Civility

[esldude]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

 

I can count on one finger the number of people I've encountered in my lifetime who believe that transferring binary data over the Internet changes it's sound quality.

I know of at least 2.  There are a few others I am pretty sure.  

 

Neither they nor my ears have convinced me they are correct.  

[fas42]

38 minutes ago, plissken said:

Then using measurements and bias controlled evaluation methods explain.... 

 

I didn't know air currents around my ADC could effect it's sensitivity. I'll capture a track with a fan blowing air on it and one with not. Let me know which is which. 

 

 

 

Subtle variations happen all the time. All these tweaks seem to be able to surmount them. 

 

An ADC aiming above 16 bits is getting into hairy area - 24 bits is a nightmare, for the device - yes, you'll get numbers, but just try to get perfect repeatability of digits heading into the 24 bit zone.

 

Tweaks often just make things different, not necessarily better - the trick is know when the sound is genuinely improving, rather than just varying.

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, esldude said:

Other than at the very beginning, people earn money everyday doings things they know they can do.  Most people are similarly uncomfortable when starting a job they haven't done previously.  So your offer is VERY different from a job.

Ever seen those street hustlers running the follow-the-marble scam? There's usually no shortage of suckers willing to bet real money they can succeed at a seemingly simple task they have never done before (I have yet to see anyone stupid enough to try it twice).

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, esldude said:

I know of at least 2.

Who is the second?

[esldude]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Ever seen those street hustlers running the follow-the-marble scam? There's usually no shortage of suckers willing to bet real money they can succeed at a seemingly simple task they have never done before (I have yet to see anyone stupid enough to try it twice).

So how can we use this "confidence game" strategy to get subjectivists to take blind tests?  Wait a minute....isn't that another thread? Er.....no I guess a different topic actually. 

[christopher3393]

1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

I respect what Archimago does very much. I don't consider my message compromised. In some ways I consider my usual offer of $2000 very gracious indeed. 

 

The seemingly odd way it's perceived is not on me and I think the reaction is a cautionary tale about how much the subjective person fears exposure. 

 

 I strongly disagree with this. Let's ask archimago.

[esldude]

7 minutes ago, mansr said:

Who is the second?

Martin Colloms.  He of the super precise ever moving upward subjective sound quality index.  

 

Here is a short explanation of his index that originally only went to 10. 

http://colloms.com/pages/review.aspx

 

Here is a partial list as of a decade or so ago of power amplifiers.  The last number is his subjective score of the quality with higher being better.  Said to be a linear scale, a Krell KSA 50 once judged as 9.7 of a possible ten has been superseeded by Krell Evolution One which is more than 13 times better.  Perhaps Sandy K can tell us how many points the various transfer methods amount to according to Mr. Colloms. 

 

Krell Evolution One 130
Conrad Johnson Premier 350SA 110
Krell FPB700cx 100
Audio Note Ongaku 85
Karan KSA 450 80
Krell Evolution 402 75
Krell FPB 400cx 75
Krell FPB 400 65
Krell FPB 650m 55
Cary 300se LX20 (fixed bias) 50
Hot Tubes JD1 50
Cary 805 c (load dependant) 45
Krell FPB600 45
Conrad Johnson MV60se [6550] 40
Audio Note Kegon SE ( WE300B) 40
Krell FPB300 Mk2 39
Cary 300se LX20 (auto bias) 38
Conrad Johnson Premier 8a 38
Conrad Johnson LS70 38
Edge NL 10 Mono 37
Karan KA S270 power 36
Cary 572 SE 35
Conrad Johnson Premier 140 35
Conrad Johnson MV60se [EL34] 35
DNM PA3s 33
Halcro DM 38 33
Krell FPB300 (original) 33
Naim NAP 500 32
Krell KAS 2 31
Krell KAS-2 30
Audio Research VT 150 (SE) 29
Audio Research VTM200 28
Naim NAP 250 classic 26
Cyrus PA 7 monos 24
Bel Canto SET 80 23
Conrad Johnson MV55 23
Krell MDA 300 23
Conrad Johnson MF 2300 22
Conrad Johnson MF 2500 22
Mark Levinson ML 333 22
Krell KSA 100s 21
Krell KMA 160 21
Audio Research Classic 120 20
Classe CA 200 20
Flying Mole DAD -M100 proHT 20
Krell KSA150B 20
Krell KSA200s 19.5
Krell KST power 19.5
Audio Research D120 19
Audio Research D120 19
Conrad Johnson MV125 18.5
Audio research MA100 18
Audio Research D25 18
Audio Research D400 18
ARC D125 18
Krell KSA 80 17.5
Tag McLaren 100X5R stereo 17.5
Classe CA 201 17
Electrocompaniet AW 250 power 17
Muse 175 power 17
Audio Research M300 16
Cary SLP 70 Power 16
Goldmund Mimesis 3 power amp 16
Jadis JA200 16
Mark Levinson ML 20.5 16
Audio Research SP11 Mk2 15.5
Musical Fidelity A370 15.3
Jadis JA 30 power 15
Sharp 1 bit SM-X100 15
Spectral DMA 50 (pre 1990) 15
Audio Research M 300 14.5
Krell KMA 100 II 14
Sunfire 300W 14
YBA 1 power 13.5
Cello Performance power amp 12.8
Radford STA 25II 12
Technics SE-A 3000 power 12
Audio Research D115 II 11
Quad 202 10
Krell KSA 50 9.7
Quad 606 8.5
Quad 405 7.3
Quad 303 6.5

[fas42]

Taking blind tests to see if one can hear differences is, to repeat myself for the n'th time, 100% pointless. All that matters is whether one is closer to making the playback system "invisible" - that is, you only hear the characteristics of the recording, and none whatsoever of the playback setup. Anything else may be a fun hobby, but is not about high fidelity reproduction.

[christopher3393]

2 hours ago, plissken said:

 

I respect what Archimago does very much. I don't consider my message compromised. In some ways I consider my usual offer of $2000 very gracious indeed. 

 

The seemingly odd way it's perceived is not on me and I think the reaction is a cautionary tale about how much the subjective person fears exposure. 

 

Yes, but archimago is referring to the way one addresses people. It is about one's tone in communicating, not about financial quantities at all. Not even in the ballpark. It is about how you treat people with your words. I think you have misunderstood him. Why don't you ask him?

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, esldude said:

Martin Colloms.

I only know of him indirectly through name-dropping by the first person. I wasn't even sure he was real.

[esldude]

Just now, mansr said:

I only know of him indirectly through name-dropping by the first person. I wasn't even sure he was real.

Reviewer at nearly all the major magazines at one point or another.  He also wrote a very nice book "High Performance Loudspeakers".  Which was one of the few concise, helpful treatises at the time which allowed one to build their own speakers in a very objective engineering oriented way back in the early 80's.  

[christopher3393]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

With all this god talk around, I think it might be helpful to define what we mean by a "god" ...

 

Ha! God luck!

[sandyk]

11 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I can count on one finger the number of people I've encountered in my lifetime who believe that transferring binary data over the Internet changes it's sound quality.

 

 I can name at least 3 prominent people for starters :

Cookie Marenco who supplies Uncompressed Zips for this very reason, Barry D. who refuses to supply his recordings via the Internet, and Martin Colloms.

Anyway, I am out of this yet another,  in the vindictive series of threads designed only to attack Audiophiles.

It's interesting that we no longer see people like these participating in this forum due to a small core group of "know-it-alls" following them around like a bad smell.

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

 

[mansr]

4 minutes ago, esldude said:

Reviewer at nearly all the major magazines at one point or another.  He also wrote a very nice book "High Performance Loudspeakers".  Which was one of the few concise, helpful treatises at the time which allowed one to build their own speakers in a very objective engineering oriented way back in the early 80's.  

Before my time.

[christopher3393]

1 minute ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

 

Briliant. Thanks.

 

I actually wonder about anti-religious bigotry here.

[sandyk]

2 minutes ago, esldude said:

Reviewer at nearly all the major magazines at one point or another.  He also wrote a very nice book "High Performance Loudspeakers".  Which was one of the few concise, helpful treatises at the time which allowed one to build their own speakers in a very objective engineering oriented way back in the early 80's.  

Wiley: High Performance Loudspeakers, 6th Edition - Martin Colloms

www.wiley.com › ... › Audio & Speech Processing and Broadcasting

1. Cached
2. Similar

High Performance Loudspeakers, Sixth Edition is a fully revised and updated version of the highly successful guide to the design and specifications of high ...

 

 

 Unlike Dennis, he is also a qualified  E.E.

 

Bye !

[kumakuma]

3 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 I can name at least 3 prominent people for starters :

Cookie Marenco who supplies Uncompressed Zips for this very reason, Barry D. who refuses to supply his recordings via the Internet, and Martin Colloms.

Anyway, I am out of this yet another,  in the vindictive series of threads designed only to attack Audiophiles.

It's interesting that we no longer see people like these participating in this forum due to a small core group of "know-it-alls" following them around like a bad smell.

 

 

Barry makes his music available for download via his website:

 

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

  

[esldude]

1 minute ago, kumakuma said:

 

Barry makes his music available for download via his website:

 

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com

  

Those are samples.  He won't sell his recordings that way.  If he did I probably would own more of them. Just a convenience thing. 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Just now, sandyk said:

Unlike Dennis, he is also a qualified  E.E.

Dennis not  qualified? Get out!

 

[kumakuma]

Just now, esldude said:

Those are samples.  He won't sell his recordings that way.  If he did I probably would own more of them. Just a convenience thing. 

 

Scroll through this page and you can see that downloads of each of his albums are available for purchase:

 

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com/purchase.htm

[esldude]

Just now, kumakuma said:

 

Scroll through this page and you can see that downloads of each of his albums are available for purchase:

 

http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com/purchase.htm

Okay, so that has changed since I last looked at his site.  Good to know.  Thanks for pointing it out. 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 minutes ago, esldude said:

He won't sell his recordings that way. 

 

last time I spoke with Barry he was making his music downloadable

[lucretius]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

With all this god talk around, I think it might be helpful to define what we mean by a "god" ...

 

I'll leave that to others, since I have no conception of "god(s)".

[plissken]

38 minutes ago, esldude said:

Other than at the very beginning, people earn money everyday doings things they know they can do.  Most people are similarly uncomfortable when starting a job they haven't done previously.  So your offer is VERY different from a job. 

Many that I've offered to come on site express that they have vast experience. I.E. it's not their first rodeo.

 

We aren't talking job. We are talking ability. There have been a few members here that have allowed me to access their playback system remotely and I've been 100% in troubleshooting their issues. An offer of $$ wasn't going to affect the outcome. I made a claim I a material expert on systems and network implementation and from 10,000km away I've proven it without ever seeing the physical setup.

 

So when SandyK want's to pull a punk move and accuse me of hiding behind an email and a keyboard somewhere, for a few fortunate people here, that hasn't been the reality of it.

 

38 minutes ago, esldude said:

 

I do agree with you, when people state night and day differences or think the difference is so large only poor systems or half deaf people could miss it they should pony up and show us.  With differences that large the test would be easy.  When they fail at a bare minimum they should learn the differences are not night and day.  Anything else is irrational.  However, we don't live in the world of should.  And it should be readily apparent from your experience your method won't entice people to take your tests.  They should, but they won't.  

 

Agreed.