Quote:
Originally Posted by 883dave /img/forum/go_quote.gif
This is a sport of trial and error. In todays market we are able to borrow or purchase and return items, so one can try different things in their system.
Take the specks on an amplifier, most are the same or close, however most will sound different "snake oil?", measurement and specks are great and also a great way for someone to sell you an inferrior product.
or take Bose their measurements are not that far out of line with some of the best speakers out there, so would you go blindly and purchase them solely on measurement?
If you can't trust your ears, why would you even bother with this hobby
Also have you ever seen a bee fly? Science is at a loss to explain how and why a bee can fly.
|
I wanted to bow out gracefully, but this post really shows such a contempt for research I just have to respond.
1a. Bose measurements. They don't publish them. In fact, they go a step further,
they are philosophically against them. A quote from the abstract:
Quote:
| In the quest for better ways to measure and evaluate loudspeakers, it is natural to search for quantitative objective tests to replace the qualitative subjective methods that are vulnerable to the large variances of individual value judgement. In this pursuit, there is the danger of employing objective standards whose correlation to the ultimate goal of natural sound reproduction is open to serious question. This paper examines the merits and shortcomings of some of the well known measurement criteria and presents some new approaches intended to make steps in the direction of more meaningful measurement and evaluation procedures. |
.
And the measurements that have been done are very,
very far from the "not that far out of line with some of the best speakers out there". The FR of their acoustimass system:
1b. More about measurements. Yes they can be used to sell you snake oil, but that is if you let them be interpreted for you. And at the very least, we're talking about things that
are measurable. The difference between the ripple and noise between a boutique cable and a standard one are virtually zero. The difference between the output DC current of a well designed power supply between a boutique cable and a standard cable is indistinguishable from noise.
2. The bee issue. I usually see this argument in "intelligent design" debates, and to see it brought up as fact in a cable debate is, well, not surprising. From wikipedia:
Quote:
According to 20th century folklore, the laws of aerodynamics prove that the bumblebee should be incapable of flight, as it does not have the capacity (in terms of wing size or beat per second) to achieve flight with the degree of wing loading necessary. Not being aware of scientists 'proving' it cannot fly, the bumblebee succeeds under "the power of its own arrogance" (McFadden et. al. 2007). The origin of this myth has been difficult to pin down with any certainty. John McMasters recounted an anecdote about an unnamed Swiss aerodynamicist at a dinner party who performed some rough calculations and concluded, presumably in jest, that according to the equations, bumblebees cannot fly.[17] In later years McMasters has backed away from this origin, suggesting that there could be multiple sources, and that the earliest he has found was a reference in the 1934 French book Le vol des insectes by M. Magnan. Magnan is reported to have written that he and a Mr. Saint-Lague had applied the equations of air resistance to insects and found that their flight was impossible, but that "One shouldn't be surprised that the results of the calculations don't square with reality".[18]
It is believed[citation needed] that the calculations which purported to show that bumblebees cannot fly are based upon a simplified linear treatment of oscillating aerofoils. The method assumes small amplitude oscillations without flow separation. This ignores the effect of dynamic stall, an airflow separation inducing a large vortex above the wing, which briefly produces several times the lift of the aerofoil in regular flight. More sophisticated aerodynamic analysis shows that the bumblebee can fly because its wings encounter dynamic stall in every oscillation cycle. |
3.
You do no service to yourself by making facts up. So stop it.
