[AtomikPi]

 
I feel the same kind of ambivalence about, say, Schiit. On one hand they'll put out gear like the Modi/Magni and say it's probably all you'll ever need, but they'll also put out tube amps, R2R DACs, and USB cleaners. In the case of Schiit, they can fall back on the Everest excuse: "we did it because it was there", and no one will blame an engineer for trying to make a better spec-ed product or play around with topologies. Still, my objective core wants them to take the hard stand.

 
You'll notice that Schiit never posts about the sound signature of their gear. That's something that I really respect. They're just putting quality products out there and letting them sell themselves. 

 

[cel4145]

"[COLOR=252525]It's hard enough to make a living in a boxing audiophile world, so every now and then you gotta do something that might not agree with your principles. Basically, you have to forget you got any."[/COLOR]


In Tyll's case, he's got two audiences to satisfy. When something like Pono comes out that's leans heavily toward the subjective side, I can't say I blame him for shifting a bit on the couch. Still, if you chase two rabbits you will lose them both, and even though I understand the reasoning for it, that review really stuck in my craw.

Well said.

I feel the same kind of ambivalence about, say, Schiit. On one hand they'll put out gear like the Modi/Magni and say it's probably all you'll ever need, but they'll also put out tube amps, R2R DACs, and USB cleaners. In the case of Schiit, they can fall back on the Everest excuse: "we did it because it was there", and no one will blame an engineer for trying to make a better spec-ed product or play around with topologies. Still, my objective core wants them to take the hard stand.

A great example is the Ragnorak and the Yggdrasil. And I don't buy the Everest excuse since Schiit wouldn't produce it if they knew that they couldn't market it.

 

[jcx]

on style - I didn't invent these informalities - just adopted what is seen on forums - its not writing for textbooks, resumes
 
http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/
 
maybe this link will live a bit longer here?
 
 
accusations of "arrogance" is interesting coming from those sounding like they are posting from "Audiophile Guru" self conception or attempted positioning
 
 
I admit engineers can have cultural clashes when talking with the general public - maybe its even regionally amplified with my uni, work experience in the Northeast - a region not known for being steeped in Southern courtesy
 
when someone talks about EE in terms I recognize from 3 decades of working as one then I do expect a certain reciprocal extension of collegial mutual respect
 
my presumption is that we each certainly have specialized knowledge and experience that the other may only have passing acquaintance with but we both reason from a similar "Rational Materialism", "Scientific Rationalism" point of view, have substantial common background in math and systems modeling
 
engineer on engineer in my experience we are blunt about pointing out what we think are misconceptions in each others reasoning, work - I expect to be "called out" too
 
being wrong, having incomplete conceptions or even just temporary lapses is such a constant in learning, dealing with complex systems that it seems a big waste of time and energy constantly softening the critique, easing into the subject with social lubrication to "spare feelings"
 
sometimes when something is pointed out in technical argument you do go "I knew that" - and then realize their point is made
 
the best is when you take it in and suddenly rearrange your previous pieces into a new level of understanding of a subject
 
 
all this may be foreign, uncomfortable to non STEM types - where "personal interpretation" is given primacy, there are few "hard facts"
 

 

[cel4145]

on style - I didn't invent these informalities - just adopted what is seen on forums - its not writing for textbooks, resumes

http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/

maybe this link will live a bit longer here?

It should die. The first three bullet points are poor or out of date (written in 2004), with the analysis about punctuation just plain dumb. And notice the writer DOES say you should capitalize the first word in a sentence, if you bother to read the last bullet point, which is flawed, though, in some of the rest of its points.

 

[castleofargh]

   

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

on style - I didn't invent these informalities - just adopted what is seen on forums - its not writing for textbooks, resumes
 
http://www.contentious.com/2004/09/13/grammar-and-punctuation-for-the-web-whats-proper/
 
maybe this link will live a bit longer here?
 
 
accusations of "arrogance" is interesting coming from those sounding like they are posting from "Audiophile Guru" self conception or attempted positioning
 
 
I admit engineers can have cultural clashes when talking with the general public - maybe its even regionally amplified with my uni, work experience in the Northeast - a region not known for being steeped in Southern courtesy
 
when someone talks about EE in terms I recognize from 3 decades of working as one then I do expect a certain reciprocal extension of collegial mutual respect
 
my presumption is that we each certainly have specialized knowledge and experience that the other may only have passing acquaintance with but we both reason from a similar "Rational Materialism", "Scientific Rationalism" point of view, have substantial common background in math and systems modeling
 
engineer on engineer in my experience we are blunt about pointing out what we think are misconceptions in each others reasoning, work - I expect to be "called out" too
 
being wrong, having incomplete conceptions or even just temporary lapses is such a constant in learning, dealing with complex systems that it seems a big waste of time and energy constantly softening the critique, easing into the subject with social lubrication to "spare feelings"
 
sometimes when something is pointed out in technical argument you do go "I knew that" - and then realize their point is made
 
the best is when you take it in and suddenly rearrange your previous pieces into a new level of understanding of a subject
 
 
all this may be foreign, uncomfortable to non STEM types - where "personal interpretation" is given primacy, there are few "hard facts"
 

 

no comment about writing properly, I suck too much to say anything ^_^. hey I capitalize the I, took me some efforts to get used to it instead of using the apparently disturbing i. I'm sure that deserves a point for good behavior.
 
 
about the "2 EE enter in a bar"(where is the joke?), I feel the same. I expect people to always tell me when I'm wrong somewhere and not needing to put on a hazmat suit before telling me. it wouldn't even come to my mind to be offended.  the guy isn't trashing me, he's helping me so that I will now know more than I did yesterday.
 
about internet, I learned how to behave on the net playing online games, everybody was insulting everybody, and it meant nothing at all. if a guy was insulting my mother on the street I would try to remove a few of his teeth. but online, when a guy cracks up a "that's what your mother said to me last night", I can't help but find it funny.
internet is internet. forcing people to behave online like in real life, to me that's like when people want to ban a game because they're afraid a kid won't know the difference between a game and reality...
first time I saw a real turtle I didn't try to jump on it.

 
QED ^_^
 
 
 
so it certainly is a small struggle for me when I see places like headfi where everybody has to pretend and behave like a sir.

 
 
 
 
 
 
now the moderator point of view:
castleofargh is a jerk and TOS is the law, love thy neighbor.

 

 

[RRod]

Claim of positive ABX of hi-res in Foobar here. I'm already at my wit's end in that particular thread, so someone else feel free to poke around for how the test was messed up.

 

[OddE]

  I admit engineers can have cultural clashes when talking with the general public - maybe its even regionally amplified with my uni, work experience in the Northeast - a region not known for being steeped in Southern courtesy

 
-I know, I know - I am late to the party, I just wanted to share an anecdote collaborating your point:
 
A few years ago, my employer threw a pre-Christmas weekend at a semi-swanky hotel for all employees and spouses (the latter being just for show - we were too busy working to maintain any relationships, but anyway...)
 
As the evening progresses, I (MSc, radio frequency engineering), and two colleagues (MSc, power electronics; PhD marine engineering) are enjoying ourselves by the fireplace, scotches in hand. All of a sudden, the barmaid and a security guard approaches us and tells us we'd better split up and leave, now - before we start fighting.
 
We look at them, puzzled. We were just getting into a frank (ahem) exchange of views on an engineering issue we'd recently read about in the journal of the Norwegian Society of Engineers, throwing our respective fields of expertise into the discussion with great enthusiasm. It took some convincing explaining to them that we were the best of friends and that what they'd just observed from across the bar was more or less par for the course as we became embroiled in discussion.
 
To further stress the point that engineers may be a bit off compared to the general population, a few minutes later another colleague of us (BSc, computer science) comes by and asks what that business with the bouncer was all about - he could tell from across the room that we were having a great time and wondered why they'd bother us...)

 

[krismusic]

-I know, I know - I am late to the party, I just wanted to share an anecdote collaborating your point:

A few years ago, my employer threw a pre-Christmas weekend at a semi-swanky hotel for all employees and spouses (the latter being just for show - we were too busy working to maintain any relationships, but anyway...)

As the evening progresses, I (MSc, radio frequency engineering), and two colleagues (MSc, power electronics; PhD marine engineering) are enjoying ourselves by the fireplace, scotches in hand. All of a sudden, the barmaid and a security guard approaches us and tells us we'd better split up and leave, now - before we start fighting.

We look at them, puzzled. We were just getting into a frank (ahem) exchange of views on an engineering issue we'd recently read about in the journal of the Norwegian Society of Engineers, throwing our respective fields of expertise into the discussion with great enthusiasm. It took some convincing explaining to them that we were the best of friends and that what they'd just observed from across the bar was more or less par for the course as we became embroiled in discussion.

To further stress the point that engineers may be a bit off compared to the general population, a few minutes later another colleague of us (BSc, computer science) comes by and asks what that business with the bouncer was all about - he could tell from across the room that we were having a great time and wondered why they'd bother us...)

 

[sonitus mirus]

If I had to make a completely unscientific guess at how I would prioritize audio improvements, this is how I would rate the significance of such things.
 
Assuming 100% for audio nirvana:
 
Source Material: 50% (recording quality, mastering, etc.)
Source Format: 5%  (lossy, FLAC, SACD, etc.)
Playback Equipment: 20% (the total audio playback chain, including DACs, Amps, and Transducers)
Room Environment/EQ: 25% (treatment, speaker placement, ambient noise, etc.)
 
Just making it up as I drink go.  Anything missing?
 
Essentially, if the same CD or audio file was played on two different systems or "Playback Equipment", one nearly perfect at 19.2% of the possible 20%, and some other gear that was only 12% of 20%, the 12% gear could sound much better than the 19.2% gear if the room was better treated and EQ was used effectively.
 
Where does everyone else place value on such things when looking at the total picture?  I'm thinking the Playback Equipment has even a smaller overall influence on the sound quality than I may be suggesting, but I will leave my number where they are for now and hope someone else will play.  I often see audio fans spending gobs of money on equipment that would only bring about a 1% improvement in the overall sound quality, while they could see huge improvements from hooking up an inexpensive EQ in their audio chain.
 
I realize there is nothing scientific here, at least on its own merit.  I thought this thread was appropriate for this post.  Off with 'is head, if it must go and simply does not belong.

 

[castleofargh]

hard cold numbers for subjective values, I love it. ^_^
 
personally, I would go for choice of song and signature(headphone,EQ,...) as the main reason of me being happy. and a little something for everything else, with mostly a need for comfort(for headphones/IEMs), no hiss, and ok left/right balance. the rest is an added but not necessary bonus.

 

[SunTanScanMan]

If I may add my own theoretical perspective without the use of numbers.
 
I would slightly lower the importance of the source material, and increase for room environment and in perhaps equipment
 
- For me sound quality is a bonus. If it's a performance, or piece of music that I enjoy or am interested in, I can reach 'nirvana' whatever its quality, however it is transmitted.
- It's nice to have decent equipment to listen at the highest fidelity, but the main importance of the equipment is convenience/accessibility to music, comfort, reliability and effectiveness to the task at hand.
- Environment - Quite pertinent for me after moving near a busy road which easily affects immersion, and limits the equipment (open headphones) that can be used effectively.
 
*I would add an additional category of 'knowledge', including (but not restricted to) both 'science' related to audio, and experience with equipment - This category enables one to find justified contentment with their given circumstances/equipment, thereby leaving mind to concentrate on music somewhat freely.
*Deepening knowledge of music itself can also increase its appreciation - One example - A longer list of reference points helps one to formulate opinions that are more complex, and reasoned based on a firmer basis - much like a good essay.

 

[Thad-E-Ginathom]

  hard cold numbers for subjective values, I love it. ^_^
 
... ... ...

 
I always wondered where those hifi-mag/retailer percentage calculations (x% on stands, y% on cables, etc etc) came from, and my guess is... out of some marketing man's imagination.

 

[sonitus mirus]

For one person always sitting in the same position, it might be rather easy to get end-game equipment set up; though, for anyone looking to fill an entire large room with wonderful sound, it would be much trickier and costlier.  

 

[SunTanScanMan]

Science can still deal with estimations. Surveys can seek to measure sentiment that are 'subjective'. E.g. patient experience in hospitals, consumer opinion etc.
Perhaps a rough and somewhat less than accurate method on its own, but one that can demonstrate a trend of some significance with enough data.

A basic theoretical example:

1. We assume that all of us purchase equipment and music for the purpose of achieving enjoyment of music/or gear (does not matter which for this example)
    - Ask what do they consider most important in their enjoyment of the hobby. Music? Gear? Other?
 
2. We assume that most have constraints in this endeavour - financial constraint - an example for this purpose
    - Sort according to income?
 
3. Assuming the existence of financial constraint, we assume further that we divert funds in the most efficient manner that we see fit.
 
4. On this basis we calculate out total expenditure of our current gear + music.
 
5. From that we calculate the proportion of total expenditure spent on each category of components. E.g. Amps, DACs, Music
    - For further accuracy there may be calculations available to compensate for inflation.
    - Spending compared to income
 
6. The proportion of money spent on each component may indicate a pattern - Where does one consumer put most financial investment/importance in?
    - Back to @sonitus mirus' original question, where people "prioritise audio improvements"
    - Does it correlate with no.1? Can one be considered a music lover if they have spent a disproportionately larger amount of money on gear than music? Vice versa.

 

[uchihaitachi]

  Science can still deal with estimations. Surveys can seek to measure sentiment that are 'subjective'. E.g. patient experience in hospitals, consumer opinion etc.
Perhaps a rough and somewhat less than accurate method on its own, but one that can demonstrate a trend of some significance with enough data.

A basic theoretical example:

1. We assume that all of us purchase equipment and music for the purpose of achieving enjoyment of music/or gear (does not matter which for this example)
    - Ask what do they consider most important in their enjoyment of the hobby. Music? Gear? Other?
 
2. We assume that most have constraints in this endeavour - financial constraint - an example for this purpose
    - Sort according to income?
 
3. Assuming the existence of financial constraint, we assume further that we divert funds in the most efficient manner that we see fit.
 
4. On this basis we calculate out total expenditure of our current gear + music.
 
5. From that we calculate the proportion of total expenditure spent on each category of components. E.g. Amps, DACs, Music
    - For further accuracy there may be calculations available to compensate for inflation.
    - Spending compared to income
 
6. The proportion of money spent on each component may indicate a pattern - Where does one consumer put most financial investment/importance in?
    - Back to @sonitus mirus' original question, where people "prioritise audio improvements"
    - Does it correlate with no.1? Can one be considered a music lover if they have spent a disproportionately larger amount of money on gear than music? Vice versa.

You don't need sufficient data; it's simple enough, for the typical audiophile demand just increases according to price and mystical qualities only constrained by their budgets. (An actual veblen good in action!)
 
Might make for an interesting linear programming model