[cdog46]

I was briefly reading some of the responses as to which computer (mac v. pc) makes for a better sound processing source.

As one who has been in electronics as a job and audioholic-it is certain that all electronics and the associated transducers are not created equal. Any good D/A designer will tell you just designing that part it is more an art than a science. (For really really good ones) What's this bit perfect myth hocus pocus.

So...... what's my point? Only that arguing what's the ne plus ultra borders on the myth, superstion, and religion you read in mags like Sterophile.

You'd be better off, in some cases-talking religion or politics which in essence you are.

 

[LawnGnome]

Anyone else confused by what he is trying to say? Most of it seems incoherent.

Especially the third paragraph.

 

[ecclesand]

Nary a clue...

 

[Apocalypsee]

That's just some words, I don't understand a single word he saying...

Probably he say anything/everything sounds the same I guess....

 

[Duggeh]

I think that someone has been at the Gin before opening their account.

 

[Redo]

Somebody spent too much time reading the FLAC vs WAV thread

 

[EnOYiN]

Errrr... I guess it is:

AMAZING

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think that someone has been at the Gin before opening their account.

I was. And look at where I am ending up now.

 

[Dragon Rider]

I saw that OP post earlier this morning, and was going to ask what his point was until I noticed that he told us what his point was; but, i still don't get it. Glad to see that I'm not the only one clueless

 

[Morph201]

Hmmm... After a couple of beers this afternoon, it makes PERFECT sense to me! F'ING AMAZING!!!

 

[islewind]

On the topic of religion, I'd like to address why divine sovereignty is the key element in any monotheistic worldview...

 

[wavefunction]

I think he is implying that due to the quantum uncertainty principle, we cannot for sure have "Bit for bit perfection"

edit: at least on planck scale.

 

[unclejr]

So I tried to edit a bit of the original post in hopes of clarifying what he was trying to say ... (???)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdog46 (edited) /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was briefly reading some of the responses as to which computer (mac v. pc) makes for a better sound processing source. As one who has been in electronics as a job and who is an audioholic, it is certain that all electronics and the associated transducers are not created equal. Any good D/A designer will tell you just designing that part is more an art than a science (for really really good ones). What's this bit perfect myth hocus pocus? So...... what's my point? Only that arguing what's the ne plus ultra borders on the myth, superstition, and religion you read in mags like Stereophile. You'd be better off, in some cases-talking religion or politics which in essence you are.

... well, he lost me on the last line ...

I'm not sure the argument is incredibly compelling and certainly not convincing to me, but nonetheless.

And P.S. Leave it up to "wavefunction" to talk about the UP and Planck!

At least you didn't try and calculate whether or not the operators were commutative! Ohh, head hurting ...

 

[cdog46]

If what I said is over your head-let me dumb it dumb it down so you'll have a chance of understanding what I was saying. This was my main point There is no perfect sound reproduction system. That's a really a hard concept to get your hands around.

An A to D convertor does just what it says. Takes an analog signal samples it, and digitizes it. Their are many ways of smoothing the sound curve out-Gaussian, Cheachev filtering which is all over my head. But seeing you have so much fun with my post I'll have mine.
What that last paragraph means is that there are more ways than one to digitize an analog signal. So that why its an art.e to expound-I will.

And if you have never read Stereophile-some readers a few years back believed Armour All sprayed on CD's yielded better sound. Get it? what my third paragraph was about? If not I can expound on this too.

I did not mean to make it so complicated for the more stupid people who read this post. So if my limited explanations made no sense to the stupid people who were having their jollies with my post- you're actually more stupid and ignorant then you would ever be able to comprehend.

Kind of like the the 18 bit processing-too high a BER.

 

[Morph201]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdog46 /img/forum/go_quote.gif If what I said is over your head-let me dumb it dumb it down so you'll have a chance of understanding what I was saying. This was my main point There is no perfect sound reproduction system. That's a really a hard concept to get your hands around. An A to D convertor does just what it says. Takes an analog signal samples it, and digitizes it. Their are many ways of smoothing the sound curve out-Gaussian, Cheachev filtering which is all over my head. But seeing you have so much fun with my post I'll have mine. What that last paragraph means is that there are more ways than one to digitize an analog signal. So that why its an art.e to expound-I will. And if you have never read Stereophile-some readers a few years back believed Armour All sprayed on CD's yielded better sound. Get it? what my third paragraph was about? If not I can expound on this too. I did not mean to make it so complicated for the more stupid people who read this post. So if my limited explanations made no sense to the stupid people who were having their jollies with my post- you're actually more stupid and ignorant then you would ever be able to comprehend. Kind of like the the 18 bit processing-too high a BER.

What???

I still don't get it.. what are you trying to say??

 

[Dept_of_Alchemy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by islewind /img/forum/go_quote.gif On the topic of religion, I'd like to address why divine sovereignty is the key element in any monotheistic worldview...

On the topic of politics, I'd like to address why an informed populace is the key element in any democracy...