What % of equipment reviews do you believe?
Jul 3, 2015 at 12:21 PM Post #361 of 381
There is no such thing as an amplifier that is just a wire with gain. It is just a theoretical ideal. A lot of amplifier designers say that their amplifier is built to mimic just a "wire with gain," but that is really just a marketing term. Just like the idea of a complete lack of colouration is just a theoretical ideal.

True that.
But I'm pretty sure that we are already into the Inaudible Coloration territory ... or inaudibly close :wink:
And that's already the null hypothesis ... anyone who thinks differently, should provide solid proof ... "most people think" is not.
 
Jul 3, 2015 at 12:39 PM Post #362 of 381
Funny thing is...all the amps and DACs I've used did sound the same.
redface.gif

 
Jul 3, 2015 at 1:36 PM Post #363 of 381
There is no such thing as an amplifier that is just a wire with gain. It is just a theoretical ideal. A lot of amplifier designers say that their amplifier is built to mimic just a "wire with gain," but that is really just a marketing term. Just like the idea of a complete lack of colouration is just a theoretical ideal.

 
If you want to get really theoretical, a wire with gain is imperfect because it carries current in chunks, and therefore makes a poor choice for a theoretical ideal.
 
At the quantum level all conductors are nonlinear because they conduct electricity one electron at a time. Since there is no such thing as 3.1415926 electrons but rather either 3 electrons or 4 electrons, electrical current is always delivered in discrete chunks and is therefore always nonlinear.
 
A current of 1 ampere is defined as one mole (6.24 x 10 to the 18th) of electron-sized charges of electricity passing a point in a second. The number of discrete electrons carrying this current is so large that it is common to think and as if there are such things as analog signals that are not quantized, but in fact all electrical signals are quantized. It is just that the quanta are very, very small.
 
Jul 3, 2015 at 7:00 PM Post #364 of 381
  A current of 1 ampere is defined as one mole (6.24 x 10 to the 18th) of electron-sized charges of electricity passing a point in a second. The number of discrete electrons carrying this current is so large that it is common to think and as if there are such things as analog signals that are not quantized, but in fact all electrical signals are quantized. It is just that the quanta are very, very small

 
Also a good point to bring up when someone starts going on and on about vinyl.  All those monomers in their precious records already have finite sizes.
 
Tell them it's already quantized!
 
Jul 3, 2015 at 7:21 PM Post #365 of 381
Also a good point to bring up when someone starts going on and on about vinyl.  All those monomers in their precious records already have finite sizes.

Tell them it's already quantized!


You can of course try to do that but I wont expect any changes/results.

A guy named Planck already told everyone that analog is just a big fat legend and Everything is actually discrete/digital .. that was more that 100 years ago and he even 'measured' that smallest quanta thingie .. and still, here we are discussing the sound of cables. Kinda depressing if you ask me.
 
Jul 3, 2015 at 8:30 PM Post #367 of 381
A guy named Planck already told everyone that analog is just a big fat legend and Everything is actually discrete/digital .. that was more that 100 years ago and he even 'measured' that smallest quanta thingie .. and still, here we are discussing the sound of cables. Kinda depressing if you ask me.

 
It would be nice if more people had a basic understanding of quantum theory.  We might have to get them on board with Ohm's law first though...
 
Jul 4, 2015 at 5:21 AM Post #368 of 381
From my exp, the onboarding time for science is between the ages of 5 and 15. Anyone who misses that window is pretty much 'lost in the woods'...very few (partial) exceptions from that 'rule' and it's usually a waste of time to try to steer someone on that path later.

Anyone who has a diff experience?
 
Jul 4, 2015 at 7:59 AM Post #369 of 381
From my exp, the onboarding time for science is between the ages of 5 and 15. Anyone who misses that window is pretty much 'lost in the woods'...very few (partial) exceptions from that 'rule' and it's usually a waste of time to try to steer someone on that path later.

Anyone who has a diff experience?


Not always, I think. But casual observations seem to support it. The frustration threshold certainly is lower at that age, and success in science classes at that age, if achieved, is a major contributor to the will to continue on in science. Also, much depends on the subject matter -- the "hard" physical sciences tend to see a higher attrition rate, in high school, than the life sciences. As a university educator, I can only say that I'm lucky to teach at this higher level -- the students here are highly motivated (they pay enough to be here, so it's 100% "they're here because they want to be, not because they HAVE to be"). And university students aren't far off from 15 as you say -- they're actually about 17-18 yrs old, fresh from their formative high school experiences.
 
p.s. my problem, and I echo the frustrations of many of my colleagues here, is to try to steer students at university away from applying to med school and towards fulfilling careers in biomedical research, basic and applied. Longer road, on average, but it's an uphill battle. 90% of undergrads in the Faculty of Science list themselves as "pre-med". Geez.
 
Jul 4, 2015 at 8:23 AM Post #370 of 381
   
It would be nice if more people had a basic understanding of quantum theory.  We might have to get them on board with Ohm's law first though...

 
Ohm's Law is one of the first things students here learn, in their Physiology courses (neurophysiology). Piece of cake for them. The thing that trips them up somewhat is membrane capacitance and the concept that membrane potentials take a finite time to depolarize and repolarize, because of the intrinsic membrane capacitances of nerve cells, and all excitable cells, in general. Cool stuff, most "get it", but it's still a conceptual hurdle for these students, in my experience.
 
Jul 4, 2015 at 10:18 AM Post #371 of 381
From my exp, the onboarding time for science is between the ages of 5 and 15. Anyone who misses that window is pretty much 'lost in the woods'...very few (partial) exceptions from that 'rule' and it's usually a waste of time to try to steer someone on that path later.

Anyone who has a diff experience?

 
By the time I was five or six years old, I was already conducting science experiments...armed with a microscope, bacteria samples, insects, lots of chemicals, countless science books, and so on.
cool.gif

 
Jul 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM Post #372 of 381
   
By the time I was five or six years old, I was already conducting science experiments...armed with a microscope, bacteria samples, insects, lots of chemicals, countless science books, and so on.
cool.gif

 
The IQ distribution curve can be highly skewered in some parts of the world 
wink.gif

 
What the heck are you doing on HF?  Go shake some (test) tubes!
beerchug.gif

 
Jul 4, 2015 at 10:48 AM Post #373 of 381
  The IQ distribution curve can be highly skewered in some parts of the world 
wink.gif

What the heck are you doing on HF?  Go shake some (test) tubes!
beerchug.gif

 
lol. I'm not as deeply into science as I was back then. Nowadays I'm more into creative stuff: music, anime, video games, headphones...and dreaming about creating all of the above, though I have created music my entire life; just not properly in a studio.
 
I thought it was interesting that you are a professor. What do you teach?
 
Jul 4, 2015 at 10:53 AM Post #374 of 381
  I thought it was interesting that you are a professor. What do you teach?


Neurophysiology. Synaptic mechanisms of learning and memory. Hippocampus and related brain structures. Electrophysiology of synapses and neurons.
 
Jul 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM Post #375 of 381
lol. I'm not as deeply into science as I was back then. Nowadays I'm more into creative stuff: music, anime, video games, headphones...and dreaming about creating all of the above, though I have created music my entire life; just not properly in a studio.

I thought it was interesting that you are a professor. What do you teach?


Forgot to add that performing very well in the 5-15 window is no guarantee that you wont end up in the woods later :p.
Being creative is cool & all but many enjoy that so much that they kinda forget to actually create anything.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top