Oh boy. Sure. What ever. Just answer the questions, particularly the one about how you know what other people feel. If you cannot behave like a scientist, do not pretend to know how to.

Sure. If you dare to. Sure you want me to flaw your test? I am not scared of any testing, what so ever, rather I embrace it. I also embrace my current beliefs, assumptions, experience, and knowledge. Please, send me this test of yours, please explain it in detail, and the ethics of how you will...

In interpretive qualitative research, there is no usage of bias. Bias is related to positivist research, and is not used in the tradition of interpretive research. Actually, objecting to how bias is traditionally used in the nature sciences, rejecting it completely, is so comon, that there is a...

You missed the point, as to virtually reproduce the physics of sounds, by using a headset, compensating for the physics of the head of the listener, on the fly or pre recording. As for using mono recordings, that is how greater parts of the industry work, as it is, right now.

Sure, you did. What do you mean by AVR? I happen to also use the HA-1. It is not the easiest beast to tame, and given what is needed for it, that probably applies to most DACs. Let's just say that I hear plenty of differences using mine. What does that mean. Well it means that you claim to...

That comes down to epistemology. How can you know that you cannot know anything? We all need to accept that cause and effect has its limits, unless we want to go insane. As to what I am saying, is that they ignored their true positive data, and ignored following it up. The conclusion is clearly...

This is getting dumb. Who did you quote? Has he written any paper, that has passed any real scrutiny? Can you please point me to his work? Did you just Google that or is this someone you actually know and a piece of work you actually vetted?

Thanks. I missed that. Sloppy just became fraudulent. It is funny how the lack of real scientific proof for this supposedly proven knowledge is utterly missing, and that nobody in here seem to be able to point to concrete research supporting their claim. Yet there is a substantial level of...

Looking at that paper, it is pretty obvious, that this does not generate universal knowledge. The gear and setup is highly in question, particularly the use of speakers. Also, they do not describe all factors, particularly interconnects of gear and handling of digital noise. The results are only...

About this historical claim about tape recordings, the claim of "indistinguishable from the original" was experience based. And repeatable. If running the same test today, using the exact same setup, the experience would be about the same. That is what is reasonable to expect. There is a need to...

I feel human.

You need to read carefully what you just wrote. If want to get a paper rejected, this is all you need to write. This will get you flunked, on its own. People do get the blunder, right?

I asked for if people knew of any good research on a topic, that implies, at least in any scientific forum I know about, that you know what your recommend and find it good yourself. I actually tired to look it up, in multiple online research databases, and it is not available on those. Given...

@gregorio in post: 13809060 You need to quote me properly, as not to falsify what you claim to be said. As in this post. If you do not comprehend what is being said, you need to be careful at rephrasing quotes. I struggled through your rant, but when you claim that recording individual...

You are talking about a multi speaker setup. Which is about as far away as you can get, form using headsets. While headsets would have few if none limits as to what may be achieved, speakers have a ton of limitations. That is a $350 microphone. Listed spec: Signal-to-Noise Ratio 78 dB (IEC...

Great. Now you are getting it. Yes, for classic stereo reproduction using speakers there is some form of soundstage. And no, there is hardly any soundstage as by physical space, outside the head of the listener, when using headsets. Not for regular recordings. What I am arguing, is simply...

I gave the video a go, could barely hear it a -78db. With a ton of noise. (I probably play too loud as well) People need to wake up. If you do not get the meaning of the argument, you need to do some recording on your own. A SN of 78db is pretty darn good. For most recording equipment, this is...

Well, if you did know the understanding of soundstage and imaging, then you would know that it is the placement of instruments in space, as experienced by the listener. As a term in a terminology, it belongs in the subjective field of science. As for what you are speaking of, which probably is...

1. Better at soundstage, particularly for vector reproduction. Better for articulation. That could be the case, I just cannot get to work for my part, due to loss of signal quality, using USB. 2. This is about inferring complex sound, not sine waves. If you got any scientific papers on complex...

The proof for 16/44.1 is made by using sine waves. Beyond that, we do not know very much. You do not know everything ever written, just because you know the alphabet. Is 16/44.1 enough for vector reproduction? Do you have any proof of that? Is that a headset limitation? How do you know that it...

Well, if you do not care what others think, why be in a community with others, like a forum? Care to describe the form of "subjectivity" you speak of here? Are you claiming to be an interpretivists, in which you claim that knowledge is made through the experience of the individual, and...

Wow! Hey guys, calm down! There are a lot of people in this very forum, that stick to a very strict form of positivism. That is, that they believe that the world can be quantified and described, and reject the notion of subjectivity. Others, like me, belong in the tradition of the interpretive...

I hope MQA dies. There is supposed to be clean 16/44.1 stream, if you do not use it, but that is simply not the case. The MQA reproduction is far worse than the 16/44.1, for all the tracks I have tried. That something sounds different, does not mean that it is an improvement. Both the supposedly...

USM is a destructive algorithm. At least it used to be, as of the USM filter we used in the signal processing class at UiO. Not really my field, and this was at introductory level of signal processing. It consistently and always described as an destructive algorithm. I saw this video on Youtube...