I'm aware of that and that's the reality that I perceive from my system …
You’re just going round in circles, making BS points that have already been addressed and questions put to you that you simply ignore and then just repeat the same BS again. It’s like explaining to a 5 year old that there is no tooth fairy, them just sticking their fingers in their ears and the next day insisting the tooth fairy visited again. Again, the “
reality that you perceive” is a magical invisible speaker between the two stereo speakers, are you seriously arguing that is actually the case or, is it an obvious fact that what you perceive is NOT “
the reality”?
We rely on multiple views of objective measurements using multiple instruments and not just on the analog output of a DAC from an AP555B where other parameters cannot be measured to see where we perceive a potential change in sound can be loosely attributed to objectively
Hang on, first it’s “trust your ears”, then it’s “I rely on my sight to hear”, now it’s “I/we rely on multiple views of objective measurements”, you can’t even get your own story straight! Also, if it’s “
not just on the analogue output of a DAC” then what part of a DAC do you think you are listening to? Lastly, what “
other parameters cannot be measured” on the analogue output of a DAC and if they cannot be measured how can they even be parameters?
"ministry of audio science"
So, I state you apparently don’t even have an understanding of science expected of a young school child and then you state the above, indicating you don’t understand the difference between religion and science, thereby proving my statement true. Well done, and thanks!
Bad noise spectrum: …
Good noise spectrum:
Audible? Absolutely to some people, but not to everyone of course because "all sources sound the same" absolute statements from the ministry of audio science
So let me get this straight, you’re sitting there listening to a 240MHz data signal (square wave/eye pattern) that apparently makes you “
cry and have goosebumps” but that experience is ruined by noise that’s “
audible absolutely to some people” which is more than 239.9MHz lower? So not at all delusional!
None of those absolutist science are used when manufacturing great sounding audio gears that actually make people cry and have goosebumps from sheer sound quality
So DACs do not use any math to implement filters, oversampling, clock recovery, etc., there’s no scientific measurement of signal input, great sounding gears do not use circuits, resistors or other electronic components based on and calculated with Ohms Law or the Maxwell’s Laws and 1+1=2 is not “absolutist”. How do you think DACs are designed and manufactured then, do you think they’re made by the intuition of magical little audiophile pixies which then travel to your sitting room to make your eyes water and give you goosebumps? Do these little audiophile pixies only work when audiophile are listening but go on strike when non-audiophiles are listening or objective testing is occurring?
I suppose it stands to reason that if you don’t understand what the word “science” means, then you also couldn’t understand what the word “technology” means either, as technology is the practical application of science. Keep flapping those arms, you’re doing a great job of getting even higher than Dunning-Kruger’s “peak of mount stupid”!
G