ralphpnj wrote: > By moving all equipment evaluation into the world of opinion, i.e. this > piece of equipment sounds better than that piece of equipment, all the > evaluations become equally valid and thus beyond criticism. In other > words, all the evaluations are equally pointless. docbob wrote: > It's needn't be all or nothing. Some evaluations are naturally opinion > and some are better presented as facts (e.g. measurements, presented > with the test conditions) ralphpnj wrote: > Quite true but where does one draw the line? docbob wrote: > It's pretty arbitrary, right? 16 years for driving. 18,000 ft for Class > A airspace... Julf wrote: > Those two are arbitrary in the sense that they could equally well be 18 > years (as in most European countries) or 5,500 metres (as it was in the > bad old, purely metric, Soviet Union). But, while no laws of nature, > they are not arbitrary in the sense of "well, whatever I think it is" - > they are both the result of extensive research, studies, debates and > agreements. The line I mentioned was the arbitrary line for when to use opinion and when to use something more objective in -equipment evaluation-, not design. > Pretty much like the current scientific and engineering understanding of > proper design of digital sound reproduction systems... Other than standards > (like red book), there aren't "agreements" for proper design, and engineers are free to make mistakes... and they do. I'm not intending to disparage all, most, or even many current designs. I just point out that design mistakes occur, even when the proper design is printed in the textbook.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ docbob's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64780 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=104227 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
