Computer Storage - Best Practices

[marce]

On 4/21/2019 at 9:42 PM, numlog said:

who are these newbies that manage to come here and avoid the other 95% of the internet (including half of this site, courtesy of your valiant efforts) that agree and perpetutate that ''bit are bits''? I think the people  here all already know what they hear is ''wrong''. you are free to waste your time though, 10000 posts later

 

Bits are bits though, maybe you should listen to the 95% who realise bits are bits...

[marce]

16 hours ago, numlog said:

you mean the 95% who parrot what a handful of actual researchers have proved for them over the years.

 

No I mean those of us who work in high end electronics doing signal integrity and critical layout, that's who... basically the whole of the electronics industry, apart from a few misinformed audiophiles...

 

So if bits are not bits what are they...

Oh jitter/timing is a critical part of signal integrity, that's what we use to ensure the BITS get to the destination in time...

 

[marce]

Also I ask Motberg to enlighten us as he seems to think "bits are bits" is funny, of course this digital phenomena you may have heard of is based on binary and bits being bits....

[marce]

Just now, sandyk said:

 

Seems that you all still have a lot to learn then, and perhaps Rajiv's huge thread could be a good place to start !

No you have a lot to learn, I work with it in the real world with real results, not some meandering thread where people are playing and having a good time, but it is not research, it is hearsay.

[marce]

24 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

 Still ignoring the results of your so called "  Gold Standard" DBTs , eh ?

 Apparently they are only " Gold Standard" when they agree with your own  rigid " black and white" beliefs.

What are you on about, what DBT's...

I am on about comments to a post yesterday, Not the listening test others are talking about...

[marce]

I think I get you now...

 

[marce]

Yet designing audio reproduction equipment is all about science and engineering... Or haven't you noticed...

[marce]

2 hours ago, marce said:

Yet designing audio reproduction equipment is all about science and engineering... Or haven't you noticed...

What is it then Motberg... since you seem to disagree...

I could do with a laugh

[marce]

Yawn, why do so many true believers in magic and unicorns have to spit their dummy out of the pram... Today's digitally sourced music (well for the last 30 odd years) depends on quite complex electronics, so having at least a modicum of understanding of electronics and electronic engineering is required if you are really going to delve into it.

It nothing to do with proving the other side wrong its to do with facts and determining what does and does not improve sound, to do it properly you need to follow certain practices and methodologies...

You can be an audiophile and believe in science and engineering, you don't have to believe all the BS and misguided information....

[marce]

Worryingly we are always referred to as non-believers, its a hobby not a religion.

[marce]

Yeah right....

Without all this science and engineering we wouldn't be talking on this forum or listening to digitally stored music or all the rest of it, why do audiophiles bash it so much?

[marce]

18 hours ago, numlog said:

they are bashing the self proclaimed scientists whose main focus doesnt seem to be making new discoveries and helping us understand what we dont while simulataneously becoming more respected as scientist and as an audiophile, but instead refute all possible hints that current science is flawed in some way... at least thats the impression I got.

active research, testing etc into something you believe is nonsense is definitely a lot tougher than the former, likewise its a lot easier for the audiophile to just accept what they ''think'' they hear is real.

No it is you (the true believer audiophile) who wont accept the given facts as they don't fit in with the belief system.

[marce]

11 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

Once again, a certain group of Anti Audiophile members, some without any qualifications whatsoever in the Electronics and Computer fields, who blindly accept everything stated by several hard line Objective members,  has yet again decided to disrupt and cause the inevitable demise of a thread that they do not agree with, posting replies that have no relevance to the question being asked by the original poster.

 Moriez was 100% correct when he posted this :

 

troll

 

[marce]

11 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 Most of the members do, but they refuse to blindly accept that an expertise in one area of electronics also translates to expertise in other different areas of electronics, like you and others like Mansr  repeatedly claim.

 

For example, design and make a DAC for comparison purposes with other designs such as those from Peter St. and others, to show just how much your experience in other areas has resulted in a DAC that is at least as good as, ( Audibly not theoretically) or outperforms the other designs , then you and Mansr may be taken more seriously.

 

I working on a design with multiple DACs and ADC's and femto bias op-amps far more sensitive than audio, worked on audio DACs both pro and commercial, don't forget we have professional audio clients.

You just chat the same rubbish because what we say does not agree with your blinkered view of the world. You take EVERY opportunity to pull people down with your pointless and worthless posts, it really does get boring.

[marce]

This is getting beyond the joke now.

Listen you little man, stop pulling me down at every opportunity and stop telling what and where I can post, it is not your forum. Go away.