Please eliminate direct marketing threads and posts!

[Ajax]

Alex, and especially John (together with PeterSt and Miska and sbgk in my book) have been instrumental in examining, explaining, solving and sharing ideas about phenomena that occur at the bleeding edge of computer audiophilia, many of these are counter-intuitive and cannot be understood by the 'bits are bits' people but make total sense from a Systems Engineering perspective (Network, Computer Hardware, Software Engineering, Electrical Engineering).

[/i]

 

+ 1

 

Due to the expertise of those already mentioned, as well as Damien (Audirvana developer) and our founder Chris (who also gets accused of bias at times), my knowledge of computer audio and the quality of the sound coming from my system(s) has been significantly improved. I am a lot better off because of their efforts. That is a simple fact.

 

As a small business man (now retired) I also know how hard it is to make a buck. In an effort to get my products specified for a major commercial project I would spend countless hours educating Architects and designing solutions for them in an effort to have my products specified, only to have them "shop" my designs to the builders as their own, who intern would pass them on to my competitors with the lowest price winning. For may reasons I could not patent my work and it was a risk I had to take to get a seat at the table. Often (not always) I received no thanks or loyalty and it was always very disappointing to see my competitors take the accolades for my work. But that's life in the real world and I eventually sold my business.

 

What's my point?

 

It is naive to expect these obviously talented people, who give of their time so unselfishly, not to plug what they do. They are offering their expertise and knowledge for free! They need to eat too.

 

I don't consider myself to belong in any camp, whether it be the "bits are bits" or "trust your ears" or MAC vs PC or whatever. If I belong anywhere it is in the "open mind" camp as I truly believe that CA is still in its infancy and there are still phenomena that the theory does not adequately explain. There is a lot we do not understand.

 

An example of oversimplifying our knowledge into "bits are bits" or assuming that the theory is the be all and end all is the collapse of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in the USA in 1940. After something like 3,000 years developing knowledge of of bridge construction the main span collapsed only four months after opening as a result of aeroelastic flutter caused by a 42 mph (68 km/h) wind ... not especially strong for that location.

 

From Wikipedia "The bridge collapse had lasting effects on science and engineering. In many undergraduate physics texts the event is presented as an example of elementary forced resonance with the wind providing an external periodic frequency that matched the natural structural frequency, even though the real cause of the bridge's failure was aeroelastic flutter. A contributing factor was its solid sides, not allowing wind to pass through the bridge's deck. Thus its design allowed the bridge to catch the wind and sway, which ultimately took it down.[2] Its failure also boosted research in the field of bridge aerodynamics/aeroelastics, fields which have influenced the designs of all the world's great long-span bridges built since 1940.

 

 

Mayhem, I would ask you to reconsider your position as these wonderfully talented people are what makes CA special to me - they add real value through developing alternative concepts and experimentation . We need them to drive our wonderful hobby forward and we should support them.

[mayhem13]

Do your own reading about the explanations. Read everything Swenson has ever posted.

 

......as I expected. Thank you.

[mwheelerk]

Jud,

 

Chris is aware of these issues and ideas and said he was going to do something. But that was quite a while ago and I haven't noticed any change what-so-ever.

 

Do you see any sticky/pinned threads on forum behavior rules/guidelines ? Moderator guidelines ? Manufacturer posting policy ? How to do common posting actions, like images ?

 

Not me. That kind of stuff is not on the Terms of Service or the FAQS pages either... It is MIA.

 

 

This place is strictly amateur hour

 

What problems have you been experiencing or perceive by the points you make here? Do you have specific examples you could quote? As for me it seems rather simple. Read or don't read. Participate or don't participate. I don't see how anyone else has any influence on this. It my choice always. That is the term of service I work with.

[Daudio]

Do you have specific examples you could quote?

 

Specific ? You mean, like, Manufacturer/OEM Posting Policy ?

I am saying that the lack of that published information is the cause of this thread. Some HiFi'er wanted to snark on some cutting edge products as 'snake oil', and took advantage of that lack of policy, to declare gross violations ! Cease and Desist !!

 

Silly, but that's the kind of crap that happens without the basic rules of the road. I don't think that Alex is really comfortable without a clear policy for him to follow.

 

 

Read or don't read. Participate or don't participate.

 

Binary ? No...

 

This is about people and we are purely analog

[YashN]

Thanks for that very interesting analogy.

 

In fact, while reading about the description I remember Physics class where we were told the reason why soldiers are told to break step while crossing bridges.

 

Didn't know about aeroelastic flutter.

 

From Wikipedia "The bridge collapse had lasting effects on science and engineering. In many undergraduate physics texts the event is presented as an example of elementary forced resonance with the wind providing an external periodic frequency that matched the natural structural frequency, even though the real cause of the bridge's failure was aeroelastic flutter. A contributing factor was its solid sides, not allowing wind to pass through the bridge's deck. Thus its design allowed the bridge to catch the wind and sway, which ultimately took it down.[2] Its failure also boosted research in the field of bridge aerodynamics/aeroelastics, fields which have influenced the designs of all the world's great long-span bridges built since 1940.

 

[YashN]

Useless....

 

......as I expected. Thank you.

[livelistenlearn]

fwiw:

read some stuff superdad, JohnSwenson, miska, PeterSt, have posted.

someday, it will all make sense.

are their posts “direct marketing” or "informercials”? no. check out the definitions.

are they indirectly promoting their products/services? yes, sure.

can they help it? they have invested their time/expertise in their respective products/tech. which represent their areas of knowledge/skill. which they each believe will benefit computer audiophiles. so, they participate in CA forums, based on what they know/believe in.

isn’t CA the better for it? in serving as a platform for amateurs and professionals to interact and discuss?

don’t get me wrong: am all for honest/unbiased opinions/viewpoints on CA.

if some product-oriented threads/posts come across as distasteful to some people, they have every right to say so, or alternatively, they can “tune out”. however, the same threads may also perceived as sources of knowledge and information for those who want to “tune in".

imo, professionalism does count. pros choose to do their stuff to earn a living (or for extra income, whatever). naturally, they are careful and they do conduct themselves professionally. especially on CA. where more than a few knowledgable amateurs (inc. ex-pros) are ever willing to call you out.

in a call out scenario, discussions/debates/arguments/drama may ensue. or not. either way, there is much to learn, if one is willing to try and understand.

CA seems to be a global, open-minded i/o web platform/resource. wherein the vets (a.k.a. advanced hobbyists) + pros bother to help guide computer audiophile idiots (like me) seeking journeys towards audio-utopia.

ultimately, the journey has to be undertaken, willingly, by the pilgrim himself/herself. along the way, we deserve the right to choose who, and in what, we trust.

btw, anyone who has ever recommended any component of any kind to another member here, has also, arguably, participated in indirect marketing. that includes os like windows or osx. and stuff listed on signatures.

[Jud]

Useless....

 

Very far from it. He's got more experience of setting up audio systems for critical performance than you or I ever will. Take advantage of having people here who know more than you in their areas of specialization rather than being so quick to dismiss them.

 

(That last sentence is exactly what I'd say to mayhem about John and Superdad.)

[Ned Kelly]

Hmm, this thread seems to be more about some of the personal animosities that have bubbled to the surface here over time than a discussion as to whether or not the 'MoT' contingent on this board periodically slips in a plug for their own product. I've never objected to the latter when its clear upfront that member X sells product Y - it's some of the blatant sock-puppeting that goes on in various forums that gets to me. Here's a recent example - I've blanked out the product in question to allow the reader to focus on the sales pitch:

 

The xxxxxxxxx showed up at a piratical event at my house this weekend. It is the greatest DAC under $20k I've heard, including a wealthy friend's full MSB analog stack. It's ridiculous. I'm hearing parts of the mastering and recording process no one really was meant to hear. It's bonkers in terms of detail retrieval. With the xxx and xxxxxxxxx, you could easily pick out that the HD800 was more detailed than the Abyss. The surprise to me was that the Abyss was more detailed than the 009 setup we had as well.

 

I will be ordering this DAC day 1 no questions asked. I've never heard anything like it. It's bonkers.

 

I know several here are members of the forum that was taken from - just using it as an example of how a few people can build momentum around a product that hasnt even been released yet. In a word - bonkers

[mayhem13]

fwiw:

read some stuff superdad, JohnSwenson, miska, PeterSt, have posted.

someday, it will all make sense.

are their posts “direct marketing” or "informercials”? no. check out the definitions.

are they indirectly promoting their products/services? yes, sure.

can they help it? they have invested their time/expertise in their respective products/tech. which represent their areas of knowledge/skill. which they each believe will benefit computer audiophiles. so, they participate in CA forums, based on what they know/believe in.

isn’t CA the better for it? in serving as a platform for amateurs and professionals to interact and discuss?

don’t get me wrong: am all for honest/unbiased opinions/viewpoints on CA.

if some product-oriented threads/posts come across as distasteful to some people, they have every right to say so, or alternatively, they can “tune out”. however, the same threads may also perceived as sources of knowledge and information for those who want to “tune in".

imo, professionalism does count. pros choose to do their stuff to earn a living (or for extra income, whatever). naturally, they are careful and they do conduct themselves professionally. especially on CA. where more than a few knowledgable amateurs (inc. ex-pros) are ever willing to call you out.

in a call out scenario, discussions/debates/arguments/drama may ensue. or not. either way, there is much to learn, if one is willing to try and understand.

CA seems to be a global, open-minded i/o web platform/resource. wherein the vets (a.k.a. advanced hobbyists) + pros bother to help guide computer audiophile idiots (like me) seeking journeys towards audio-utopia.

ultimately, the journey has to be undertaken, willingly, by the pilgrim himself/herself. along the way, we deserve the right to choose who, and in what, we trust.

btw, anyone who has ever recommended any component of any kind to another member here, has also, arguably, participated in indirect marketing. that includes os like windows or osx. and stuff listed on signatures.

 

Sadly enough, the core of your rebuttal is based on being 'called out' as you have put it and they have been numerous times over and over again. The debates are never ending and always result in a subjective result where some choose accept the finality of some hear and difference and some do not.

 

Somebody, PLEASE tell me how this is advancing the hobby either technically or otherwise? As in ANY proof, there needs to be a conclusion whether it positive or negative. That simply never happens here. The results are always theoretical assumptions fortified with subjectively biased results......ALWAYS.

 

Someone show me ONE instance of a member based product debate that resulted in a conclusive positive value to the customer and I'll call off my witch hunt. Until then, buckle up folks!

 

Again, this isn't about anyone posting either opinion or fact of which I DO NOT object but about marketing a product where the posts are directly pointing to an intrinsic value of that product.

 

On another point, the reason this thread exists is EXACTLY reflected in your post where you proclaim your own inexperience or lack of knowledge in the operations of digitized music and your quest for 'audio utopia'. The specific marketing I'm targeting is the MOST damaging to folks like you, looking for solid solutions and advancement of your listening experience. Has UpTone audio done either for you personally?

[4est]

Do the terms of service require that posters "advance" this hobby? For that matter, what are your postings doing to advance it? As has been noted, you have made your opinion of small signal items, including sources, as being similar enough to be non issues as compared to speakers, DSP and rooms. Why then do you feel compelled to post so fervently in threads that aren't important to you?

Sadly enough, the core of your rebuttal is based on being 'called out' as you have put it and they have been numerous times over and over again. The debates are never ending and always result in a subjective result where some choose accept the finality of some hear and difference and some do not.

 

Somebody, PLEASE tell me how this is advancing the hobby either technically or otherwise? As in ANY proof, there needs to be a conclusion whether it positive or negative. That simply never happens here. The results are always theoretical assumptions fortified with subjectively biased results......ALWAYS.

 

Someone show me ONE instance of a member based product debate that resulted in a conclusive positive value to the customer and I'll call off my witch hunt. Until then, buckle up folks!

[Jud]

Someone show me ONE instance of a member based product debate that resulted in a conclusive positive value to the customer and I'll call off my witch hunt. Until then, buckle up folks!

 

When you provide conclusive proof of the audible superiority of your speaker design and room treatment recommendations over those that other forum members have, in their rooms and their systems - not just measurements (time domain as well as frequency domain), but proof those measured differences are clearly audible to them, it might be time to demand something similar of other members. No, you're not selling anything so far, but your recommendations do, and are in fact in many cases intended to, get people to go out and spend their money in accordance with what you're saying.

[prot]

... proof those measured differences are clearly audible to them ...

 

Hope you know that such kind of 'proof' does not exist. That is not even called proof but 'personal experience' ... and the only thing one could say about it is YMMV.

[Jud]

Hope you know that such kind of 'proof' does not exist. That is not even called proof but 'personal experience' ... and the only thing one could say about it is YMMV.

 

Which is exactly the point I wanted to make to Anthony (mayhem) - If you're calling for no discussion of members' products until you can "conclusively prove" they helped a customer achieve better sound for him- or herself, that's an impossible standard to meet.

[prot]

Which is exactly the point I wanted to make to Anthony (mayhem) - If you're calling for no discussion of members' products until you can "conclusively prove" they helped a customer achieve better sound for him- or herself, that's an impossible standard to meet.

 

Measurements are conclusive proof. It is fully proven that things like phase alignment and flat frequency response sound closer to the original recording.

Of course better measurements doesnt satisfy every taste. E.g. some people find the audissey bass level too low...for me it's just perfect ... and hopefully the neighbours are happy too

[livelistenlearn]

Sadly enough, the core of your rebuttal is based on being 'called out' as you have put it and they have been numerous times over and over again. The debates are never ending and always result in a subjective result where some choose accept the finality of some hear and difference and some do not.

 

hi mayhem 13,

actually, the 3 key points =

1) isn’t CA the better for it? in serving as a platform for amateurs and professionals to interact and discuss?

2) CA seems to be a global, open-minded i/o web platform/resource. wherein the vets (a.k.a. advanced hobbyists) + pros bother to help guide computer audiophile idiots (like me) seeking journeys towards audio-utopia.

3) ultimately, the journey has to be undertaken, willingly, by the pilgrim himself/herself. along the way, we deserve the right to choose who, and in what, we trust.

what you refer to as never-ending debates in CA contain viewpoints + info/data. these viewpoints/info/data can encourage people, esp. newbies, to experiment/discover/explore new frontiers in computer audiophiling.

if we like it, we spread the word. if we don’t like it, we can either protest or shut up. either way, we learn. hopefully, someday, we will contribute/give something back.

for example, am planning to listen to today’s electrostatics, in a small room, following this post: "Bookshelf Fullrange speakers will produce an excellent mid-hi reproduction and soundstage. Everything below 350hz or so will be a disaster from floor and ceiling bounce. Where these reflections meet at the listening position results in huge nulls and peaks relative to the frequency and distance. This has become one of the worst trends of design in commercial audio."

Somebody, PLEASE tell me how this is advancing the hobby either technically or otherwise? As in ANY proof, there needs to be a conclusion whether it positive or negative. That simply never happens here. The results are always theoretical assumptions fortified with subjectively biased results......ALWAYS.

 

the only way this hobby will advance is with the infusion of new blood. new blood likes open discussions on new and revolutionary ideas/concepts/products. not censorship.

perhaps, you do not realise the full import of public forum postings on CA. it goes global. and, people do read, and try to digest/evaluate. some act on recommendations and feedback posted by vets here, pros and ex-pros included.

however, not everyone who acts posts feedback thereafter... especially if all is good. because of time/language constraints. or inclination (lack of). that said: human nature = feedback goes ballistic when the result/experience is not good (or not all good). check out these threads:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/fresh-definition-audiophile-software-benefit-new-users-22740/ and

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/ok-i-tried-hydrogen-audio-it-didnt-go-too-well-13506/index13.html

are such threads the norm or the exception in CA? one does not wish to question your right to feel annoyed at certain threads. but pls judge for yourself if there has been extensive damage done. to anyone. who is a consumer.

 

Someone show me ONE instance of a member based product debate that resulted in a conclusive positive value to the customer.

 

well, since oct 2014, at least one newbie has invested in:

1) audi+, based on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/audirvana-2-0-a-21673/

2) hugo, based on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/chord-hugo-re-examined-20739/

3) jriver, based on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/j-river-tips-and-techniques-user-experiences-repository-13684/index21.html

 

4) 24-bit albums based on the the “music downloads & streaming” and “music in general” forums. that’s after reading multiple posts across many threads re: high-res audio formats are beneficial. or not.

5) dsd albums, based on these threads: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/chord-hugo-re-examined-20739/ and

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/direct-stream-digital-myth-busted-22375/index10.html

along the way, he also discovered:

 

6) up-sampling in audi+, based on these threads: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/direct-stream-digital-myth-busted-22375/index10.html and http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/izotope-sample-rate-convertor-15352/

 

7) that “The Absolute Sound” refers to more than a magazine. although like you, he may not agree with it being the sole (and unquestionable) reference for the good recording/playback of today’s diverse music genres.

 

...solid solutions and advancement of your listening experience. Has UpTone audio done either for you personally?

 

uptone... has not done anything for me yet because have not bought anything from uptone. but superdad, miska and PeterSt have collectively, together with other contributors, have provided guidance on dsd, software players, up-sampling and optimising a mac for music playing. for free (thus far).

 

On another point, the reason this thread exists is EXACTLY reflected in your post where you proclaim your own inexperience or lack of knowledge in the operations of digitized music and your quest for 'audio utopia'. The specific marketing I'm targeting is the MOST damaging to folks like you, looking for solid solutions and advancement of your listening experience.

now that you mention this, i respect/appreciate your well-meaning intentions.

 

that said, will you consider the possibility that your ‘witch hunt’ may have far-reaching repercussions? such as: CA losing some valuable contributors/contributions. and, forumers losing insight/guidance on new tech because the pros either don't want to, or, become hesitant to post. because: one 'witch hunt’ tends to beget other 'witch hunts’.

 

cheers.

[NOMBEDES]

(True Story) About a year ago I decided I wanted to ask Eric Clapton a few questions about his cable and equipment preference in the recording studio. So I went on the internet and did a bit of research. I found that there were "brokers" who claimed to be able to arrange interviews with various personalities for a fee. I found the fees to be out of reach. (and I had no idea if these brokers were legit.

 

I find having a chance to interact with the individuals who create the tools and equipment we use in this hobby to be a wonderful bonus. I cannot talk to Mr. Ford, Mr. Gates, or anyone of that ilk. Here, sometimes, we can.

 

A wonderful hobby! ~ Made better with the interaction some wish to curtail.

[Paul R]

Just my $0.02, but I think that the abusive marketing, basically scams, are already weeded out. And CA provides the perfect place for most small business audio and music vendors to hang about and connect with people. Even enjoy themselves interacting.

 

The abusive marketing, like the JPlay hurrah and the people that try to sell their gear by starting innocent sounding threads, and hide their commercial affiliation, I think Chris does a pretty good job of handling. And what he might miss, Eloise will find and shine a light on.

 

Personally, I would far rather be able to post a question here and have Alex K., John Swenson, Gordon Rankin, Matt Ashland, Peter St., Demian, Jussi, or a few dozen other people jump in to answer than not. Also, it provides rather direct access to their products.

 

I admit it is a fine line, but responsible, respected and respectful vendors are important parts of the community here.

 

-Paul

[mayhem13]

hi mayhem 13,

actually, the 3 key points =

1) isn’t CA the better for it? in serving as a platform for amateurs and professionals to interact and discuss?

2) CA seems to be a global, open-minded i/o web platform/resource. wherein the vets (a.k.a. advanced hobbyists) + pros bother to help guide computer audiophile idiots (like me) seeking journeys towards audio-utopia.

3) ultimately, the journey has to be undertaken, willingly, by the pilgrim himself/herself. along the way, we deserve the right to choose who, and in what, we trust.

what you refer to as never-ending debates in CA contain viewpoints + info/data. these viewpoints/info/data can encourage people, esp. newbies, to experiment/discover/explore new frontiers in computer audiophiling.

if we like it, we spread the word. if we don’t like it, we can either protest or shut up. either way, we learn. hopefully, someday, we will contribute/give something back.

for example, am planning to listen to today’s electrostatics, in a small room, following this post: "Bookshelf Fullrange speakers will produce an excellent mid-hi reproduction and soundstage. Everything below 350hz or so will be a disaster from floor and ceiling bounce. Where these reflections meet at the listening position results in huge nulls and peaks relative to the frequency and distance. This has become one of the worst trends of design in commercial audio."

 

the only way this hobby will advance is with the infusion of new blood. new blood likes open discussions on new and revolutionary ideas/concepts/products. not censorship.

perhaps, you do not realise the full import of public forum postings on CA. it goes global. and, people do read, and try to digest/evaluate. some act on recommendations and feedback posted by vets here, pros and ex-pros included.

however, not everyone who acts posts feedback thereafter... especially if all is good. because of time/language constraints. or inclination (lack of). that said: human nature = feedback goes ballistic when the result/experience is not good (or not all good). check out these threads:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/fresh-definition-audiophile-software-benefit-new-users-22740/ and

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/ok-i-tried-hydrogen-audio-it-didnt-go-too-well-13506/index13.html

are such threads the norm or the exception in CA? one does not wish to question your right to feel annoyed at certain threads. but pls judge for yourself if there has been extensive damage done. to anyone. who is a consumer.

 

 

 

well, since oct 2014, at least one newbie has invested in:

1) audi+, based on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/audirvana-2-0-a-21673/

2) hugo, based on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/chord-hugo-re-examined-20739/

3) jriver, based on this thread: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/j-river-tips-and-techniques-user-experiences-repository-13684/index21.html

 

4) 24-bit albums based on the the “music downloads & streaming” and “music in general” forums. that’s after reading multiple posts across many threads re: high-res audio formats are beneficial. or not.

5) dsd albums, based on these threads: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/chord-hugo-re-examined-20739/ and

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/direct-stream-digital-myth-busted-22375/index10.html

along the way, he also discovered:

 

6) up-sampling in audi+, based on these threads: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f8-general-forum/direct-stream-digital-myth-busted-22375/index10.html and http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/izotope-sample-rate-convertor-15352/

 

7) that “The Absolute Sound” refers to more than a magazine. although like you, he may not agree with it being the sole (and unquestionable) reference for the good recording/playback of today’s diverse music genres.

 

 

 

uptone... has not done anything for me yet because have not bought anything from uptone. but superdad, miska and PeterSt have collectively, together with other contributors, have provided guidance on dsd, software players, up-sampling and optimising a mac for music playing. for free (thus far).

 

now that you mention this, i respect/appreciate your well-meaning intentions.

 

that said, will you consider the possibility that your ‘witch hunt’ may have far-reaching repercussions? such as: CA losing some valuable contributors/contributions. and, forumers losing insight/guidance on new tech because the pros either don't want to, or, become hesitant to post. because: one 'witch hunt’ tends to beget other 'witch hunts’.

 

cheers.

 

It shouldn't have far reaching repercussions as my issue is not with non commercially influenced members reporting experiences and making recommendations. We seem to be muddying the waters here a bit. If Alex or John or Miska or Peter St. chose to no longer post as no longer being allowed to refer to their own products in the context of that post, one 'could' make an equally significant conclusion as subjective experiences do. I won't lead you to your own conclusion should that become the case, but I do know what mine would be.

[mayhem13]

When you provide conclusive proof of the audible superiority of your speaker design and room treatment recommendations over those that other forum members have, in their rooms and their systems - not just measurements (time domain as well as frequency domain), but proof those measured differences are clearly audible to them, it might be time to demand something similar of other members. No, you're not selling anything so far, but your recommendations do, and are in fact in many cases intended to, get people to go out and spend their money in accordance with what you're saying.

 

You have an unfair advantage at being able to stage an argument my friend! lol I'm also going to suggest that judiciaries of all degrees be excuded from posting on CA!!!!!

 

But seriously, yeah....hell yeah.....I'd love an opportunity to take that challenge up with quite a few here where I'd come in to their space, take some gated nearfield and LP measurements, apply some repositioning, minor treatments and DSP. I'd put money on the response rate to be conclusively successful! You may be first in line as I visit my daughter at Kutztown every few weeks. Up for the challenge? I think more than a few CA members might be interested in the results.

[Jud]

Measurements are conclusive proof. It is fully proven that things like phase alignment and flat frequency response sound closer to the original recording.

Of course better measurements doesnt satisfy every taste. E.g. some people find the audissey bass level too low...for me it's just perfect ... and hopefully the neighbours are happy too

 

You mean like the differences in measurements on this page - SRC Comparisons - when you plug in Apple CoreAudio (Leopard) and Miska's Signalyst 2.9.1 (ShortPolySinc) choose the "Impulse" test, and see the latter has better ringing behavior? Or don't you think such things will make any audible difference to the listener, and we're back to what you've just called "personal experience"?

 

Regarding "fully proven that things like phase alignment and flat frequency response sound closer to the original recording" - since it is cut-and-dried mathematics that phase correctness, flat in-band frequency response (i.e., lack of aliasing) and impulse behavior (lack of "ringing") are all related in digital audio (as aliasing behavior improves, ringing worsens, and vice versa; as "pre-ringing" is minimized, phase is no longer linear), can you show me the work that "fully proves" some particular balance of these characteristics is the *correct* one?

[Musicophile]

Guys, it amazes me how every single thread on this site gets morphed into an objectivist vs. subjectivist debate.

[Jud]

You have an unfair advantage at being able to stage an argument my friend! lol I'm also going to suggest that judiciaries of all degrees be excuded from posting on CA!!!!!

 

But seriously, yeah....hell yeah.....I'd love an opportunity to take that challenge up with quite a few here where I'd come in to their space, take some gated nearfield and LP measurements, apply some repositioning, minor treatments and DSP. I'd put money on the response rate to be conclusively successful! You may be first in line as I visit my daughter at Kutztown every few weeks. Up for the challenge? I think more than a few CA members might be interested in the results.

 

You're kidding, you're that close?! I would absolutely love that! I'll PM you - and Happy New Year.

 

P.S. Re room treatments - If you think *I* have an unfair advantage in arguing, wait until you meet my lovely wife!

[Paul R]

Guys, it amazes me how every single thread on this site gets morphed into an objectivist vs. subjectivist debate.

 

What's embarrassing is that it happening without our favorite sandy Alex around... (grin)

 

It's one subject that almost every audiophile is passionate about. It will spring up like a weed anywhere and everywhere.

 

-Paul

[Jud]

Guys, it amazes me how every single thread on this site gets morphed into an objectivist vs. subjectivist debate.

 

I think you just feel that way - have you conducted an actual count of the number of threads?

 

( - subjective vs. objective)