NealG Wrote:
> Hm big :)
>
> Sean have you listened subjectivley yet? What do you hear?
Yes, it sounds great, but I honestly don't feel qualified to talk about
subjective differences - I'd be hard pressed to tell the different
between 320K MP3 and lossless PCM, so I rely on my equipmen
Andrew L. Weekes Wrote:
> Out of curiosity, where is the jitter measurement being made, is it
> demodulated at the analogue output?
>
> Just based on my quick calc's, in a 20k bandwidth, 3.5ns would equate
> with only 67dB dynamic range, which I'm sure isn't the case, 1nS would
> only be around
Yannzola Wrote:
> Double blind surgery?
>
> y.
Yeah its where neither I nor the patient have a clue what is going
on!!
LOL
Nic
--
DrNic
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/aud
DrNic Wrote:
> Unfortunatley double blind RCT's still form a prominent part of my
> everyday life in surgery, and the need to critically appraise the stats
> that accompany them...
Double blind surgery?
y.
--
Yannzola
___
audiophiles mailing list
a
On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 14:48 -0700, DrNic wrote:
> were not fully conversant with the concept!! Unfortunatley double blind
> RCT's still form a prominent part of my everyday life in surgery, and
> the need to critically appraise the stats that accompany them...
True. Of course stereo isn't life and
I did deaf testing on my SB2, but I couldn't tell the difference.
(As a broadcast TV equipment designer, blind testing never made much
sense to me).
--
Patrick Dixon
www.at-view.co.uk
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
ht
pfarrell Wrote:
>
>
> I know all about the theory of double blind testing. My PhD advisor
> beat me pretty hard about it, and the University made all PhD students
> take some hideous statistics classes.
>
I had hoped this to be the case - I would have been disappointed if you
were not fully c
On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 12:16 -0700, DrNic wrote:
> pfarrell Wrote:
> > Have you read up on the "value" of blind testing?
> Not sure what you are getting at with this statement. If it is purely
> aimed at blind testing in audio then there may be a different answer
> (please let me know what it is),
pfarrell Wrote:
>
> Have you read up on the "value" of blind testing?
>
Not sure what you are getting at with this statement. If it is purely
aimed at blind testing in audio then there may be a different answer
(please let me know what it is), but I would categorically state that
double blind
Mike Hanson Wrote:
> Sharing ideas is a good thing, but trying to do "online comparisons" is
> a virtual waste of time. (Or should that be "a waste of virtual
> time"?)
>
> -=> Mike Hanson <=-
He he!!
Love it!
Nay probs there Mike.
Nic
Now - letting thread "stay on topic"...
--
DrNic
___
Here's a thought: Could it be something like ReplayGain or some such tag
info gumming up the works? I hear that server side FLAC's can be "gain
adjusted" while onboard decoded FLAC's cannot. Could this be an issue
=somehow= although I realize that in this instance it doesn't make
sense (since
Pat Farrell wrote:
I haven't see solid statistics to back it up, but I expect most
audiophiles do not have flat ears. From what I can pick up of the
demographics, audiophiles are men with money to spend on audio toys.
That means they are over 30 and often part of the baby boomer
generation. My k
Quite!
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
--
Mike Hanson
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
m1abrams Wrote:
> No contest my apple was the shiniest! But the free pony ate it :(
My apple will always be shinier, because it's -imaginary-!
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
--
Mike Hanson
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://
On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 03:37 -0700, Mike Hanson wrote:
> DrNic Wrote:
> > I would love to see the spectral map of hearing for the audiophile set
> > (and for the techs too) and then lets comment on how good the real
> > "final stage" is in their systems... ! :)
> Unfortunately, it's not just frequ
Hi all,
I'm in touch with Trichord Research who do a number of very good clock
and PSU updates for CD players in the UK. I've asked if they could
update the Squeezebox and they came back with a couple of questions,
which I hope someone here could answer for me. Hopefully this is the
correct forum
Mike Hanson Wrote:
> Don't worry, I wasn't accusing you of being heavy-handed or over
> emotional. I was merely trying to add some perspective to the
> situation. We may as well be having a conversation about who has the
> shiniest apple. Of course, it depends on the ambient light, the
> view
DrNic Wrote:
> I was not intending to start a "rant" either back or forth!! Just (like
> everyone else) putting in another view point/opinion... :)
Don't worry, I wasn't accusing you of being heavy-handed or over
emotional. I was merely trying to add some perspective to the
situation. We may a
lostboy Wrote:
> Just in case DrNic's language has confused the non British English users
> of this forum. The phrase "As for FLAC - its the dogs" is (I think)
> meant to be short for " ... it's the dog's bollocks" -
> http://english2american.com/dictionary/b.html refers. Of course I
> maybe wr
DrNic Wrote:
> I would love to see the spectral map of hearing for the audiophile set
> (and for the techs too) and then lets comment on how good the real
> "final stage" is in their systems... ! :)
Unfortunately, it's not just frequency response that counts here.
There's also the sensitivy to t
Just in case DrNic's language has confused the non British English users
of this forum. The phrase "As for FLAC - its the dogs" is (I think)
meant to be short for " ... it's the dog's bollocks" -
http://english2american.com/dictionary/b.html refers. Of course I
maybe wrong here :-), but I agree
21 matches
Mail list logo
