Blue or red pill?

[Ralf11]

does that include jet fuel?

[Ralf11]

6 hours ago, semente said:

 

I'm an hour's drive away and could take some cheese for the wine.

Always wanted to listen to the Tunas and Peter's DAC.

 

I am far away and am not likely to FedEx the listeners Scotch, cheese or wine, but can provide this over the internet:

 

 

[Ralf11]

"Temporal microstructure" ... means nothing, but could mean something 

 

I wonder if it could be analogized (not to just resolution or pixel count) but to micro-contrast in optics...

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, mansr said:

That's what makes it so insidious.

 

Drawing analogies between audio and imaging is fraught with peril as there is no acoustic equivalent to the optical lens.

 

 

Flipper and his Cetacean buddies differ with this assertion!!

[Ralf11]

then don't try to convince others with your bloody hobbyist groove sessions

[Ralf11]

11 hours ago, PeterSt said:

Re-attempt :

 

* * *

current draw (no matter how small) will influence the DAC's jitter response and that is what we hear. ...

 

 

ok, so how would bit identical files alter current flow?

 

or are you not persuaded that they sound different, or can sound different?

[Ralf11]

9 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

the "darkness" which you project on others might be lifted from your eyes.

 

 

 

just lift the veil

 

and reduce the noise

 

who cares about darkness?

[Ralf11]

8 hours ago, pkane2001 said:

 

Take the little blue pill if you're experiencing performance anxiety (how about that, back on-topic for this thread! )

 

 

 

the MQA pill?

 

or the McIntosh blue meter pill?

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, Spacehound said:

...

What sort of physicist is "the right one"?

 

start here:

 

http://store.doverpublications.com/048626484x.html

 

[Ralf11]

if Beer means the order that samples are listened to then he is correct

 

if he means the order of creating or transferring a digital file then that could be a source of bias if the that person knows it

[Ralf11]

I just want to mention that this thread goes really well with 1968 era Feedback tracks from the Grateful Dead...

[Ralf11]

I am going to set up a betting pool based on guesses at how many pages this thread will reach before the actual test convenes

[Ralf11]

I see you are trying to grab the low bid...

[Ralf11]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

Through the varying effects of the outer ear and head on sounds arriving from different directions. A stationary source is difficult to localise without slightly moving your head. Regular microphones capture none of this. Binaural recordings heard through headphones can get partway, but they are still quite limited, just like a stereoscopic image is a far cry from a full hologram.

 

The above is for a skull clamped in a vise.  Au naturele, you will make tiny unconscious head movements as well.

 

Ears are rarely set at the same level on skull too.

[Ralf11]

3 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Technology, engineering development, rational thinking are marvellous tools for evolving the physical mechanisms used for audio reproduction - but when they try to use the same methodology to give simplistic, unsophisticated 'explanations' for how our hearing mechanisms work, how we make sense of what's heard - then it's being used the "wrong way".

 

yes, rather than scientific analysis and rational thought, it will be MUCH better to paint yourself blue and dance around an oak tree

 

true understanding will come

[Ralf11]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

That's the point I was trying to make.

 

Indeed, and it annoys my sense of symmetry.

 

yah - thought I'd clarify a bit - I used to teach this stuff to under-grads. so am versed in how ot get it across...

 

is symmetry conserved?  I'll go ask the Walrus.  or the Lagrangian...

[Ralf11]

Sure, but about real jazz?

[Ralf11]

I agree, Sandy.  "Pawnshop" sounds like you are right there in the club.

 

(unfortunately it sounds like the club has a Scandihoovian combo; and it makes you homesick for NoLa).

[Ralf11]

Translation:

 

if you reverse the Coriolis Force, Soapie becomes Soap Opera

[Ralf11]

On 2/16/2018 at 3:53 PM, fas42 said:

 

I only recently heard Jazz at the Pawnshop - and wondered what the fuss was about ... I have plenty of jazz recordings that are far more 'captivating' than this particular example, in terms of the "spatial experience", and the sense of the whole - guess I just don't have audiophile ears, whatever those strange things are ...

 

can you list them?

 

the fuss is about the SQ - I can't get nearly that SQ on my DSD originals of Buddy Bolden playing live at the Fisk School 

[Ralf11]

12 hours ago, mansr said:

If you measure the angle occupied by the moon when near the horizon and again when high in the sky, you get almost exactly the same value. Nevertheless, the rising or setting moon is often perceived as twice the size of the moon when (more or less) overhead. Atmospheric refraction can't explain this.

 

my understanding is that no one has yet fully explained the perceptual size inflation...

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, semente said:

 

I think that height perception is just one's brain filling in the missing information.

...

 

 

Nope.  it is more than that, but that factor is involved.

[Ralf11]

You should explain comb filtering to beer

[Ralf11]

34 minutes ago, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

Yes, Tripels.  If you drink Dubels, you will be limited to two-D, so cannot hear the third dimension, height.  And, stay away from Quadrupels.

 

 

it will be easier to make a comb filter out of the Tripels

[Ralf11]

Let's go with stereo vs. stereophonic recording