #169 of 206 Old 05-04-2012, 08:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

To me that is about personal education. IME most of the people who raise this issue are they themselves not well-informed about what we already know.

Try attending a high level EMC presentation..you would be surprised to find out what you did not know.

Or even better still, try giving a high level EMC presentation to an audience of engineers, physicists, and scientists. You would be very surprised to hear the questions..

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

IMO it is up to the test bench and its users to understand and manage any and all asymmetries between the bench environment and actual use.

We are in complete agreement. Unfortunately, most of the understanding is just not there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

IME this is a two-way street. IME, once the test bench is set up so that it doesn't add any grounding problems, it may actually be more favorable to the UUT's with grounding problems than real life.

Bingo. And given a test bench setup which favors a UUT with grounding problems, and a user who claims to hear the difference...what happens? Typically, the test bench results will be used as proof there is no difference..so it's all in the user's mind.

This is precisely why I questioned your use of this particular sentence..
Quote:
Are you unaware of the scientific evidence that shows that one performance reaches certain now readily achievable levels, both differences and improvements can't be heard?

As you've now agreed, the test bench can indeed mislead, especially if there is a grounding issue which only surfaces in the field. In that specific case, identical numbers at an arbitrary level on the test bench WILL NOT accurately predict an audibility discernment in the field.

It is ALSO the reason I have recommended bench tests which push currents between the input ground and the wall outlet safety ground... It is one of many tests which need doing, but are not. Technological extensions of the Bill Whitlock diode/resistor/pin 1 test.

edit: Note that Bill's test is only an IR drop test of a device's INPUT.. Why is it (incorrectly) assumed that the pin 1 problem is limited to the input of the downstream device??? Or even that it is only an IR problem???

edit: There are far more technical tests which also need doing, but let's walk first..

cheers, j

ps..an excellent discourse we are having. Thank you.

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #170 of 206 Old 05-04-2012, 09:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post


Bingo. And given a test bench setup which favors a UUT with grounding problems, and a user who claims to hear the difference...what happens? Typically, the test bench results will be used as proof there is no difference..so it's all in the user's mind.

On balance, when we do ABX DBTs, we try to duplicate the user's setup, even going so far as to do the DBT in the user's system.

As part of ABXing, some test equipment does get used. Do we find unexpected flaws and artifacts?

You betcha!
arnyk is offline  
post #171 of 206 Old 05-04-2012, 01:51 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 234
Here we go again...
Ratman is online now  
post #172 of 206 Old 05-08-2012, 05:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post

Here we go again...

What a useless comment.

Perhaps a useful post with technical content for a change? Or, am I asking too much?

j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #173 of 206 Old 05-08-2012, 07:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 234
Not really.

Just because a comment is "technical", doesn't make it "useful" when a thread drifts off-topic.

Perhaps personal knowledge competitions between the usual suspects should be taken offline. Or is that asking too much?
Ratman is online now  
post #174 of 206 Old 05-08-2012, 08:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post

Not really.

Just because a comment is "technical", doesn't make it "useful" when a thread drifts off-topic.

Perhaps personal knowledge competitions between the usual suspects should be taken offline. Or is that asking too much?


You are NOT the content police. You are not the "personal knowledge" moderator. You are not the enforcer here to make sure discussion remains within the brackets of what YOU consider to be the topic.

In this case you are a lurker providing no relevant discussion nor technical information.

And you do not speak for all.

You are under no obligation to view a thread. If you don't like it, don't post.

j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #175 of 206 Old 05-08-2012, 09:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hd_newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 2,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

You are NOT the content police. You are not the enforcer here to make sure discussion remains within the brackets of what YOU consider to be the topic.

but you are?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

What a useless comment.

hd_newbie is offline  
post #176 of 206 Old 05-08-2012, 10:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd_newbie View Post

but you are?

Nope. Never claimed to be.

So lets see.

The statement "here we go again" was an attempt at embarrassing others to stop posting.

Now you are claiming that describing that one upsmanship attempt at denigrating as useless....is policing?

Not even remotely accurate.

Your attempt is also inadequate for the task.

Please, either read content correctly, or don't comment. Do not feed the glib commentary disguised as "concern for fellow readers...

edit: and attempts at derailing threads via this type of comment?...transparent..

j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #177 of 206 Old 05-08-2012, 11:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,266
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd_newbie View Post

but you are?

the ignore function is your friend
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #178 of 206 Old 05-08-2012, 11:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,677
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post

the ignore function is your friend

The ignore function forgot my birthday last month. Some friend!

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #179 of 206 Old 05-09-2012, 06:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post

the ignore function is your friend

It can also be seen as an immature way to deal with what you don't care to read or hear. The new tech age equivalent to sticking your fingers in your ears and repeating "I can't hear you".

I will admit that I have indeed used the function in the past, but I now believe it is only a stopgap measure on the path to maturity. (heaven forbid I choose something which could possibly impede my proceeding along that path) (I note the lack of a "target" smiley..)

Randy...I see that classified (1) in your posting information field. What is that all about, I've never seen it before.

cheers, j

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #180 of 206 Old 05-09-2012, 07:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

Randy...I see that classified (1) in your posting information field. What is that all about, I've never seen it before.

Click the (1) .
Ratman is online now  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off