[sonitus mirus]

The audiophile claims and myths thread is included as an important link at the top of the Sound Science forum, and anyone that truly cared to learn about such things has more than enough information to allow them to make a reasoned decision on the subject matter.   My personal discovery was eye-opening, and I am thankful to have had access to this information.  
 
It may be a long way off, but what I am seeing is an apparent push to implement proprietary new audio formats that can be marketed and sold many times over in various versions that have artificial quality levels imposed.  Having an audio format with strong DRM, as an example, allows for the industry to impair more commonly distributed formats, and to charge a premium for content that sounds correct.  I hope this doesn't work, and it is frustrating to see all of the misinformation being thrown around in a market where there is already plenty of confusion and misunderstandings running rampant. 

 

[cel4145]

As late as yesterday he came out with some impossible nonsense that was refuted, (correctly), by at least two posters, no more than two posts later he came out with the same twaddle again, you think perhaps that's not frustrating to other contributors? I could understand the eventual resort to childishness and piling on.

As I said previously, I'm no saint and have done similar things myself. But that doesn't make the behavior the right thing to do or the best choice. And to deny that is to only look at part of the problem.

 

[uchihaitachi]

If two sources manufactured by different companies, yield identical (close to identical) results in objective measurements under the same load etc. Would this mean that they ought to sound the same (not accounting for placebo)?
 
In a way I am indirectly asking if properly conducted measurements are fully comprehensive? (If done under AES17 guidelines as an example...)

 

[GrindingThud]

Assuming all measurements were the same, yes.

 

[Steve Eddy]

If two sources manufactured by different companies, yield identical (close to identical) results in objective measurements under the same load etc. Would this mean that they ought to sound the same (not accounting for placebo)?

In a way I am indirectly asking if properly conducted measurements are fully comprehensive? (If done under AES17 guidelines as an example...)

Well, there are some components out there with "flaws" that that would alter the signal sufficiently to fall within known audible thresholds. Like some single-ended triode tube amps for example.

However all evidence indicates that it's pretty trivial to design components that are transparent to the point of inaudibility and no one has shown otherwise.

Of course this just covers electronics. All bets are off when it comes to transducers.

se

 

[uchihaitachi]

Well, there are some components out there with "flaws" that that would alter the signal sufficiently to fall within known audible thresholds. Like some single-ended triode tube amps for example.

By this do you mean, beyond audible levels, even flaws are irrelevant in general?

However all evidence indicates that it's pretty trivial to design components that are transparent to the point of inaudibility and no one has shown otherwise.

Of course this just covers electronics. All bets are off when it comes to transducers.

Could you expand on this, specifically why transducers are a different matter? Thank you!

se

 

[Steve Eddy]

Can you try not to nest your replies within a quote? When you do that, and I reply with quote, nothing you wrote appears and I have to copy/paste it from the message itself. Thanks.

By this do you mean, beyond audible levels, even flaws are irrelevant in general?

Not at all. Reading your post again, let me rephrase that.

If you have two pieces of gear that have audible flaws, but those flaws are identical for both units, then no, you wouldn't be able to tell them apart, even if the audible flaws were obvious.

Could you expand on this, specifically why transducers are a different matter? Thank you!

Because we just haven't been able to get things to behave as linearly when it comes to mechanical apparatus as we have been able to achieve in the electrical domain. And by transducers I'm talking about things like loudspeaker drivers, headphone drivers, phono cartridges, etc.

se

 

[BlackbeardBen]

A note here:

Someone (who is long-term active on the forums) ought to reboot the Testing Audiophile Claims and Myths thread.
 
Before that happens though, here's a question:  Should it pick up from where the old one stopped without copying all of the old links, or should it include those as a sort of super-summary?

 

[lamode]

 

Sponsor Announcements and Deals

Is what this website is really about - It is a business, not a place to freely discuss science of sound .
Just the fact that it's forbidden to write DBT in the thread that most needs it proves my point .
Imagine if the rule was : No mentioning or application of Ohm's Law or the Sampling Theorem in the Sound-Science thread ?
And it raises some serious questions about certain peoples integrity .

 
It seems clear that you are right but it doesn't have to be this way. I am active on many forums such as cars, photography, etc, (that are also run as businesses) and I haven't seen protectionism like this anywhere else.
 
Recent example: someone posted about a canjam event in Germany yesterday. Within an hour the post and any quotes of the post were deleted. It wasn't a head-fi event, but the information was of value to European head-fiers.

 

[uchihaitachi]

Head-fi, the North Korea of the forum world.

 

[Ruben123]

I keep laughing while reading tera thread. Wonder how it compares to Clip+, sighted and blind tested...

The tera even needs an amp! Excuse me?! $1000> and not enough? Also it plays wav only. Everyone their taste I guess.

 

[RRod]

   
It seems clear that you are right but it doesn't have to be this way. I am active on many forums such as cars, photography, etc, (that are also run as businesses) and I haven't seen protectionism like this anywhere else.
 
Recent example: someone posted about a canjam event in Germany yesterday. Within an hour the post and any quotes of the post were deleted. It wasn't a head-fi event, but the information was of value to European head-fiers.

 
I was amazed when people were allowed to call out HDTracks on one of its own threads a few months back. Guess none of us got reported ^_^

 

[RRod]

I keep laughing while reading tera thread. Wonder how it compares to Clip+, sighted and blind tested...

The tera even needs an amp! Excuse me?! $1000> and not enough? Also it plays wav only. Everyone their taste I guess.

 
But I hear it turns my square waves into tesseract waves the SQ is so gud!

 

[maverickronin]

  But I hear it turns my square waves into tesseract waves the SQ is so gud!

 
It skipped 3d and went straight to 4d?
 
Impressive.
 

 

[Ruben123]

I never really heard such $$ stuff but I keep wondering... differences are of course quite small, but HOW can one pretend to hear the ´warmth´ or call what ever you want. Must there be a first reviewer who says such a thing... and then everyone agrees that the DAP has very mild mids, though extremely precise trebles- and keeps repeating that?