[bigshot]

You're perceiving attacks that aren't attacks, and responding in a way that encourages other people to fight back. Then it becomes a series of attacks and counter attacks that never end. If you enjoy being argumentative and you really don't care a bit what other people think of you, that is a fine way to be, I know there are people who are just naturally ornery and contrary and that is the way they are. But if you actually want to share and learn from others, it's like slamming a door on what you're trying to do. You need to make an effort to get along if that is the way you want to be.

 

[Davesrose]

You're perceiving attacks that aren't attacks, and responding in a way that encourages other people to fight back. Then it becomes a series of attacks and counter attacks that never end. If you enjoy being argumentative and you really don't care a bit what other people think of you, that is a fine way to be, I know there are people who are just naturally ornery and contrary and that is the way they are. But if you actually want to share and learn from others, it's like slamming a door on what you're trying to do. You need to make an effort to get along if that is the way you want to be.

Starting a post with "They are wrong!" or "Oh dear, that’s even worse than the first one!" comes across as aggressive and argumentative as I perceive it. Then also have a long post saying the author doesn't know anything about recording, before then apparently reading that they are a professional and have offer scenarios of why in that author's 50 years of experience would use it. That's not conducive to just providing the pertinent information. Anyway, I'll try to have better internet behavior and either not engage Gregorio or be better about staying calm and just trying to filter what's on topic.

 

[bigshot]

Nope. Attacking your argument isn't the same as attacking you. Ideas and arguments are honed on the whetstone of disagreement. If you perceive disagreements as an attack on you personally, you can't get anything out of a debate. And no one can get anything from your arguments because you stop listening when you feel you've been attacked.

When someone says you are very wrong, it's a cue that you should carefully consider their points and attempt to understand them. You'll never win a debate if you don't understand your opponent's arguments better than he does himself.

This thread has turned into people talking past each other. That is a choice, not an inevitability. It isn't impossible to get along with Gregorio. He knows his stuff. As a pro, he doesn't always look at things from the same perspective as a hifi nut does, but the information below that is solid. And info is what should be discussed, not perspectives.

 

[Davesrose]

Nope. Attacking your argument isn't the same as attacking you. Ideas and arguments are honed on the whetstone of disagreement. If you perceive disagreements as an attack on you personally, you can't get anything out of a debate. And no one can get anything from your arguments because you stop listening when you feel you've been attacked.

When someone says you are very wrong, it's a cue that you should carefully consider their points and attempt to understand them. You'll never win a debate if you don't understand your opponent's arguments better than he does himself.

This thread has turned into people talking past each other. That is a choice, not an inevitability.

I was referring to attacking the author of a linked article, who may be an experienced professional. If you read that article, and it is revealed that the author has years of experience at the end, then you don't have to first be dedicating your post spending many paragraphs saying they're inexperienced or don't know any better. Or not reading the poster that you're responding to that has a short paragraph providing a short overview of how a 16bit ADC doesn't fully fill a 16bit file, and how that's different than a 32bit file in editing. That can be a pertinent comparison of of new recording devices, that while they are limited to 20bit ADCs, go through processing for 32bit float.

At any rate, I will try to be more cordial and concisely on topic myself. Not everything has to be a debate.

 

[bigshot]

If everything was a debate, that would be better than attacking each other.

 

[Davesrose]

If everything was a debate, that would be better than attacking each other.

The best situation is that we avoid the ad hominems and accept that debate means first understanding what the other poster is saying, before supplying our own supported opinion. Debating ideas that are informative. I shall try to be better about adhering to that, and being more concise if I notice there might be issues about semantics.

 

[gregorio]

I find it impossible to have any productive exchange with you.

Not surprising that! If you are going to make false statements, not read what you’re responding to or even what you yourself are quoting or posting, try to relate everything to a very significantly different field and then use ad hominem attacks, how do you expect that a “productive exchange” could ever be possible?

I was referring to attacking the author of a linked article, who may be an experienced professional.

I don’t doubt he’s an experienced professional but being a professional journalist even if they’ve been recording their interviews for 50 years doesn’t mean they have a deep understanding of audio. Heck, I know world class musicians with Grammys who don’t know the first thing about audio!

I’m a professional, I’ve been driving a car for 40 years, therefore I know what I’m talking about when discussing how F1 cars work. Sure I do, right up until someone who actually drives a F1 car or is an F1 engineer for a living turns up and calls me out on the basics. Your argument is fallacious!

“For example, I've always recorded interviews wherever I am.” - What interviews? How often are professional production sound mixers/recordists interviewed and why would they record them? This is not indicative of an audio recordist, entirely indicative of a professional journalist or writer though.

I’m not attacking the author’s profession, he’s maybe very knowledgeable about his profession, unless he’s claiming to be an audio professional, in which case he knows less after 50 years than I’d expect a first year student to know after 5 weeks!

I’ve taught about 1,500 aspiring audio engineers (when I was a senior lecturer at a university in the subject). I’ve worked with “engineers” who earned £50 for the odd pub gig and therefore called them professional engineers, I’ve worked with some of the top recording engineers in the world in some of the world’s top recording studios. My first feature film was 25 years ago and I spent many days sitting with the production sound recordist during the filming on the 007 stage of Pinewood Studios, I’ve done a bit of production sound recording on films myself and been on the audio post team of numerous projects for the BBC, many others and quite a few theatrical films over the last nearly 30 years, it’s what I do for a living. Now an “Appeal to Authority” is a fallacy, so I’m not going to list all my professional experience or use it as the basis for my argument but I can tell the difference between a real professional who knows what they’re talking about and an amateur who knows very little!

G

 

[bigshot]

I'm making an effort too

 

[Steve999]

I'm making an effort too

You’ve made huge improvements over the last few months, IMHO. Hope you don’t mind my saying so. It sets a good example for the forum in terms of all of us trying to improve the tone and create a more inviting atmosphere.

 

[Lexxie]

Two words. Phase distortion. Study it this weekend and we'll get to what role it may play in ADC next week after the test on Monday.

For a little sugar and spice, I will also mention that since "inaudible level" arguments by INTJ types have gone through a slew of debunkings in the past decade, if you dare to edit/master/process anything with data below inaudible threshold but still near the same order of magnitude of said threshold, you're really playing with fire for quality.

Remember, in sound reproduction EVERYTHING is lossy except storage and transport. What you lose in phase A may be inaudible, just as what you lost in phase B was inaudible, just as what you lost in phase C was inaudible. But put A+B+C together et voilà you got a difference.

These people seem to really believe in the Zeno paradox. Add 1 grain of salt, no difference was detectable in A/B tests. Therefore, since each time you add 1 grain you have established with science that there is no difference, you need never worry about over-salting the soup. They use FR as their golden idol and other oversimplified representations of acoustic phenomena as their golden idols, in spite of sound character literally being a holistic temporal phenomenon.

At the end of the day you're quantizing a continuous analogue sample and reconstructing it with a fractional pittance of the real raw data with some Nyquistian magic and faith in infallibility thereof. Is the end of science finally here? No new discoveries will ever overturn scientific paradigms ever again? Some said so when Newton's theories lasted centuries. Wonder what happened there, can someone remind me what always happens to dogma?

So yeah anyway, anything that makes you dataset better approximate the real data it's trying to reproduce, won't hurt at worst and may likely be helpful for producing better remasters in 2082.

 

[Steve999]

@castleofargh help us please!!!

 

[Davesrose]

 

[gregorio]

Two words. Phase distortion. Study it this weekend and we'll get to what role it may play in ADC next week after the test on Monday.

Another two words, “red onions”. Study red onions this weekend and we’ll get to what role they may play in ADC next week. I’ll give you a clue though, it’s about the same role as your two words!

The rest of it:

This isn’t the sugar and spice forum and if there’s a “slew” of debunkings, it shouldn’t be hard to link to just one or two of them with reliable evidence.

There’s always “data below inaudible threshold”, so you’re saying no one should ever dare to edit/master/process?

An ADC doesn’t reproduce sound, it has nothing to do with sound.

I think you’ll find that science established that 1+1=2, not 1+1=1 (no difference). However, given that this is about the oldest science dogma we have, then 1+1=2 must be wrong because if that scientific paradigm/dogma hadn’t been overturned there would have been no new discoveries in the last 10,000 years or so.

Thanks for your insight into the knowledge, understanding and rational thinking abilities of audiophiles, very enlightening indeed, with the added bonus of being highly entertaining, certainly gave me a big laugh!!

G

 

[bigshot]

I think it's interesting how someone can mention a bunch of technical concepts in a post without having any conception of what any of them mean. Are they copy/pasting and paraphrasing from somewhere else? Are they creating believable sounding word salad? Is it generated by AI? Maybe it's the 21st century equivalent of a poem or sonnet?

 

[Davesrose]

I think it's interesting how someone can mention a bunch of technical concepts in a post without having any conception of what any of them mean. Are they copy/pasting and paraphrasing from somewhere else? Are they creating believable sounding word salad? Is it generated by AI? Maybe it's the 21st century equivalent of a poem or sonnet?

Is this forum popular enough for a bot? Just in case, I thought my linked video has a good overview of how there's different phase distortion with a live performance and a transducer. And the only time you might perceive a distortion is tone generators or an anechoic chamber.