1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Objectivists board room

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by joe bloggs, May 28, 2015.
288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297
299 300 301 302
  1. colonelkernel8
    I’m not sure they’ll approve this post since they are manually doing so while I’m in this probationary period.

    The essence of the situation: I was accused of pulling a thread off topic. I called to question the subjective experience of a reviewer claiming to hear differences between two identical DAPs, one enclosed in stainless steel and the other in copper. Of course he claimed the copper one was “warmer” and so on. I pointed out the insanity of that argument since this is the same silly claim made by people who believe in the effects of different cable materials. I was measured in my criticism, albeit harsh in my initial post since he also claimed to hear differences in *firmware* despite the manufacturer stating the firmware did not affect the playback at all. This same reviewer receives, as far as I can tell, all of their equipment for free, and in at least several situations wasn’t asked to return the equipment (we all know this is a huge problem here). I also critiqued that. I was eventually reported for being “rude” for not accepting an individual’s subjective experiences despite very clearly laying out the case for why these audible differences could not exist in the device at hand (I’d argue this was on-topic). As a result, many of my posts were deleted (the ones the mod claimed were off-topic) and I was placed in a probationary state that requires my posts get approved by a mod. They didn’t say how long this would last.

    The utter hypocrisy here is that Jude himself claimed that nwavguy was banned because he linked to his blog in his signature. This reviewer has the done the EXACT SAME THING and his blog is chock full of ads and other revenue generating content. Furthermore, when individuals come into sound science and try to claim that their subjective experiences are indeed facts, we don’t moan about how disrespectful they are and report them, we try to reason with them and supply evidence to the contrary. Only after they start filling the thread with garbage do we either choose to ignore them or ask them to leave. Admittedly, I and other less scrupulous posters, when fed up with continued nonsense, can get a little disrespectful, but only after we’ve been directly disrespected ourselves. What we don’t do is call for a mod to preserve our closed discourse and send the naysayer away.
    Intensecure likes this.
  2. bfreedma

    Just to clarify, I’m don’t want this document to redefine Sound Science in any way.

    Everyone should still post as as - I think that a faq would just help new posters think about the concept of human audibility and relate that a bit more to the various numerical claims being made. And hope for somewhat less repetition of the common questions and questioning or at least change the spin to asking about the math rather than refuting it.
  3. bigshot
    It would be good to clear out a lot of those links at the top and replace them with more appropriate ones, but I know castle said that was beyond his powers. Pins would be fine. I think Testing Audiophile Claims and Myths would be a good pin to start with. And I like that Rane glossary a lot too.
  4. castleofargh Contributor
    testing audiophile claims and myth, done. TBH I could have done that a long time ago as it's a no brainer.
    I have relied on the Rane glossary for almost as long as I've come to audio forums. the PDF is stored on my computers from fear that the link would go down someday. to understand measurements, it's obviously a good start to understand what they measure ^_^.

    when I knew nothing about nothing I always came back to those:
    http://www.apexhifi.com/specs.html estimating power use on a headphone, still have the excel file too, although now I can do ohm's law on my own like a big boy, but laziness still makes it a compelling file ^_^.

    http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm pick up an EQ, play around, look at the graph, learn stuff. learn how to describe stuff.

    and this, although it's an ad, it can help jump start a conversation about "obvious" things:
    JaeYoon, bigshot and sonitus mirus like this.
  5. Argyris Contributor
    A rather accurate description of how these "arguments" (using that term loosely) with subjectivists tend to go in here. And a fine Python skit, especially since it's something from the show that isn't that overrated skit about the bloody parrot.
  6. gregorio
    I am pretty/very familiar with some of those songs and I did listen for more than a couple of minutes.

    I don't want to be pedantic but as this is the science forum: It wasn't a "bloody" parrot, neither was it just resting, stunned or pinning for the fjords, it was a dead parrot! (citation: "Monty Python's Dead Parrot Discovered" - ScienceBlogs, 2008)

    I second the idea of a sticky/FAQ btw.

    Argyris likes this.
  7. bigshot
    I know there are some Monty Python fans here... just wanted to share something I picked up for my autograph collection the other day...

  8. bigshot
    This is my hometown and I was in 8th grade when this went down. I want a time machine to go back to this!
    skwoodwiva and Glmoneydawg like this.
  9. Glmoneydawg
    Not sure music was their strong point.....Terry Gilliams clip art animation though was way ahead of its time and absolutely fn hilarious.Considering what you do for a living i will of course defer to your opinion.
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2018
  10. skwoodwiva
    Aja is my favorite near as or better than Graceland.
    I have a new favorite watch for my you tube hits here in music
  11. bigshot
    Lumberjack Song is pretty quintessential Python. Gilliam is a genius though. He worked for Harvey Kurtzman, so that makes sense. The other one I think is incredible is Graham Chapman. He was a master of logic and structure. Argument Clinic is largely his work.
    skwoodwiva likes this.
  12. sonitus mirus
    One of my favorites with a bit of science to make it applicable here.

    bigshot likes this.
  13. castleofargh Contributor
    Bill Nye didn't change a bit.
  14. RRod
    Just in case anyone else was thinking about getting the new release of the Fellowship of the Ring complete recordings, I've got a summary of what I've seen so far here. Hope they release the other two films; will be nice to see those $500 tags for TTT suddenly plummet ^_^
  15. JaeYoon
    So I upgraded to the Samsung S9. I really like the sound from the S9. The default qualcomm codec chip is a black sheep among head-fi users who prefer the external dac options and that an expensive DAC is required to enjoy music.

    But I like the default audio from this phone, even with wifi and 4G LTE there are no crackles or noise going on during audio playback.

    Powers all my earphones with ease. Maybe someone will make some load measurements but it sounds excellent. I don't detect any unwanted noise and provides accurate playback for me.
    Maybe my ears are just going bad and I'm easy to please :p
288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297
299 300 301 302

Share This Page