In Reply to: Falling into the trap posted by Tony Lauck on July 26, 2008 at 06:18:32:
Actually, no. I did try a double blind digital bypass test using an ABX box and a PCM-F1. It was at a place belonging to a former roommate, E. Brad Meyer. Of course, like all others, I "failed" the test.
This is consistent with when the soundwaves either do not change or change as such to be below audibility thresholds. Soundwaves are unconcerned with audiophile mental weakness or illnesses.
Indeed, the more I did the test the more everything sounded the same.
That you would not be able to tell the difference between your stereo and a Walmart HT unit in an ABX comparison tells a great deal more about you than the ABX box or test.
And indeed, the more I did the test the more everything sounded like s---. Such is the nature of these tests.
Actually, such is the nature of audiophiles to be so vain as to believe this.
I then went to the studio of another former roommate from the same summer, Clark Johnsen, who had different opinions on digital.
Yes. He is of the opinion that ink and/or physical grinding of the edges of CD's cause improvements to the soundwaves impinging upon the ears and also that digital media such as CD's are not pollution when tossed into harbors. All of which is quite consistent with a person with severe lifelong mental health issues or perhaps a more recent breakdown of sorts.
The significant difference between Clark's place and Brad's place was that the sound was better at Clark's. (In fairness, Clark's taste in music was more along my lines.) This was my exposure to the objectivist - subjectivist split.
Using the same loudspeakers and measured room acoustics? "Better" how?
The split had divided two old friends. Everything I had learned about scientific methodology indicated that the sound at Brad's place should be as good as at Clark's.
I thought you were a computer programmer? This requires physics?
I knew that financial considerations had never blocked Brad's choice of components.
I'm not sure what this has to do with soundwaves, Ivor's psychogenic beliefs being exposed to reality, or anything else.
But I knew that the sound at Clark's place was more true to the music that I loved.
Whatever that means.
I considered this situation to be a mystery.
Did you consider opening a physics book or consulting in someone with knowledge of psychoacoustics to solve this?
It had divided two old friends and I was determined to resolve it. Indeed, it provided the initial impetus for me to acquire a high end system.
I would taken one of those friends to get the treatment needed, but hey, that's just me.
I wanted to find out for myself who was right.
Right??? About Tony's subjective preference for possibly worse sound, like say Tubeguys new system?
Along the way, there was a lot of musical enjoyment to be had, although the original mystery has yet to be explained.
I'm still not sure what "mystery" you're talking about.
I do not consider myself to be a subjectivist.
I do.
I believe in use of objective criteria in designing, testing and using audio systems.
Oh really? Then why don't you share what objective reality differences existed between Brad's and CJ's systems when you investigated.
I believe however, that these systems only exist to further the enjoyment of music, which is purely a subjective experience.
And I'm perfectly fine with that. Until one starts projecting psychogenic occurrences into physical reality and claiming tubes, fullranges, wires, op-amps, etc, etc, etc have positive or negative "effects" on soundwaves, unknown to science but real and not imagined.
cheers,
AJ
Funny thing, in Audiophile circles if you can hear things others cannot, you are revered, in society, you are sent for treatment.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Falling into the trap - AJinFLA 07/26/0811:05:44 07/26/08 (10)
- Can't help yourself, can you? - robert young 03:18:43 07/27/08 (9)
- I'm OK with AJinFLA - Tony Lauck 18:07:39 07/27/08 (8)
- Hi Tony, - robert young 04:18:38 07/28/08 (7)
- RE: Hi Tony, - Tony Lauck 12:01:51 07/28/08 (1)
- The potential for misinterpretation.... - robert young 12:07:47 07/28/08 (0)
- Difficult, not impossible - Tony Lauck 09:10:27 07/28/08 (4)
- Sorry to disagree... - robert young 11:09:09 07/28/08 (0)
- I can vouch for Robert Hypocrite Young being mentally disabled - AJinFLA 09:58:36 07/28/08 (2)
- "...his thirst for bile." - robert young 11:05:28 07/28/08 (0)
- RE: I can vouch for Robert Hypocrite Young being mentally disabled - Tony Lauck 10:18:39 07/28/08 (0)