[bigshot]

Whatever. I don't know why I should care about SRC. It's not like it makes any difference in practice. "Don't sweat what you can't hear" is my motto.

It's a nice day here today. In the 80s. Good day to get our in the sunshine.

 

[gregorio]

Whatever. I don't know why I should care about SRC.

If you don’t care/know about SRC, then why post (false) assertions about it in the science forum? Again, you’re highly intolerant when others do it, but it’s perfectly OK when you do?

It's not like it makes any difference in practice.

Again, another false assertion! It’s made a significant difference in practice. SRC improvements have changed the procedures/practices of recording, mixing and mastering of many commercial music releases/genres and therefore what they sound like when “people” reproduce them.

"Don't sweat what you can't hear" is my motto.

Usually that’s a very reasonable motto, because in the audiophile world many of the “improvements” in digital audio either make no difference at all or are just even more inaudible overkill. However, there are instances where inaudible improvements result in clearly audible differences (typically, though not always, due to cumulative effects).

This being the science forum, we MUST be factually accurate and at least acknowledge when this is the case (and hopefully explain it correctly). If we don’t, then this forum is NOT a science/factual forum, it’s just another BS “opinion” forum, but with a different opinion!

It's a nice day here today. In the 80s. Good day to get our in the sunshine.

Accused of deflection, your response is even more deflection. A common fallacious tactic of which you are highly critical but apparently, it’s perfectly OK for you to do it?!

G

 

[bigshot]

I'm not deflecting. I consider you an online friend. When you grab on so hard, I get concerned about you. I think you should lighten up. It doesn't really bother me because I'm a happy and satisfied person overall, but it can't be good for your mood and state of mind.

I've said multiple times that I'm talking about home audio, not pro audio or theoretical science. I'm not even talking about SRC. When I fire up my stereo and listen to music, there is absolutely no reason for me to be concerned with artifacting. I hit play and it plays perfectly. If I have some reason to resample, transcode, convert, format or compress, it always comes out audibly transparent using my standard settings. I honestly don't know why I need to worry about any of this. I'm not a scientist and I don't pretend to be one. I changed my avatar to try to make that clear. I'm a home audio enthusiast who applies scientific principles to solve problems when they crop up instead of relying on hoodoo and placebo. That is what this forum is intended for. It isn't a place for peer review and there is no required qualifications for posting here. It's about home audio.

 

[gregorio]

I'm not deflecting. I consider you an online friend. When you grab on so hard, I get concerned about you.

You state you’re not deflecting and then for the rest of the paragraph that’s exactly what you do!

Incidentally, I consider you an online friend too but occasionally you make false assertions and proceed to undermine the purpose/ethos of this subforum, thereby (albeit unintentionally) making it no better than the others.

I've said multiple times that I'm talking about home audio, not pro audio or theoretical science.

Just repeating a falsehood does not eventually make it true, as you well know because you criticise others for doing the exact same thing.

Obviously you are not talking about home audio, was the audio you are reproducing created in your home, what about the DSP in your operating system and hardware? What happens in pro audio (recording studios) sometimes doesn’t have a direct affect on consumers or isn’t applicable to home audio reproduction but sometimes it does/is. Should we sweep this inconvenient fact under the carpet (inadvertently or not) when it does, and if so, how does that make this subforum any different from say the Cables subforum?

Also, I’m not talking about theoretical science either. I’m talking about artefacts that were easily verified as audible by DBT, about the PRACTICAL application of science in DSP engineering/programming and how the development of SRC with artefacts at astonishingly low levels changed the procedure of creating recordings and thereby, of what comes out of your home audio system. Now what part of that should we not discuss in this subforum: DBTs, the DSP underpinning all pro AND home digital audio or the recording, mixing and mastering of the recordings we’re reproducing at home?

I'm not even talking about SRC.

Then why haven’t you made that clear when the topic is about SRC and why are you going off-topic anyway?

I'm a home audio enthusiast who applies scientific principles to solve problems when they crop up instead of relying on hoodoo and placebo. That is what this forum is intended for.

Yes, that is what this forum is largely intended for, so why are you trying (albeit unintentionally) to pervert that intention??

There are dozens, maybe hundreds, of different SR converters and a number of different applications of SRC widely used throughout the chain of creating and reproducing audio. What testing have you done? Apart from not noticing any audible artefacts from just one type of SRC and one type of application, what are you “relying on” other than “hoodoo or placebo”?

[this subforum] isn't a place for peer review and there is no required qualifications for posting here. It's about home audio.

This is the “Sound Science” forum, it isn’t the “Scientific Research” forum and it’s certainly NOT the “Bigshot’s Home Audio Beliefs” forum!

G