jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 25, 2020 5:25:29 GMT 10
I see Audiophilestyle forum has introduced an object-fi subsection which is proving to be an interesting read - as much because of Audiophile Neuroscience's posts on there as the banning of some of the rabid members (usually so-called objectivists) from AS which tended to hijack every thread.
Anyway, I'm still banned (not that I'm a rabid objectivist - it's just that I'm a ........ - I'l let you fill in the missing definition in your own heads).
I wanted to introduce a different re-framing, for your consideration, to the well-worn paths that all these discussion seems to follow.
I've thought a bit about this & my feeling is that we are trying to bridge between two very different systems - the one of measurements which tends towards using simple test signals, on individual devices & measures short segments of the output signal (but to great depth) Vs our auditory perception which evaluates the analogue end product produced by the full system & not in short snippets but rather the whole track/song. The essence to this difference lies in auditory scene analysis where the brain is doing an ongoing analysis of the analogue signal & evaluating it against it's library of rules/sound structures/sound statistics (whatever it turns out to be the full definition for how auditory perception works) - this library being a learned asset derived from sound behaviour in the world.
When everything satisfies auditory perception the sound is considered natural. But the evaluation is happening over a longer time than is usually attributed to auditory perception - all the focus usually being on eidetic short-term memory. Auditory stream analysis being an on-going categorisation of the sound into various streams associated with real sound objects, effectively means it's doing an evaluation over a much longer term - any anomalies that occur in this stream which confuses this stream categorisation effects, throws auditory perception into a dilemma of where this anomalous sound fits - which auditory stream or background sound does it belong to - a bit like how a bistable optical illusion works - is the image a vase or two faces facing each other - we flip between the two?
Until people recognise this fundamental & vast difference between measurements & the way auditory perception works, there will always be the objectivists trying to re-frame everything into their narrow viewpoint i.e measurements are more sensitive than hearing; DBTs are needed, etc.
This is similar to what Fas42 says although it's expressed differently.
Thoughts?
|
|
jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 25, 2020 6:37:47 GMT 10
Follow-on thoughts, expansion on some of the above: - ASA categorises the on-going sound into the same stream based on a number of criteria involving amplitude, frequency, time, direction, beat frequency, etc but also on the progression of the sound within the stream i.e is the sound stream following the expected progress of the sound? This model of it's progress is something learned from experience of sound sin the world & I'm sure there are general principles/rules derived from these many examples - just like we seem to learn how to say full grammatically correct sentences just from hearing others sentences (just like what I just did, init?). IMO, at first, words are just various unconnected sounds but from the repeated hearing of the sound we learn the words (& associate them with objects, etc) & from the repeated hearing of the sounds of words strung together, we learning sentences. of course, feedback & correction of a child's use of language comes into play. And out of this type of rote learning & repetition/correction/feedback, we seem to extract the rules of language use.
On a more abstract, more generic level we generally absorb the rules by which sound behaves in the world.
To make a specific point about measurements Vs auditory perception, I believe a small anomaly in the progress of an audio stream can lead to a bigger effect on our perceptions. Even if we were able to identify & isolate this anomaly in measurements I believe it would appear to be inconsequential given our current "established" thresholds & understanding.
This is why I believe measurements have not come any closer to equating to perceptions - there's a different weighting/importance applied in perception which is context dependent. Measurements are absolute & tend to ignore context.
The other point to make is that, auditory perception, being the result of processing & analysis of sounds, means it's not absolute, it's variable - hence we can get used to a level of sound or the other side of this coin, we can be very happy with the reproduced sound & yet when something better is introduced, we can recognise this as improved sound
I also have the sense that blind testing is not the correct way to try to evaluate this as the anomaly will not cause us to jump or draw our attention, specifically - I believe it is more subtle than this - causing more of a shift in the underlying auditory processing - this processing is below our conscious level & the only thing that rises to a conscious level is an unease or lack of interest or fatigue in the system that is doing this. These sort of effects are not conducive to blind testing.
Ah but the argument is that why would non-blind testing work any better? Again, we see it mentioned often - people listen over a long period before they form an opinion of the character of the sound a device in a audio system. It's a felt impression & is easily dismissed as wishy-washy, feelings but gestalt is the word that best captures this.
|
|
jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 25, 2020 6:56:08 GMT 10
And some final thoughts - all of my thought above are IMO, not a fixed, unmovable viewpoint which brings me to wonder how such thoughts would go down on that thread on AS? I also noticed a similar (but different) thread on ASR "Science: Are You Consistant in Your Views? " where mhardy6667 makes some great posts which highlight the difference between scientific thinking & technician's thinking - to paraphrase "A scientist researches and develops NEW methods. The technician implements those methods"
And the majority on ASR are definitely technicians!!
|
|
|
Post by Audiophile Neuroscience on Feb 25, 2020 14:35:46 GMT 10
Hi John I wasn't aware that you were banned over at a.s.. I thought I saw your moniker but I may have been mistaken.
Anyway, I agree with a lot of your points but as before I don't necessarily ascribe the same importance to ASA as you do in the role of overall auditory perception. It's just one thing of many.
The post on AS merely highlighted for me the long-standing difficulty of trying to correlate objective measurements with subjective perceptions. As you say, measurements of the audio signal are not direct measurements of perception. They are surrogates or indirect markers. In medicine such markers are used all the time but the difference is we know exactly, well within limits, how that indirect marker compares to a gold standard test of what you think you are measuring. It's just calibration of one tool against another known and more accurate tool.
I don't think is necessarily rocket science. Irrespective of how complex perception is it must have by definition an evoking stimulus. The principle is pretty straightforward in that you can study that stimulus to observe what changes in the stimulus correlate and is concordant with some sort of change in perception.
As I mentioned in the thread over yonder no one seems to have had the time or the money or the means to look at it. Instead they just keep on talking about non-specific levels of distortion or jitter of whatever and even that doesn't seem to have been nailed down completely.
I mentioned in that other thread the example of dynamic range measurements and our perception of compressed sound, you know the loudness wars. I believe I can tell the difference in subjective sound between a very loud/compressed recording and a very dynamic/non-compressed recording. I sometimes look at the main two dynamic range measurements provided in J River and I get a reasonable correlation and concordance. I am not sure why audio engineers have not wanted to pursue this a little further and indeed find other objective measures that at least similarly give us a hint of what we should be expecting to hear.
It may be that things like warmth, or detail, or spaciousness, or transparency are just too vague and subjective. Maybe they are things that are added in somewhere in the neural processing after the signal has arrived but even so, there still must be cues somewhere in the evoking stimulus/signal. It is basic neurobiology. With warmth for example we know that spectral balance in the signal is important. At a touch more upper base in the EQ and it sounds a bit fuller and warmer.
So, if there are precious few measurements of the audio signal that inform us how the sound/music will be perceived, i.e. what will it sound like, what is the point of measurement? Well, that's all been covered as well as everyone here well knows. In my opinion, In a nutshell you are measuring the performance of the instrument to perform to spec. Not surprisingly, and as you say, I guess this is the domain of technicians and engineers, to implement the science. I would say the flow is science -> engineers -> technicians.
David ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All music is folk music. I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." - - Louis Armstrong
|
|
sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021)
Global Moderator
Posts: 226
About Me: Retired ex Principal Telecommunications Technical Officer with 43 years at Telstra (Australia)
I am also a Moderator in Hi Fi Critic Forum
Electronics hobbyist for >65 years with DIY projects including Loudspeakers, Stereo FM tuner, S/W Regen Receiver, Superhet AM ,
Synchrodyne PLL AM tuner (Phase Lock Loop),Stereo Tape Deck, Amplifiers including I.C. types, Class A, Class AB 100W/Ch. (ETI5000) 240W/Ch. Mosfet (AEM6000) ,several DACs , numerous PSUs including VERY low noise (<4uV) types etc.for myself and friends
Audio Industry Affiliation: NIL
|
Post by sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021) on Feb 25, 2020 16:59:17 GMT 10
I see Audiophilestyle forum has introduced an object-fi subsection which is proving to be an interesting read - as much because of Audiophile Neuroscience's posts on there as the banning of some of the rabid members (usually so-called objectivists) from AS which tended to hijack every thread. Anyway, I'm still banned (not that I'm a rabid objectivist - it's just that I'm a ........ - I'l let you fill in the missing definition in your own heads). Hi John The new sub forum in A.S has now developed into being virtually the same as it was originally in the General forum. When several members from the Objective side got what they asked for, they were no longer interested , and were either banned, or moved to A.S.R forum, which is predominantly Objective. Several then virtually kicked the Forum owner in the genital area suggesting that other members would be better served by posting in ASR instead. Before they departed however, they requested that I be banned from this new area, and 2 members in particular reported my posts in this area, one of which was simply a reply to a member who expressed her displeasure at me apparently breaking the rules by posting there. He wasn't even prepared to let me state that my reply in that thread had been made several weeks before he requested Admin to move his thread to the new area. Not satisfied with that, he then requested that my much earlier reply be removed. One of these 2 members even reported one of my posts in the General area that had been previously quite acceptable in that area. He then tried the same with another member. I am now a 2nd Class member in that forum, not being permitted to post anything other than measurements etc. in that area, whereas there are now numerous posts and replies from Subjectivists in that area that should not have been permitted.
My problem has arisen because many of the Objective side simply refuse to accept the results of the 6 separate DBT sessions by Martin Colloms, as well as confirmation from Barry, who I sent a comparison CD-R. They also refuse to accept the results of the tests that were performed with both yourself and Marcin Ostapowicz from JPlay, as well as numerous confirming reports, including 2 from highly qualified long term members last year .
Regards Alex
|
|
|
Post by Audiophile Neuroscience on Feb 25, 2020 17:26:31 GMT 10
Hi Alex as said in private emails I think you just need to sit tight for a while. Notwithstanding your understandable frustration at not being permitted to post in the new sub- forum I think you have to give credit to Chris moving the board in the right direction. He deserves some support and it is hoped that many members that abandoned CA/AS in the past because of bad behaviour of a few, will now return.
David ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All music is folk music. I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." - - Louis Armstrong
|
|
sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021)
Global Moderator
Posts: 226
About Me: Retired ex Principal Telecommunications Technical Officer with 43 years at Telstra (Australia)
I am also a Moderator in Hi Fi Critic Forum
Electronics hobbyist for >65 years with DIY projects including Loudspeakers, Stereo FM tuner, S/W Regen Receiver, Superhet AM ,
Synchrodyne PLL AM tuner (Phase Lock Loop),Stereo Tape Deck, Amplifiers including I.C. types, Class A, Class AB 100W/Ch. (ETI5000) 240W/Ch. Mosfet (AEM6000) ,several DACs , numerous PSUs including VERY low noise (<4uV) types etc.for myself and friends
Audio Industry Affiliation: NIL
|
Post by sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021) on Feb 25, 2020 17:33:58 GMT 10
It may be that things like warmth, or detail, or spaciousness, or transparency are just too vague and subjective. Maybe they are things that are added in somewhere in the neural processing after the signal has arrived but even so, there still must be cues somewhere in the evoking stimulus/signal. It is basic neurobiology. With warmth for example we know that spectral balance in the signal is important. At a touch more upper base in the EQ and it sounds a bit fuller and warmer. David ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All music is folk music. I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." - - Louis Armstrong Hi David The causes of these things are well known to most Audiophiles, and that includes E.E.s who are Audiophiles. As you are well aware. the sensation of added warmth can also be the result of a higher percentage of even order distortion. In fact, AKSA in DIY Audio (Hugh Dean from Aspen Audio in Melbourne) deliberately tailored even order distortion in some of his Solid State amplifier designs to give a Vacuum tube like warmth. This can also be achieved by choice of filter capacitor types in the PSU area, even with Digital A and V
Regards Alex
|
|
|
Post by Audiophile Neuroscience on Feb 25, 2020 17:55:35 GMT 10
It may be that things like warmth, or detail, or spaciousness, or transparency are just too vague and subjective. Maybe they are things that are added in somewhere in the neural processing after the signal has arrived but even so, there still must be cues somewhere in the evoking stimulus/signal. It is basic neurobiology. With warmth for example we know that spectral balance in the signal is important. At a touch more upper base in the EQ and it sounds a bit fuller and warmer. David ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All music is folk music. I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." - - Louis Armstrong Hi David The causes of these things are well known to most Audiophiles, and that includes E.E.s who are Audiophiles. As you are well aware. the sensation of added warmth can also be the result of a higher percentage of even order distortion. In fact, AKSA (Hugh Dean from Aspen Audio in Melbourne) deliberately tailored even order distortion in some of his Solid State amplifier designs to give a Vacuum tube like warmth.
Regards Alex
Hi Alex
I think these things need to be confirmed and in some way made quantifiable. If designers are voicing their gear to sound a certain way then it would be useful to know the measurements that they have relied upon to do so. If they have added even order harmonics it is presumably measurable. The trouble is there is no look up table that tells the ordinary person what that measurement means to their listening experience
David ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All music is folk music. I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." - - Louis Armstrong
|
|
jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 26, 2020 0:27:15 GMT 10
Hi John I wasn't aware that you were banned over at a.s.. I thought I saw your moniker but I may have been mistaken. Anyway, I agree with a lot of your points but as before I don't necessarily ascribe the same importance to ASA as you do in the role of overall auditory perception. It's just one thing of many. ...... David ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All music is folk music. I ain't never heard no horse sing a song." - - Louis Armstrong Thanks David Always enjoy your thoughtful replies. Yes, I got banned twice - first because Chris wanted to know my EE credentials when I posted some innocuous suggestion for people to try $10 RF attenuators on their SPDIF lines as I found it was beneficial to sound. I reacted at the audacity of this request as did others (Alex included, I think?). I suspect some people were in Chris's ear about this & a banning followed. I came back a year or two ago as Mmerrill99 because Chris would never answer any of my emails requesting requesting an unbanning. I was outed by some objectivists & Chris banned me again for being previously banned. Obviously persona non grata, at this stage, I reckon. Perhaps after years of challenging objectivists about the shortcomings of their measurements & DBTs, etc. this is to be expected or maybe it's just my abrasiveness & manner? As regards ASA, I could be regarded as a man with the proverbial hammer but I find it an elegant explanation for the many unexplained datapoints we see in this hobby - the ones I mentioned already & many more observations. Maybe I'm incorrectly including a lot of other auditory research under the umbrella of ASA as I don't perceive distinct boundary lines between these different lines of research - to me ASA is the research into the core principles for the workings of auditory processing & when I see research along the lines of "auditory perception uses statistical summaries" I include it as part of ASA In my experiments & further development of my DAC, I & many, many others (now customers) perceive undeniable improvements (across the board, system wide differences) using LiFePO4 battery power. Further improvements from supercapacitors instead of batteries as the power source brought further improvements - smaller but perceivable. I don't "voice" my DAC - rather I try to get the most realistic sound I can by investigating techniques - usually having to do with elimination of noise/stability, both from outside & self-generated by components. Now I challenge anyone to show me measurements on the analogue output of the DAC which reflects these audible improvements. I am hopeful that these will emerge in time & yet I suspect that because it is a system-wide perceptual change that it is a system-wide change to the analogue signal too. I'm sure you can see why I think ASA may well explain these perceptual differences & why current measurements won't find them unless a totally different approach & understanding is adopted. Indeed I was told by Amir, when he did a hatchet job ASR "review & measurements" on a 7 year old DAC of mine bought off ebay - a DAC in which the battery was dead & he was running it off some unknown SMPS for his measurements - he claimed that running it with a good battery would make no difference to the measurements. I could say the same for USB isolation (of the USB data signals) not of the ground or 5V lines - again a perceptible improvement in sound & I challenge objectivists to find the differences in the analogue signal from a USB DAC Of course, the all too often response from objectivists is that there is no difference there to measure - it's all in your head - so they don't bother, citing instead DBTs, settled science, etc. As you know ASA works back from the outcomes of auditory perception trying to tease out its working principles using what's known about the workings of other senses. The explanatory insight it provides for me is that it explains that auditory perception (like all other perceptions) is a processing task, a self-learning process, which seems to use pattern-matching, statistical analysis & as a result comparisons over a longer time-frame whereas measurements are very much a detailed snapshot of a small snippet. When a longer time-frame is used for measurements, I suspect that the signals/anomalies of note as far as auditory perception are concerned, don't appear as being of significance in measurements (often they are dismissed as below the threshold of hearing or a simplistic model of auditory masking is invoked to dismiss them). I agree with you that measurements particularly when you look at a site like ASR, are essentially a navel gazing exercise, bearing absolutely no relation to audio quality So to my mind, the large chasm between current measurements & auditory perception is that they are just two completely different frames of reference & trying to equate them is doomed to failure unless measurements change to reflect the workings of auditory perception - ASA being the best model for understanding this. I'm looking into PKane's DeltaWave & Distort app as a good advance in highlighting differences in music playback from one system to another - it might prove to be a worthwhile start to furthering this investigation of perceptually useful measurements?
|
|
jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 26, 2020 0:35:09 GMT 10
Hi John The new sub forum in A.S has now developed into being virtually the same as it was originally in the General forum. When several members from the Objective side got what they asked for, they were no longer interested , and were either banned, or moved to A.S.R forum, which is predominantly Objective. Several then virtually kicked the Forum owner in the genital area suggesting that other members would be better served by posting in ASR instead. Before they departed however, they requested that I be banned from this new area, and 2 members in particular reported my posts in this area, one of which was simply a reply to a member who expressed her displeasure at me apparently breaking the rules by posting there. He wasn't even prepared to let me state that my reply in that thread had been made several weeks before he requested Admin to move his thread to the new area. Not satisfied with that, he then requested that my much earlier reply be removed. One of these 2 members even reported one of my posts in the General area that had been previously quite acceptable in that area. He then tried the same with another member. I am now a 2nd Class member in that forum, not being permitted to post anything other than measurements etc. in that area, whereas there are now numerous posts and replies from Subjectivists in that area that should not have been permitted.
My problem has arisen because many of the Objective side simply refuse to accept the results of the 6 separate DBT sessions by Martin Colloms, as well as confirmation from Barry, who I sent a comparison CD-R. They also refuse to accept the results of the tests that were performed with both yourself and Marcin Ostapowicz from JPlay, as well as numerous confirming reports, including 2 from highly qualified long term members last year .
Regards Alex I got the impression the the new sub-forum was a breath of fresh air but I haven't followed it closely. Yes, I know from experience that Chris can be obstinate & gets his ear bent by advertisers & others on that forum & moderates accordingly Hopefully, it can work out to your satisfaction but you may well be a victim of your own challenges to objectivists
|
|
sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021)
Global Moderator
Posts: 226
About Me: Retired ex Principal Telecommunications Technical Officer with 43 years at Telstra (Australia)
I am also a Moderator in Hi Fi Critic Forum
Electronics hobbyist for >65 years with DIY projects including Loudspeakers, Stereo FM tuner, S/W Regen Receiver, Superhet AM ,
Synchrodyne PLL AM tuner (Phase Lock Loop),Stereo Tape Deck, Amplifiers including I.C. types, Class A, Class AB 100W/Ch. (ETI5000) 240W/Ch. Mosfet (AEM6000) ,several DACs , numerous PSUs including VERY low noise (<4uV) types etc.for myself and friends
Audio Industry Affiliation: NIL
|
Post by sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021) on Feb 26, 2020 7:24:24 GMT 10
Hi John The new sub forum in A.S has now developed into being virtually the same as it was originally in the General forum. When several members from the Objective side got what they asked for, they were no longer interested , and were either banned, or moved to A.S.R forum, which is predominantly Objective. Several then virtually kicked the Forum owner in the genital area suggesting that other members would be better served by posting in ASR instead. Before they departed however, they requested that I be banned from this new area, and 2 members in particular reported my posts in this area, one of which was simply a reply to a member who expressed her displeasure at me apparently breaking the rules by posting there. He wasn't even prepared to let me state that my reply in that thread had been made several weeks before he requested Admin to move his thread to the new area. Not satisfied with that, he then requested that my much earlier reply be removed. One of these 2 members even reported one of my posts in the General area that had been previously quite acceptable in that area. He then tried the same with another member. I am now a 2nd Class member in that forum, not being permitted to post anything other than measurements etc. in that area, whereas there are now numerous posts and replies from Subjectivists in that area that should not have been permitted.
My problem has arisen because many of the Objective side simply refuse to accept the results of the 6 separate DBT sessions by Martin Colloms, as well as confirmation from Barry, who I sent a comparison CD-R. They also refuse to accept the results of the tests that were performed with both yourself and Marcin Ostapowicz from JPlay, as well as numerous confirming reports, including 2 from highly qualified long term members last year .
Regards Alex I got the impression the the new sub-forum was a breath of fresh air but I haven't followed it closely. Yes, I know from experience that Chris can be obstinate & gets his ear bent by advertisers & others on that forum & moderates accordingly Hopefully, it can work out to your satisfaction but you may well be a victim of your own challenges to objectivists Hi John
When I last checked last night , there were only 2 threads that were purely objective and were WAY beyond the comprehension of the vast majority of members : Sound Engineering Repository. They are the kind of threads that would be more appropriate in Hydrogen Audio and other Engineering forums, not in a predominantly Audiophile based forum. Even in that thread he had to continually repeat that he would remove all posts that didn't comply with his demands . The rest of the threads in that area are very little different to those that would have previously been posted in the General area, with quite a few starting out as questions, yet there have been no requests so far (AFAIK) to remove posts like those from the member from the Lower Blue Mountains in NSW. If it hadn't been mainly for my long term stubborn challenges to the hard line Objectivists such as Mansr and a few others, David would not have been able to resume posting in A.S. This was also made possible by the eventual banning of the highly disruptive Ralf11, who openly challenged Chris several times before it finally happened. Even Kumakuma (Tom) and myself have now reached some degree of understanding. For Mansr, who as you would be aware even called himself Troll, it was a struggle to take control of the forum and become the main spokesperson. I suspect that if he had taken the comments on board in some of the replies to his Goodbye thread , and later on asked Chris to be permitted to resume posting in the forum, that he would have been welcomed back with open arms. Mansr does have a lot to offer, and I would also be happy to see him return if he knew when to bite his tongue.
Kind Regards Alex
|
|
jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 26, 2020 8:39:32 GMT 10
Yes, Alex, i didn't read the "state of the Union" thread, only the thread titles that interested me. Dipping into that thread now, I see it is pretty much business as usual with posters on there. I'll have a look at the threads you mention. Whose the Lower Blue Mountains member, Frank (Fas42)? Do you really think Mansr can bite his tongue - don't think he is having it his own way on ASR?
|
|
sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021)
Global Moderator
Posts: 226
About Me: Retired ex Principal Telecommunications Technical Officer with 43 years at Telstra (Australia)
I am also a Moderator in Hi Fi Critic Forum
Electronics hobbyist for >65 years with DIY projects including Loudspeakers, Stereo FM tuner, S/W Regen Receiver, Superhet AM ,
Synchrodyne PLL AM tuner (Phase Lock Loop),Stereo Tape Deck, Amplifiers including I.C. types, Class A, Class AB 100W/Ch. (ETI5000) 240W/Ch. Mosfet (AEM6000) ,several DACs , numerous PSUs including VERY low noise (<4uV) types etc.for myself and friends
Audio Industry Affiliation: NIL
|
Post by sandyk (RIP Alex, 1939 - 2021) on Feb 26, 2020 11:43:49 GMT 10
Yes, Alex, i didn't read the "state of the Union" thread, only the thread titles that interested me. Dipping into that thread now, I see it is pretty much business as usual with posters on there. I'll have a look at the threads you mention. Whose the Lower Blue Mountains member, Frank (Fas42)? Do you really think Mansr can bite his tongue - don't think he is having it his own way on ASR? Hi John Yes, it is pretty much business as usual, except now in an area demanded by some, who really didn't want it in the first place, as it would stop them from them the usual attacks on Audiophiles. I am trying to be careful about naming people as there is always somebody who out of spite would report back to again try and get me banned. In case you are unaware, on several occasions Mansr demanded in posts that I be banned from the forum, seconded by Kumakuma who was banned, then apologised and was unbanned again. I suspect that he will be closely watched though. Yes, you were correct about the poster. Unfortunately, Mansr's ego is even greater than his undoubted expertise in many areas, other than actually listening.
Kind Regards Alex
|
|
jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 27, 2020 1:00:44 GMT 10
Yes, Alex, i didn't read the "state of the Union" thread, only the thread titles that interested me. Dipping into that thread now, I see it is pretty much business as usual with posters on there. I'll have a look at the threads you mention. Whose the Lower Blue Mountains member, Frank (Fas42)? Do you really think Mansr can bite his tongue - don't think he is having it his own way on ASR? Hi John Yes, it is pretty much business as usual, except now in an area demanded by some, who really didn't want it in the first place, as it would stop them from them the usual attacks on Audiophiles. I am trying to be careful about naming people as there is always somebody who out of spite would report back to again try and get me banned. In case you are unaware, on several occasions Mansr demanded in posts that I be banned from the forum, seconded by Kumakuma who was banned, then apologised and was unbanned again. I suspect that he will be closely watched though. Yes, you were correct about the poster. Unfortunately, Mansr's ego is even greater than his undoubted expertise in many areas, other than actually listening.
Kind Regards Alex It's interesting that they demand something which they are seen not to want in the end. It reminds me of the constant demand for ABX only because they know 99.9% of home run ABX will produce a null result & therefore it's QED as far as they are concerned. When a positive ABX result is produced/shown for something that they have maintained shouldn't be audible, they go through all sorts of contortions to deny it - looking for cheating, demanding proctoring or video of the ABX listening test. I remember linking to ULTmusicsnob's ABX results on Head-fi showing he could discern high resolution downsampled to RB quality & totally different ABX results showing he could discern low levels of injected jitter. The interest I had in this was the process he went through to achieve these positive results - the tenacity required & his impressions of how difficult it was to find the "tell" in music files. I later discovered he was a conductor so he was used to hearing into the mix to isolate & identify anomalies. But interestingly, these sort of anomalies weren't found by him in either the HRes ABX or Jitter ABX test. From memory he basically focused on the attack of the piano as the differentiator in the jitter test & a totally different differentiator, to do with the 3D layering of the soundstage in the high res ABX tests. But the reaction of lots of the ABX mafia for rejecting these positive results ran the full gamut of reasons. But the final excuse for rejection these positive ABX results was along the lines of "why would we be bothered with wishy-washy perceptions like 3D soundstage". The other interesting thing is that he already knew he preferred the High res versions based on his experience (yes sighted normal listening) - didn't need this dedication to finding a tell, just a holistic impression of which preferred Amazing how the church of objectivism is so much of a religion for many in it - they certainly don't like being exposed as such. I just find it difficult to tolerate this level of hypocrisy - maybe because of a catholic upbringing in Ireland?
|
|
jkenny
Full Member
Posts: 83
About Me: Audio equipment designer forever in pursuit of more realistic & engaging music reproduction purely because of the extra enjoyment of music created by such reproduction.
http://Ciunas.biz
|
Post by jkenny on Feb 27, 2020 6:01:07 GMT 10
Unfortunately, Mansr's ego is even greater than his undoubted expertise in many areas, other than actually listening.
Kind Regards Alex Just looking at the Intona USB 3.0 isolator thread on ASR in which mansr is posting & he seems to be just bullishly spoofing as if he knew what he's talking about - the internal workings of this Intona. www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/intona-usb-3-0-isolator-review.11700/post-337656I know a bit about this area, myself so can tell he is bullsh*tting The previous Intona USB 2.o device used two FPGAs on each side of an isolation gap bridged by ISO devices. The FPGAs converted bi-directional 480Mbps (high speed) USB serial, packetised signals into slower ULPI parallel signals whose speed can be handled by these isolator chips. You can see the internals here Intona probably used this info to create their USB to ULPI interface? cross-hair.co.uk/tech-articles/ULPI%20interface.htmlI expect the USB 3.0 Intona follows the same technique, likely using faster/bigger FPGAs? So, contrary to what mansr says - the USB signal actually DOES reframe the USB signal in both directions from USB to ULPI, across the isolators as parallel signals & on the other side, the ULPI parallel signals are converted to serial, packetised USB 2.0 signals by the FPGA - it's fundamental to how the Intona device works.
|
|