[Duke650]

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Duke650]

Disney, Amazon, Google, HP, HD...

 

[Rotijon]

Uh... this is probably an inside joke im missing.

But what is a "supermegaburrito filter"? Why the super and buritto?

 

[Brooko]

Jason - I just read your latest - very insightful.  I can't help thinking that you've somehow (whether intentional or unintentional - I'm not sure) trying to make a correlation that the guys relying on measurements/science rather than what we hear (or in the example taste) are somehow possibly inferior?
 
In my trade I deal with the food industry, and I've also dealt with a lot of chefs - and some very good ones.  To maybe balance the equation a bit, I'd point out that most really good chefs (at least the ones I know), are extremely well read, know the science of cooking very well - and because of this they create better food and earn their stars.
 
I was lucky enough to stay with one of our chefs for 3 days last time I was in the US - and it was a real eye opener being able to stand alongside him as he cooked, and pepper him with questions. The amazing thing was how well they understood the science of cooking.  What happens to the cells under heat.  Why our taste buds react the way they do.  How our tastes react, and how much indicators other than taste affect us.
 
I guess what I'm trying to say is that the great chefs (at least in my experience) are the ones that have both creativity, and truly understand the science behind what they are doing.

 

[wink]

Anyone who has a [REDACTED] coming down the line deserves all the praise he can garner.  

 
The [REDACTED] will sell itself without the need for marketing hi-jinks.   

 

[Jason Stoddard]

  Jason - I just read your latest - very insightful.  I can't help thinking that you've somehow (whether intentional or unintentional - I'm not sure) trying to make a correlation that the guys relying on measurements/science rather than what we hear (or in the example taste) are somehow possibly inferior?
 
In my trade I deal with the food industry, and I've also dealt with a lot of chefs - and some very good ones.  To maybe balance the equation a bit, I'd point out that most really good chefs (at least the ones I know), are extremely well read, know the science of cooking very well - and because of this they create better food and earn their stars.
 
I was lucky enough to stay with one of our chefs for 3 days last time I was in the US - and it was a real eye opener being able to stand alongside him as he cooked, and pepper him with questions. The amazing thing was how well they understood the science of cooking.  What happens to the cells under heat.  Why our taste buds react the way they do.  How our tastes react, and how much indicators other than taste affect us.
 
I guess what I'm trying to say is that the great chefs (at least in my experience) are the ones that have both creativity, and truly understand the science behind what they are doing.

Nope, I believe you're reading too much into it. What I'm saying in the chapter is that we have a particular approach, and the relevance of that approach will be decided by the market. Agreed that great knowledge of the actual science behind what you're doing is critical in both food and audio--hence the next chapter being about what we measure, and why.

 

[jcx]

but it reads to me like you are deliberately stoking the "objectist/subjectist divide"

 

[Jason Stoddard]

  but it reads to me like you are deliberately stoking the "objectist/subjectist divide"

Not at all. My position as a "subjective objectivist" or "objective subjectivist" is well-covered throughout the book.
 
If you find me a little touched in the head, or our company's position delusional, there are plenty of other companies out there that hew to a pure objectivist ideology (at least in marketing...I have yet to meet any audio engineer at any audio company that thinks that measurements are everything, and that every device that meets or exceeds currently-accepted standards of transparency sounds the same.)

 

[BeyerMonster]

Jason - I just read your latest - very insightful.  I can't help thinking that you've somehow (whether intentional or unintentional - I'm not sure) trying to make a correlation that the guys relying on measurements/science rather than what we hear (or in the example taste) are somehow possibly inferior?

I'm sure Jason can elaborate more in his next chapter, but they have touched upon this topic briefly in the past. Measurements are only as good as the process used to capture it and the relevance of the measurement itself.
To give you a sports analogy, The Oakland Raiders like drafting the fastest player they can find for WR, a skill position that can benefit from speed. This is often determined by 40 yard dash times(measurement). Historically, they often don't pan out because they suck at actually catching the ball(oops, measured the wrong thing).
At the amateur level (loose analogy to nwavguy), those 40 yard dash times are also often hand timed(measurement error) without consistently agreeing exactly when to start/stop measurements (inconsistent methodology).

Just my $.02

EDIT: typos

 

[KLJTech]

I wouldn't be so sure that we know exactly what to measure, or how exactly to measure it, especially when it comes to a device that plays music that stirs emotions.  

 

[Jason Stoddard]

  I wouldn't be so sure that we know exactly what to measure, or how exactly to measure it, especially when it comes to a device that plays music that stirs emotions.  

 
To be fair, measurements are absolutely critical in developing audio products. I'll cover a bunch of measurements in the chapter I'll post next, including some that may surprise you (stability, for example...many times, an edge-of-stability design won't manifest as overt oscillation, but as a slightly higher noise floor or noise floor modulation--and simulations of phase margin will only get you so far on a real layout). I'll also cover at least one instance of what we measure that's off the beaten path, and results in non-harmonically related output in surprising places. 
 
But, (1) we do believe there are sonic differences between components that measure similarly, (2) we do not believe these sonic differences align 100% with measurements, and (3) neither the sound scientists at large institutions with big $ NOR the guys that tilt at windmills have ALL the answers, but that we should not dismiss the contributions of smaller entities. If you don't agree with our position, I completely understand. 
 
Beyond that, let's please leave the objective/subjective challenges alone, lest we end up in Sound Science. 

 

[ktmracer12345]

Michelin starred chefs are expensive, have long waiting times and then there's El Bulli who use food science and Michelin chefs to achieve unprecedented results.

ElBulli was $300+ a plate, had a waiting list a year long, and ranked #1 in the world multiple times. It never achieved a profit and finally closed due to financial losses. I'm sure Schiit would love to have access to audiophile research and technology on the level of TI. But without a way to recoup those costs it'd drag Schiit down and we'd all be worse off because of it.

The way to push the envelope on hi-fi is increase the size of the user base. In order to increase the user base it needs to be accessible. $30k speakers aren't accessible. Tidal, Modi, Magni, Piston 2's, Q701's, HD598's...these are the products that are going to help push the envelope for hi-fi. More potential buyers means Schiit will be willing to spend more money on R&D, knowing that they will recoup the costs. If we want electrostatic products from Schiit, we just have to give them a way to recoup their expenses. Unfortunately 99% of the current audio users aren't aware these products even exist. They walk in Best Buy and drop $300 on a set of Beats thinking they'll achieve audio nirvana. It's sad to think more R&D dollars are probably being spent on choosing out popular colors for Beats than Audeze spends on research for their entire company.

 

[Byronb]

ElBulli was $300+ a plate, had a waiting list a year long, and ranked #1 in the world multiple times. It never achieved a profit and finally closed due to financial losses. I'm sure Schiit would love to have access to audiophile research and technology on the level of TI. But without a way to recoup those costs it'd drag Schiit down and we'd all be worse off because of it.

The way to push the envelope on hi-fi is increase the size of the user base. In order to increase the user base it needs to be accessible. $30k speakers aren't accessible. Tidal, Modi, Magni, Piston 2's, Q701's, HD598's...these are the products that are going to help push the envelope for hi-fi. More potential buyers means Schiit will be willing to spend more money on R&D, knowing that they will recoup the costs. If we want electrostatic products from Schiit, we just have to give them a way to recoup their expenses. Unfortunately 99% of the current audio users aren't aware these products even exist. They walk in Best Buy and drop $300 on a set of Beats thinking they'll achieve audio nirvana. It's sad to think more R&D dollars are probably being spent on choosing out popular colors for Beats than Audeze spends on research for their entire company.

+1

 

[Impulse]

but it reads to me like you are deliberately stoking the "objectist/subjectist divide"

There shouldn't be a divide anyway, just like politics, people are far too eager to pick a side these days. Why is it so inconceivable that a mixture of both approaches might actually work best?

There's no way current technology allows us to measure and account for every single variable, just like most people probably can't hear or distinguish a preference over every minute change in a chain, even when it should matter.

The best reviews and products out there seem to come from writers and engineers that understand this, IMO anyway. The size of the outfit involved doesn't necessarily correlate with this in the least.

Photography is the one market where I've observed the closest resemblance to audio where there's a very real mix of art vs science and a lot of data is obfuscated or hard to pin down (intentionally and otherwise).

If you aren't a photography geek then an analogy like that would be lost on ya tho, but it probably works better than food... Let's just avoid car analogies, please!

 

[darkfireblade25]

 
Yep, please do so! Sorry I didn't clarify that...even though there's a version that I've released for sale (mainly for people who really really want a hard copy) that doesn't invalidate the community-created versions...and they will be more comprehensive than the one I did in any case.

I personally bought the hard cover version and got it a few hours ago. I'm a firm believer in owning analogue versions of digital things and I gotta say, I didn't even realize how long the series of chapters were until I saw the thickness of it. Maybe we can get an add on booklet once the second volume gets some heft to it.