If you have never heard the barbershop one before it's really a fun one.
But you have to use headphones to get the effect. I've had it in my
library for a while just to show what you can do with effects. It
doesn't do much with speakers.
--
Nonreality
-IF THE RULE YOU FOLLOWED BROUGHT YOU
iPhone;339385 Wrote:
IMO if one is going to spend money attempting to improve the SB3 and
Duet (and buy a linear PS), one should have bought a Transporter in the
first place (or save up the mod money until one can buy a TP). It is
just simple math.
Depends if you DIY or pay for the mods.
nuhi;338932 Wrote:
@Nonreality, that's it, at least you were wiser from the start. My
wishful thinking got to me, but at least as honestguv stated I did
learn my lesson.
Don't worry, I've fallen prey to this crap too. Just not with too
expensive of stuff because I didn't have the money to
I scored 26/30 and 30/30 for parts 1 and 2. It strikes me that this is
basically a test of memory rather than musical acuity. The fact that
the tunes are so dreary doesn't help. Like Sean, I started off
listening out for much more subtle differences than were actually
present - this probably
honestguv;339431 Wrote:
Audiophiles want to believe in magic. If they stop believing and start
following real world performance then a consumer based hobby is going
to be rather boring and unsatisfactory. How many readers and
advertisers would a home audio publications get that said all
Nonreality;339538 Wrote:
If you have never heard the barbershop one before it's really a fun one.
But you have to use headphones to get the effect. I've had it in my
library for a while just to show what you can do with effects. It
doesn't do much with speakers.
Yeah, that's a good
Nonreality;338606 Wrote:
You were not talking about archival at that point in the post so don't
pretend you were. It was your first comment to fix the sound problem
or were you just throwing it out there to get something going?
I wouldn't begin to pretend, Nonreality - I'll completely
cliveb;339603 Wrote:
I scored 26/30 and 30/30 for parts 1 and 2. It strikes me that this is
basically a test of memory rather than musical acuity.
Well, with your scores it sure is just a test of your memory! For
people with a severe form of amusia it is not, as their memory works
perfectly
hmmm... I scored 26 26. Halfway through the second test I lost the
will to live (boredom).
My eldest daughter is now doing it.
I'm interested to see what she scores as she has near perfect pitch and
performs in choirs, orchestras etc, whereas I'm an old rocker who can't
sing in tune but can
shyster;339462 Wrote:
I haven't take the tests, but the article doesn't seem to say much about
whether audiophiles are imagining things. The article does discuss how
the brain processes sound.Same opinion. Interesting article, though. Pity
there's no marriage,
children and happy life in the
seanadams;339423 Wrote:
You have reached an intellectual dead-end - a total impasse. You're
asking questions, but how could any answer satisfy you if you've
already decided that everyone else is full of it?It's my 70's side... ;)
seanadams;339423 Wrote:
The thing is, you are asking
I think the article is pretty clear. There is no objective reality, just
a collective average interpretation but individuals hear everything
slightly differently. So it begs the age-old question... Fidelity to
what? - answer - Whatever you want
Perhaps we should stop worrying about what's right
Nonreality;339523 Wrote:
I hope you have a helmet on and your life vest. :)
He doesn't need them. This was the genius of Blumlein. Of course it's
all a beautiful illusion. It doesn't matter.
One important implication of this article is that to design a good
product that appeals to the
DeVerm;339660 Wrote:
But did you read the article? What's your opinion about it?
I have just read it. I don't see anything new in what he says. It's
always been patently obvious that what people perceive is modulated by
how their brains work.
Of course, those who are interested in
I took the test. 27/30 23/30, though I guessed on the last 15 of test
2 because of boredom.
Like someone else mentioned I think this was more a test of memory than
anything. I really don't see how this is anyway applicable to what my
hearing is able to resolve as I was only given a single
I got 26/30 and 27/30 which means I am Joe Median according to the
histogram (which I thought I'd post a link to):
http://www.delosis.com/listening/summary.html
Darren
--
darrenyeats
SB3 / Inguz - Krell KAV-300i (pre bypass) - PMC AB-1
Dell laptop - JVC UX-C30 mini system
opaqueice wrote:
Nonreality;339538 Wrote:
If you have never heard the barbershop one before it's really a fun one.
But you have to use headphones to get the effect. I've had it in my
library for a while just to show what you can do with effects. It
doesn't do much with speakers.
Yeah,
Pneumonic wrote:
I took the test. 27/30 23/30, though I guessed on the last 15 of test
2 because of boredom.
Like someone else mentioned I think this was more a test of memory than
anything. I really don't see how this is anyway applicable to what my
hearing is able to resolve as I was
Robin Bowes;339798 Wrote:
Yeah, true. And all you need to do to get to the moon is make your own
rocket an fly there!
Well, I know two people that have made binaural recordings in their
spare time, but only one astronaut (and he's only been on the shuttle
and ISS a few times, never the
Yes, so it takes a cellphone way longer to cook your brain. A rough
estimate: only 30% of radiated RF from phone enters brain, let's keep
that at only 100 mW. A microwave big enough for my head is indeed
1000W. So with only 100mW the phone needs 10,000 times as long to
damage my brain
rayiner;339808 Wrote:
Say your microwave cooks a pizza in 100 seconds at 1,000 watts (ie: 100
kJ of delivered energy). By your reasoning, I can accomplish the same
effect by leaving the pizza next to a 25 watt lightbulb (say 10 watts
actually hitting the pizza) for about 3 hours. Try it
DeVerm;339835 Wrote:
pls. write about what you actually know about, and not just statements
that you could know are not true by checking it on the web.
Welcome to the Audiophile forum! You must be new here :)
--
radish
Robin Bowes;339849 Wrote:
I don't think a sample size of three is statistically significant. :)
No argument there.
But still, my point was that wiring up a couple of cheapish mics with a
coathanger or a dummy head isn't quite rocket science :-).
--
opaqueice
Robin Bowes wrote:
I don't think a sample size of three is statistically significant. :)
Laugh, but its weird, at 8 or 9, it can be, depending on the population.
You have to have really clear results to get the reject the null
hypothesis result, but you can do it with under ten.
--
Pat Farrell
24 matches
Mail list logo
