|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Looking at it backwards posted by BillyBuck on April 11, 2009 at 15:54:20:
It's not just measurement "in the wild", but the right measurements.
Believe me when I say that the typical measurement suite would not reliably detect all of the things that go on in "in the wild", because they don't encompass the whole of what is occurring. Looking at ONE dimension of ONE parameter ONE at a time is woefully inadequate to fully define signal distortions, or the ultimate end result in an overall record/playback situation.
You wrote:
"I have a problem with the notion that there are extra-magical qualities to electrons that wouldn't show up in measurements ...."
Indeed. But that kind of statement is just a red herring on Self's part, it is tantamount to putting words in other people mouth's.
Why does it require magic electrons to hear subtle sonic differences, and to base your buying decisions on the sound instead of the measurements?
We STILL have amps that measure 0.002 % THD, and that STILL sound like hammered dog-crap. It should be plain by now that the measurements have failed so far, and all we currently have left that will actually work is subjective evaluation.
I am not saying that we should totally give up on objective criteria, but to wholly realize the inherent limitations and even confusion they can bring to the table, and not let the measurements become an end-all, be-all. It just won't work for achieving the best sound.
Jon Risch
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Looking at it backwards - Jon Risch 04/12/0919:00:33 04/12/09 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
