Jump to content
IGNORED

Misleading Measurements


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

It's actually very simple ... no-one measures how robust audio systems are to resisting the influence of electrical interference, noise factors - these are just thrown into the "good enough to get a sticker meaning that it meets some EMC standard" box, and that's the end of it.

 

Highly "over-engineered" components actually do enough to mitigate these effects - they that shall never be mentioned, 🙂 - and the SQ, works.

 

The refusal of objectivists to take interference mechanisms seriously is a key factor of why so much nonsense exists in the audio world - at a practical level, this has to be dealt with, to get accurate reproduction of what's on a recording, irrespective of whether a rig costs $500, or $500,000 ...

 

Not so fast there. Subjectivists also refuse to show ANY data to prove that EMI does cause interference and it is large enough to do so. Right now is all in the urban legend/urban myth realm. Even on this board, there are a variety of threads on this topic without any data other than subjectivist listening results. That can be boiled down to, you wanted it to sound better so it does.

 

Both have to be dealt with. Can one actually measure the interference? If one can, is it large enough to make a difference? If not, how can one ameliorate what one cannot quantify?

 

 

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to comment
2 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Because the interference factors that are crucial are difficult to measure - in terms of the usual quantitative results that people use to assess audio quality. I haven't had any inclination to try and get numbers, because everything I've read has indicated that people who have full access to equipment that should pick up something have had no success with trying to see correlations.

 

Anyone who takes audio even vaguely seriously knows that all sorts of noise inducing mechanisms matter - everyone who tries a power conditioner or filter, or considers separate power runs, or worries about the type of lights in the listening room is dealing with this. The ears tell the story - and that's what matters.

 

Wanting it to sound better? Interference makes it sound like crap - you don't want to keep listening ... solving these issues brings back the enjoyment factor; a relaxed ease to the sound which means you can run at high SPLs for extended periods without fatigue. And this is something that "good numbers" can never replace.

 

What's actually happening is that low level detail in the sound presentation is being corrupted, had had enough noise added to it to make it difficult for the listening mind to interpret the meaning of that detail - this is why the sense of unease with sub-par SQ builds ups, and hinders long term enjoyment of the listening.

 

 

The ears tell you. If a sense of irritation with what you are listening to keeps intruding, then you have an issue ... so, indeed it makes a difference. Simple experiments are often enough to identify a cause and effect link - the hard bit is often to work out a fully comprehensive solution, that is 100% robust; workarounds are often a decent alternative

Ears can be fooled. The number one hallucination is auditory. Ears are also subject to emotional bias. So, I do not trust 'Golden Ears'.

 

Maybe there is a reason it is hard to measure, it doesn't exist. Playing Devil's advocate here. The underlined part is important. If they can't measure it, maybe it is all in your head.

 

Something to think on.

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to comment
1 hour ago, sandyk said:

 They don't need to !

 If Data is required, then it's  the job of the E.Es etc to measure it.. 

 The vast majority of Subjectivists are not technically qualified, and do not have the equipment or training needed to do so.

 One well known source of RF/EMI is poor quality LED lighting (cheap and nasty SMPS)

Actually, that is the issue. They do. Ears can be fooled. So, data is needed.

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to comment
2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Except the consequences of HiFi are nothing. 

SO True....

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to comment
Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

It's always good to have perspective :~)

 

I am a scientist in RL - it is what we do :D .

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I love it. 

 

I also like to stop and look around once in a while and ask what the hell I'm doing. Getting off course is easy and taking things too serious can be slippery. A touch of self deprecating humor usually goes a long way as well :~)

 

I do all the time. It is how we do things. Review, review, review. 

 

Then there is the statistical testing methods and double blind tests that us scientists use all the time. 😁

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to comment
  • 4 weeks later...
On 11/1/2020 at 12:06 AM, fas42 said:

 

Try going to YouTube, and type in "million dollar audio system" in its search - you'll find such are in plentiful supply; I saw one reference to $6,000,000 - not much gold around them, 😉.

 

LOL - listening on youtube is like listening to an AM radio presentation of a rock concert.

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 It needn't be that way if you either pay for better audio or have suitable Video S/W where you can demultiplex the hidden A and V streams after downloading the videos. The hidden video is typically 70,000kb/s (max.)  H264, and the hidden Audio is typically 529kb/s .aac which is VERY close to CD quality

 

How many actually know about it and how many just listen to standard lossy youtube fair?

 

Just saying....

Current:  Daphile on an AMD A10-9500 with 16 GB RAM

DAC - TEAC UD-501 DAC 

Pre-amp - Rotel RC-1590

Amplification - Benchmark AHB2 amplifier

Speakers - Revel M126Be with 2 REL 7/ti subwoofers

Cables - Tara Labs RSC Reference and Blue Jean Cable Balanced Interconnects

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...