or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Testing audiophile claims and myths - Page 435  

post #6511 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by James-uk View Post


Yes


Do you agree with all the points he raised or part of it?

post #6512 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Singleton View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by James-uk View Post


Yes


Do you agree with all the points he raised or part of it?


yes!

 

 

 

:tongue:

post #6513 of 6524
+1 . I agree with all of his points.
post #6514 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by James-uk View Post

+1 . I agree with all of his points.

 

Me too... looks like great minds do think alike.:)

post #6515 of 6524
I have been a victim of the fake EQ he mentioned too many times... tongue.gif
post #6516 of 6524

Sound is merely airwaves and no high-end system or low-end one will ever take that away.  :D


Edited by interpolate - 5/29/15 at 11:52am
post #6517 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

I have been a victim of the fake EQ he mentioned too many times... tongue.gif

 

I've got a vague idea of what's meant by 'fake EQ'. At which point in the video is this discussed? interesting in hearing this.

post #6518 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamKing View Post

I've got a vague idea of what's meant by 'fake EQ'. At which point in the video is this discussed? interesting in hearing this.

He means an engineer spending time EQing a track only to realize that the EQ isn't patched into the board.

I think Ethan interjects it when jj is talking about setting up the tube/solid state switch that actually did nothing. Comes after Poppy Crum's talk which is the first talk given.

se
post #6519 of 6524

that happened to me so many times. with the EQ bipassed and me starting to change some value by 1 or 2db thinking I just needed a little something there ^_^. 

I even spent time with the hd650 on my head, trying to EQ it, and the sound coming from the speakers:rolleyes:.

I'm such a pro.

post #6520 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogsurviver View Post
 

 

Now please reconsider; just because of similar "carved in stone" beliefs ( which are as safe as can be, being backed by enough papers and peer reviews and whatnots of the scientific world ) -

 

are YOU 100% sure

 

you are not depriving yourself of something better than what is generally mentioned in these pages as being sufficient to correctly convey the music ?

 

Not even 0.123456789 % doubt ?

No such thing as 100% sure. But it's better than something which I'm 0.01% sure about. Improve that, and we'll entertain you. Or do you suggest you're better than the peer-reviews and all?

 

BTW, CD mats and the recorcdings? And I swear to God, if you don't have them...........


Edited by dazzerfong - 5/29/15 at 11:03pm
post #6521 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzerfong View Post
 

No such thing as 100% sure. But it's better than something which I'm 0.01% sure about. Improve that, and we'll entertain you. Or do you suggest you're better than the peer-reviews and all?

 

BTW, CD mats and the recorcdings? And I swear to God, if you don't have them...........

In due time. In half an hour I will be in the concert hall, recording "a" choir.

 

And the recording IS available - in "glorious YT sound" ( derived from MP3 192 kbps made for airing on the national radio ) :

 

 

When I have time sometime next week , I will upload exactly this piece in BOTH original simultaneuosly recorded masters - DSD128 and 192/24 .

post #6522 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post

So are you going to say you can't tell if he's trolling or just pretending to be stupid. evil_smiley.gif

Since when is being ignorant or wrong considered "trolling"?

I really don't think most people who accuse others of being trolls even know what the word means. It seems to have devolved into a general epithet hurled at anyone they just don't like or disagree with.

se
Edited by Steve Eddy - 5/29/15 at 11:52pm
post #6523 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post


He means an engineer spending time EQing a track only to realize that the EQ isn't patched into the board.

I think Ethan interjects it when jj is talking about setting up the tube/solid state switch that actually did nothing. Comes after Poppy Crum's talk which is the first talk given.

se

 

Thanks Steve,

 

A similar thing happened to me where I thought my parametric EQ was active on my system for weeks. Then a particular song's sound made me realize values were reset to null through some mishap or update to the system. I can see that happening again because slight EQ is just what it is slight and it's easy enough to forget to check settings after system changes. 

 

I've never EQ'ed a track though but could see that happening too if I did.

post #6524 of 6524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post


Since when is being ignorant or wrong considered "trolling"?
 

 

Since the person in question disregards all the evidence offered as to why he is wrong and persists in re-posting the same nonsense over and over without any evidence of his own.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths