Mnyb;693385 Wrote: > > ...Hint electronics is used in other stuff than audio and laws of > pshysic are universally valid , nothing special with a circuit if it > happens to carry an audio signal no exceptions for that...
Yes - and some (much) of that stuff is WAY, WAY more demanding than audio. CERN neutrino detectors anyone? Almost anything to do with astronomy (try capturing a single photon that has travelled billions of miles), medical science such as NMR scanners, the list is endless. The amount of precision and low-level signal/noise handling demanded by these applications would make an audio designer shiver. The sheer engineering is almost impossible to grasp in some cases. I'm sick and tired of being told that there's stuff about the way computers and networks work that we don't understand... really this is the height of stupidity. There is no other branch of "engineering" - and I use that term loosely and somewhat ironically in this case - that comes within a million miles of the neurotic fantasies of "high-end audio" (ha!). Everything else I can think of manages to completely separate the aesthetic quality of the output/results from the technical qualities of the equipment. Audio is the only field I can think of where "better engineered" and "personally preferred" or "more enjoyable" are terminally confused. For example, I'd love a Ferrari GTO but it's not "better engineered" than a modern Ford. By almost any measure - and there are hundreds - the Ferrari is rubbish by moderns standards. It is however a thing of beauty and great fun to drive. One major issue at the heart of this is the lack of understanding about why audio measurements and preferences don't line up. Here's why: in the vast majority of cases, peoples expectations of what something should sound like are ONLY based on 2 things: 1)(sometimes) - what they THINK have heard it sound like before on other systems 2) (always) - what they THINK they WANT it to sound like It is impossible to measure these things - or even understand them - as they are purely subjective, non-codifiable experiences, unique to each individual. Also we know that aural musical memory is highly flawed (it is short term and non-granular unless specially trained) What does this mean? - it means that (to quote Peter Gabriel) "I know what I like and I like what I know". ... but it also means that (excluding loudspeakers) in PROPERLY CONDUCTED blind tests it will be impossible to reliably pick out components based on their sound because they simply don't sound different enough. It's about time we started applying the "CERN faster than light neutrino" test here... if 2 things sound different when logically they shouldn't, they probably don't actually sound different and the truth lies in the mind of the listener. Only a properly conducted blind test will reveal this truth. -- Phil Leigh You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it ain't what you'd call minimal... Touch(wired/W7)+Teddy Pardo PSU - Audiolense 3.3/2.0+INGUZ DRC - MF M1 DAC - Linn 5103 - full Aktiv 5.1 system (6x LK140's, ESPEK/TRIKAN/KATAN/SEIZMIK 10.5), Pekin Tuner, Townsend Supertweeters,VdH Toslink,Kimber 8TC Speaker & Chord Signature Plus Interconnect cables Stax4070+SRM7/II phones Kitchen Boom, Outdoors: SB Radio, Harmony One remote for everything. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Leigh's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=85 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93549 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
