Jump to content
IGNORED

IS EVERYTHING DEBATABLE, REALLY?


Recommended Posts

Oh, Tony. Let's be real clear. Bits don't spontaneously flip very often in hardware or software. But, we have to take into account that it does happen so we a variety of systems in place to deal with it. Some at the hardware level and some at the software level. That doesn't change the fact that we don't have analog wave forms pulsing through CPUs, RAM, NAND, gates, DSPs, etc.......

Link to comment
Just now, Speed Racer said:

Oh, Tony. Let's be real clear. Bits don't spontaneously flip very often in hardware or software. But, we have to take into account that it does happen so we a variety of systems in place to deal with it. Some at the hardware level and some at the software level. That doesn't change the fact that we don't have analog wave forms pulsing through CPUs, RAM, NAND, gates, DSPs, etc.......

 

That’s objectively false.

 

Oscciliscope output of a system board:

 

Oscilloscope_probe_290x249_1492020029.jp

 

Output of a LAN controller doing PAM5:

 

134711-tmw03_04f2fig1.gif

 

 

We’re not trying to bury you guys in meaningless trivia, we’re trying to break you from a psychological dependency on the imaginary concept of “bits are bits”. Here’s the thing: bits ARE bits, and a 1 is no different from another 1, because as an imaginary concept it doesn’t exist in the real world. Everyone agrees that a 1 is a 1 of something, and our abstraction system is reliable because everyone agrees on it. Electricity is a psychical phenomena, and the concept of data doesn’t apply to electricity. The waveforms output above are 100% analog.

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Ralf11 said:

you are going to send me a check for that setup, right?

 

kumakuma always treats his suppliers fairly. You'll get 50% of everything I get.

 

 

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, GUTB said:

We’re not trying to bury you guys in meaningless trivia, we’re trying to break you from a psychological dependency on the imaginary concept of “bits are bits”. Here’s the thing: bits ARE bits, and a 1 is no different from another 1, because as an imaginary concept it doesn’t exist in the real world. Everyone agrees that a 1 is a 1 of something, and our abstraction system is reliable because everyone agrees on it. Electricity is a psychical phenomena, and the concept of data doesn’t apply to electricity. The waveforms output above are 100% analog.

 

 

It's not enough to say that bits are transmitted using an analog signal -- everyone knows that. Why this should matter to the output of a USB DAC is the real question. 

 

So, why are we even discussing this? What is the effect of this 'analog' waveform on the output of a DAC? Is it the effect of digital noise? Timing errors? Something else? It's not bit flips, I can tell you that. That problem has been solved for much faster data rates than audio, and over much longer cable lengths than 1m USB.

Link to comment
45 minutes ago, GUTB said:

 

That’s objectively false.

 

Oscciliscope output of a system board:

 

Oscilloscope_probe_290x249_1492020029.jp

 

Output of a LAN controller doing PAM5:

 

134711-tmw03_04f2fig1.gif

 

 

We’re not trying to bury you guys in meaningless trivia, we’re trying to break you from a psychological dependency on the imaginary concept of “bits are bits”. Here’s the thing: bits ARE bits, and a 1 is no different from another 1, because as an imaginary concept it doesn’t exist in the real world. Everyone agrees that a 1 is a 1 of something, and our abstraction system is reliable because everyone agrees on it. Electricity is a psychical phenomena, and the concept of data doesn’t apply to electricity. The waveforms output above are 100% analog.

 

 

What don't you understand about the word "inside"???? Do you think data is store and manipulated inside chips as analog wave forms??

 

You and Tony are a little bit scary....

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

kumakuma always treats his suppliers fairly. You'll get 50% of everything I get.

 

Third persons always are trolls these days. Or snowflakes of course.

Better don't to that ?

Lush^3-e      Lush^2      Blaxius^2.5      Ethernet^3     HDMI^2     XLR^2

XXHighEnd (developer)

Phasure NOS1 24/768 Async USB DAC (manufacturer)

Phasure Mach III Audio PC with Linear PSU (manufacturer)

Orelino & Orelo MKII Speakers (designer/supplier)

Link to comment
Just now, PeterSt said:

 

Third persons always are trolls these days. Or snowflakes of course.

Better don't to that ?

 

So you got kumakuma's joke. He likes it when that happens. :)

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
7 hours ago, davide256 said:

In my observation 3 things factor in

 

1) "color blindness" - some people just can't hear as well the things that others hear. I can tell minute differences in correctness of timbre and transient attack. Yet imaging has always eluded me as  a thing... show me a system that images well and I truly don't hear that as anything different from a lesser system.

2) ear training - how much time have you actually spent listening to live acoustical music in your life? If your background includes  being an amateur or better performer in a band or orchestra with serious dedication, that's a big leg up from all those hours of practicing for concerts to get the sound right and listening to other instruments struggle to do the same

3) experience with auditioning gear-  ever driven a stick shift? No one does it well to start... you have to do some motor skill training to get the skills to an automatic level when "driving". And if you want to "go pro", its a long path without mentors... you  need to cultivate knowledgeable dealers and attend shows if you want to develop your ability to know whether the gear you are auditioning has "Ferrari" legs or is just a flashy "Detroit muscle car"

 

Net... the differences exist, your aural uniqueness and degree of training determines what you are able to discern.

 

I agree. Talent, training and experience all play into perceptual abilities. A neurologist can look at an MRI scan and 'see' a wealth of information,detail,physical patterns, and meaning that a medical student cannot and a layperson simply finds indecipherable. I submit most here have had a similar experience in their own fields of expertise. You see what you look for which in turn is influenced by training and experience, and some are just more talented from the get go.

 

 

6 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

I am not attacking Alex.

 

I am attacking his belief that he can create two identical files, hear differences between these files, send these files over the Internet, and have someone hear the same differences between these two files.

 

This is not personal. I have a great deal of respect for Alex and believe that he is extremely knowledgeable about most things related to our hobby. 

 

You brought up the subject IIRC and Alex asked for you to desist IIRC as it has been all discussed before. You bring it up as way of deflecting the current discussion back to an area where you feel comfortable ridiculing him IMO. Now if Alex brings it up it  fair game to "question his beliefs".

 

Typically wgscott chimes in with an insult as it seems to make him feel good about himself, and the merry go round goes round like watching the 3 stooges in action.

 

24 minutes ago, wgscott said:
6 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

I am not attacking Alex.

 

Facts don't matter to the chief stalker-in-residence with the messiah complex

 

 

 

48 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

??

 

Electricity is a psychical phenomena inside your own head, and is influenced by various chemicals.

 

If you mean something else by that, then try some different chemicals.

 

Huh? I believe the poster was talking about electricity outside the head in circuits and wires and audio transmission and not nerve conduction or synaptic transmission.

 

Perhaps it was just a "tape worm" or whatever insult you can muster when you have nothing else to offer

37 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

maybe he has a Type B tapeworm in his gut?

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

You brought up the subject IIRC and Alex asked for you to desist IIRC as it has been all discussed before. You bring it up as way of deflecting the current discussion back to an area where you feel comfortable ridiculing him IMO. Now if Alex brings it up it  fair game to "question his beliefs".

 

As Peter has already stated, he continues to bring it up in various threads yet gets angry when anyone questions him.

 

 Here's an example from a couple of days ago:

 

 

Sometimes it's like someone took a knife, baby
Edgy and dull and cut a six inch valley
Through the middle of my skull

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

He continues to bring it up in various threads. Here's an example from a couple of days ago:

 

 

 

precisely Kumakuma, when Alex brings it up it is in the context and relevance of the current discussion. You are free to challenge (without ridicule) IMO. This is different to what occured yesterday and on many other occasions. Others even seek to ridicule Alex's friends by association. Ridicule is the game here, not honest discussion of beliefs. We now await wcscott's insult........

 

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment

The claims are pretty far out there, and a key issue is that such claims need to be supported by strong evidence.

 

So far, they have not been.

 

There is also the phrase "different types of capacitance with digital files" - not clear what he means, as he didn't say different amounts.

 

Also, not clear if he means the container or what, or an effect at the decode level, or...??

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Tony Lauck said:

 

I took some of these older piano recordings and digitized some of them.  Also some live concert material where there won't be "in the room" credibiilty since there will be venue sonics.  These are on a web site:  http://www.susanlauck.com/ Enjoy these free downloads.  On the studio recordings you may notice that the piano image is excessively large.  This will happen if the physical spacing of hyour speakers is wider than the spacing of the speakers that I used, where the setup had prevously been determined as a compromise with many high quality recordings that I used for playback setup at the time.

 

I presently have a small room in which I have two Focal twin 6 monitors and a single sub woofer.  These are all powered, driven directly from a Mytek Stereo 192-DSD DAC which also serves as a preamp for auditioning analog tapes.  As set up, and playing one of these recordings, a non-audiophile friend spontaneously observed that she had never heard a piano realistically reproduced.  This system will also reproduce Mahler Symphonies at row five live concert levels with adequate headroom, and the monitors come with a safety warning of ear damage, with peak sound level capability rated at 118 dB at my 1 m listening position.

 

When I got these powered speakers they sounded like shit.  It took many hours of adjustment to location, listening position and crossover settings to realize that this wasn't going to work with out adding the sub woofer.  And then when I got this I discovered it was absolutely impossible to get this balanced with the subs until I got a calibrated microphone and measurement software.  Once I did this, I was able to turn more knobs (mostly on the sub) and get good sound, but there was still boominess in some room modes.  I eventually used software parametric equalizer to get flat response in at the listening position from 30 hz up to 1000 kHz.  The regular tweeter adjustment provided a suitable high frequency roll off, and I had previously set this on a mixture of about three dozen recordings of acoustic music of various genres.  Basically, a fairly standard curve that is flat at 1 KHz and down about  -2 dB at 10 Khz did the trick, making the most brilliant recordings listenable (the Mercury Living Presence transfers) while none of these recordings sounding excessively dull.

 

All told, I put several weeks of my time into making this system sound excellent, but no more money once I bought the sub.   The alternative would have been to spend endless time trading equipment and never settling on something that provided realistic playback.   Setup is the most important part of any system, providing that you start with decent gear.

 

 

Thanks, I'll check them out!

 

Active monitors are a good shortcut for getting optimum sound, if they are done well - as will full "digital" speakers, the Kii Three type of thing. No excitement for people who want to play with combinations, but eliminates a whole lot of weaknesses in one go - and of course introduces the potential for others - vibration effects, proximity of all the electronics.

 

The big plus for your Focals is that they can hit the necessary SPLs with no significant audible difficulties - this is key, and why so many setups are not in the race for presenting realism.

 

Particularly interesting is that it required a subwoofer to allow the setup to shine. How I interpret this is that the performance of the Focal's electronics were compromised by trying to make its bass driver do everything - the current peaks required were generating too much interference, the power supplies were not good enough to minimise the impact of the sizeable current swings. Once the load had been taken off this area, by using the separate subwoofer, the Focal's electronics were operating in a far more benign electical environment - and the sound could be rendered cleanly.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, pkane2001 said:

 

It's not enough to say that bits are transmitted using an analog signal -- everyone knows that. Why this should matter to the output of a USB DAC is the real question. 

 

So, why are we even discussing this? What is the effect of this 'analog' waveform on the output of a DAC? Is it the effect of digital noise? Timing errors? Something else? It's not bit flips, I can tell you that. That problem has been solved for much faster data rates than audio, and over much longer cable lengths than 1m USB.

 

And the 'explanation' remains the same ... while the waveforms are treated as representing data, digital stuff, there are no problems, never will be - unless the error checking, parity correcting, etc, fails. But if the endpoint is for us humans to sense what that data means, via an "analogue" receiving mechanism, the ears - then the way to look at the whole shebang flips - it's now totally an analogue world we're considering, including how the "digital data" is being shipped around. Why? Because, high speed electrical signals generate a lot of noise, automatically - it's so easy for a tiny bit of stray capacitance, a minute amount of parasitic ground coupling, to mix in interference with the 'true' analogue side of things - and, degraded sound results.

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

His core claim is that he can create two identical files that sound different, send these files over the Internet, and have someone hear the same differences between these two identical files.

 

Yesterday IIRC you said his core claim was something else. Today what you are claiming is a misrepresentation. i believe the issue is about identical checksums, one way a file is identical and therefore if different it has to be due to something else.Now I'm guessing it will be said that if checksums are identical the file is identical in every possible way known to science. Whatever the case why bang on about it unless Alex brings it up?

Sound Minds Mind Sound

 

 

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, mansr said:

I'd guess he meant different types of capacitor.

In the capacitance multiplier section of the John Linsley Hood designed PSU add-on that I use there are 2 parallel 4700uF electro's.When the original was designed , Low ESR types were never mentioned. If a Low ESR type is used in parallel with a normal type of the same capacitance, the effective bandwidth of the original design is markedly increased. However,if both types used are Low ESR types, analogue audio sounds too detailed with accentuated treble and sibilance.

You wouldn't normally use very low ESR types as used in computers ,especially not in parallel in Analogue Preamplifiers etc. However , using a selected low ESR type in parallel with a normal type of electro in the JLH normally results in a more balanced SQ as verified by the 100s of people who have used the JLHs in Pre and Power Amplifiers.

It has been shown elsewhere in this thread , that even the waveform saved on a HDD is actually an ANALOGUE waveform with all it's vagaries before being processed.

Alex

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

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...