Mnyb wrote: > Foo measurement ?! Of course you must asses product performance even if > they happen to perform beyond human capability of hearing ? And > measurmant functions as sanity checks, if for some reason design errors > would creep into the project . > > (snip).
I used the term Foo-measurements in relation to the fact that Sean Adams stated this in his post of the measurements ""if we look closer at *some of the characteristics that we think will determine subjective sound quality*, there are some pretty substantial differences between transporter and any other DACs I've tested." but the measurements themselves show nothing that is considered audible You, either agree that these measurements DO have a bearing on audibility & are willing to outline your thinking OR they DO NOT have a bearing on audibility & Sean Adams above statement is Foo. I'm simply drawing attention to the patently obvious, to me, lack of consistent logic & variability in treatment that is being applied here I can guarantee you that when measurements are produced for a certain recently introduced USB signal regeneration device that these measurements will be summarily dismissed on the basis of inaudibility. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ jkeny's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35192 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103776 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
