Jump to content
IGNORED

Nice two-part talk on jitter by Ted Smith (PS Audio)


Superdad

Recommended Posts

For your enjoyment and thought:

PS Audio Presents Ted Smith on Jitter | AudioStream

 

Key points:

Jitter can be heard at far lower levels that most people claim;

Jitters effects on the perception of music can not be measured.

 

I am not saying everyone hears it, but I am saying I hear it, it matters. In regards to .2 picoseconds of jitter.

 

I am saying he can't hear it, and he can't prove it. Jitter effects the perception of music, but those effects cannot be measured. Yeah right. Heard that before. So now .2 picoseconds is clearly audible. So where does it end? At what level is it no longer audible? Why do we need atomic clocks for time keeping? Just play a continuous tone and let audiophiles inform you when it runs fast or slow. Oh that is right I forgot. We don't hear phase on sine wave, but on impulses we do. And I don't listen to sine waves. You just can't make this stuff up any weirder can you? :) :) :)

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

That's classic!!!! I almost peed myself. So what are drummers to do in the age of digital music they might be sensitized to timing errors caused by jitter. Who needs Comedy Central when us propeller heads can simply watch this guy on YouTube! Thanx Alex. This was almost as funny as Bad Grandpa which I watched last nite!

Link to comment

Man this guy needs a contract in Vegas. In part two.

 

Look see if people's toes a tapping. If it is then jitter is lower.

 

And we have been using this picosecond BS to measure it. We needed the toe taps per minutes measure. Far more accurate and telling.

 

Then after his touchy, feely, fuzzy description of how jitter sounds to him (I know I am feeling fuzzy), he proceeds to explain how there is amazing music on a CD. This little plastic disc. It sounds better if there is less jitter. And play the same music on an LP and it sounds better perhaps. Yeah, that is a knee slapper there. Low jitter sounds better, and LP's sound better well of course because they have better timing stability I suppose. :) :) :)

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

Key points:

Jitter can be heard at far lower levels that most people claim;

Jitters effects on the perception of music can not be measured.

 

Sure jitter can be measured, he tells you on the video, you look for toe tapping. No tapping high jitter. More tapping toes, lower jitter.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

I can laugh based upon his video. His credentials don't make up for that. I did check the link though. His final entry in his background experience:

 

 

Researcher

my audio cave

 

March 2008 – Present (5 years 11 months)

 

I've designed and built my high end DAC and it sounds pretty darn good. It's time to find a partner to manufacture and market it.

 

The video looks like marketing to me. Maybe PS Audio is who he found.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

For your enjoyment and thought it said.

 

Well I sure did enjoy it. It was truly funny, and I take it Mayhem13 feels the same.

 

As for the thought, you can see what we thought of it. The statements in the video deserve just that level of thought.

 

It is not mean spirited, and it is only mockery in the comedic sense. The guy in the video is the one doing mockery. If he is coming out with product then it was mean spirited on his part.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
For your enjoyment and thought it said.

 

Well I sure did enjoy it. It was truly funny, and I take it Mayhem13 feels the same.

 

As for the thought, you can see what we thought of it. The statements in the video deserve just that level of thought.

 

It is not mean spirited, and it is only mockery in the comedic sense. The guy in the video is the one doing mockery. If he is coming out with product then it was mean spirited on his part.

 

Why don't you guys just go back to pulling the wings off of insects.

Link to comment
You guys can laugh and ridicule all you want, but maybe you should check Mr. Smith's credentials against your own first:

Ted Smith | LinkedIn

 

Emmmm........ok........what is it that I'm looking for that makes his video presentation credible?

 

Look.....he's probobly a really nice guy that loves music and high end audio and sincerely wants to advance the hobby and his listening experience. Other than that......I can't possibly think why you or anyone wouldn't be skeptical of his musings.

Link to comment

I haven't seen the video. But check out his system (and how he ran his speaker cables!):

 

Inmate Picture Gallery

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical to EtherREGEN -> microRendu -> ISO Regen -> Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC -> Spectral DMC-12 & DMA-150 -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment

Thanks for the link, Melvin. I have to wonder: if the content of these videos is so utterly, uproariously ridiculous, why did Michael Lavorgna post them on his site? I don't think it was to mock them. He does state that the topic is controversial and ends his intro with"(duck and cover)", anticipating some negative response. But I suspect Michael thinks these videos merit an airing, and not as comedy. And does Paul McGowan lack credibility? I know some in the industry have been critical of some of his views, but I've had the impression that he is generally respected. Not so?

1070957250_Imprimatur.NihilObstatSepia3Crop(2).jpg.2162a44365e84a5df7d456bf8026ed67.jpg

 

Link to comment
Thanks for the link, Melvin. I have to wonder: if the content of these videos is so utterly, uproariously ridiculous, why did Michael Lavorgna post them on his site? I don't think it was to mock them. He does state that the topic is controversial and ends his intro with"(duck and cover)", anticipating some negative response. But I suspect Michael thinks these videos merit an airing, and not as comedy. And does Paul McGowan lack credibility? I know some in the industry have been critical of some of his views, but I've had the impression that he is generally respected. Not so?

 

If he endorses or holds the views in that video, he lacks credibility. Now looking at Mr. Smith's background I doubt he is clueless on all this. I imagine he knows just which parts some of us find funny. I can only surmise he is letting loose, informally in the interview, and doing a bit of marketing as he does so. I think he could have been just a little more technically circumspect and done just about as well. The fact he seems to think that unnecessary is where he is actually mocking those who are listening to him uncritically. Those comments are also why the 'duck and cover' comment at the end. So is Lavorgna just figuring to post this up as a little controversy is good for business.? Is Mr. Smith figuring no publicity is bad publicity if they spell your name right?

 

Mr. Smith could hold the opinions he has and given an interview without so many laughable gaffs about digital. Anyone who knows much about it isn't fooled. Nor would they be impressed to pursue his products.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
Thanks for the link, Melvin. I have to wonder: if the content of these videos is so utterly, uproariously ridiculous, why did Michael Lavorgna post them on his site? I

 

Have you ever read Stereophile or their sister magazines? This isn't even the most ridiculous thing they've published! See the Shun Mook reviews.

 

The Shun Mook Affair JS page 2 | Stereophile.com

Flac audio (MBP) to miniDSP 10x10 running REW and active crossovers to ADCOM GFA 555 and 2 QSC GX5's (Tri Amped). Using Paradigm Studio 100 V.2 Speakers modded for the Active Crossover and stereo Velodyne HGS12 subwoofers.

Link to comment
Three times the charm I'm told.

 

What are you referring to?

a) I only posted the link to his LinkedIn page once before;

b) Diogenes must have been too busy looking at manhood-extending Patek wristwatch "complications" to read the thread, see the link, or use Google.

c) Maybe you think 7 times the charm, since that's the number of snarky, vacuous posts you have already made in this thread.

Link to comment
What are you referring to?

a) I only posted the link to his LinkedIn page once before;

b) Diogenes must have been too busy looking at manhood-extending Patek wristwatch "complications" to read the thread, see the link, or use Google.

c) Maybe you think 7 times the charm, since that's the number of snarky, vacuous posts you have already made in this thread.

 

Correct...I acknowledge that you posted it twice......which means you really wanted to,get your point across....which implies that if you were to post it one more time, someone might agree with your support of his pedigree. Not snarky, just an accurate assesment with a prediction of a likely outcome. A bit subjective....objective blend. Fair enough?

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...