Originally Posted by castleofargh
they very well do as long as all parameters are accounted for. many things are free from the chaos theory.
math leads to knowledge that experiments can only demonstrate years later (and some still wait to be). we tend to believe in vastly acknowledged math theories, because math have so many times now proven to be the number one truth teller in the world. and not much in math is about experiment. doesn't that contradict your statement?
("off topic"the check spelling doesn't want "proven". if "proved" is right spelling why did I have "prove" in the irregular list of verbs when I was at school?)
in most expensive domains now simulations have replaced experiments and conclusively lead to the making of the real stuff. even the guys creating the amps and headphones don't just try randomly until they get something right, unless it's one guy who learned by himself, but I would hope that he's got at least something close to an engineer level of knowledge, else it must be a long road for him.
when you know from reliable measurements(manufacturer specs might not always be it, I admit) and know all the specs are above "great for human", with enough power to drive the headphone(also something not hard to predict with the right measurements). then we know exactly how it will sound.
only when too much imperfection and distortions come out of an amp are we unable to predict how it will sound(chaos theory making a come back, too many parameters for accurate prediction). all good stuff do sound the same because there is only one right way to accurately transmit a signal. and for the amp, that's by transmitting it as it was with gain.
because math have so many times now proven to be the number one truth teller in the world. and not much in math is about experiment. doesn't that contradict your statement?
Not saying I am agree with the statement, but have you noticed that "proven"? We need to actually run experiment to verify estimates or "prove" hypothesis, instead of direct jumping into conclusion. Accuracy is nothing more than accuracy.
in most expensive domains now simulations have replaced experiments and conclusively lead to the making of the real stuff.
It would be worrifying if the "real stuff" were not sufficiently tested before actual release... in fact, we have all kinds of standards and regulations for that.
Well, when we have "all the specs" and know all related theories, we may be able to make very very accurate estimates, thats it.
But that "all the specs" is yet another topic to be defined, tested and agreed on. Currently we have equipments that are measured fine, but not widely well liked, which might be an indicator of something's lacking in paramaters measured.
Originally Posted by cjl
It's really not that difficult to determine a set of measurements that shows a headphone of just about any impedance and efficiency will be driven perfectly. Sadly, not many headphone amps have been measured to a sufficient degree to know whether they meet this spec. That having been said, it really isn't that hard to design an amp to meet this criterion - as I have mentioned before, the O2 is one such amp, as is the headphone amp in the Benchmark DAC series. I would assume a large number of other amps are similarly capable, but until I see the measurements for sure, it's hard to say with certainty.
"Driven perfectly", or the phrase "audibly perfect", is also yet another topic to be defined, tested and agreed on...
Edited by kn19h7 - 7/10/14 at 5:17am