Warm up time or is it my ears?

heiney9

Is it possible for you to discuss other audio related things? There is a lot about this hobby that is also worth talking about as well as 100's of other threads to discuss.

I do fear you were here for a singular reason, if that's the case then you have contributed all you need to and perhaps it is time for you to move along.

Why not share your other 40 years of experiences, especially the one's none of us have experience before? Why hang your hat so emphatically on a narrow, singular subject matter?

You see, your posts, both with passive/aggressive tones, and now the surrender "white flag" speech, and how your innocent and only trying to educate newbies, is old hat and been seen many times before.

It's a formula, and you are following it like a set of instructions.

H9

nooshinjohn

May I pose a question? Why is this guy not on everyone's bozo list yet? Better yet, why is he not banned???

F1nut

heiney9 wrote: »

Yeah, right "innocently making a post". You came here with an agenda and you are getting push back and now playing the victim.

Typical internet troll behavior.

H9

I couldn't have said it better myself, thank you!

fmw

heiney9 wrote: »

Is it possible for you to discuss other audio related things? There is a lot about this hobby that is also worth talking about as well as 100's of other threads to discuss.

I do fear you were here for a singular reason, if that's the case then you have contributed all you need to and perhaps it is time for you to move along.

Why not share your other 40 years of experiences, especially the one's none of us have experience before? Why hang your hat so emphatically on a narrow, singular subject matter?

You see, your posts, both with passive/aggressive tones, and now the surrender "white flag" speech, and how your innocent and only trying to educate newbies, is old hat and been seen many times before.

It's a formula, and you are following it like a set of instructions.

H9

Thanks, I didn't know that. I've made posts elsewhere on the site but you probably don't visit those threads. Why do you keep challenging me to keep posting in this thread? Why not just drop it? You are as bad as a modern university. You have no tolerance at all for dissenting information. I'll leave as soon as the site asks me to, not because you ask me to.

BlueFox

As an FYI, since it appears you do not know this, 'digital' audio cables do not carry digital information. They carry an analog signal that represents a digital signal. The receiver takes the analog signal, and then creates a digital signal. Depending on how degraded the analog signal is by the cable, it is possible to introduce jitter into the newly created digital bit stream. Thus 'digital' cables can affect the sound of the audio.

We are still waiting for links to your testing so we can evaluate the tests, methods, and results.

heiney9

fmw wrote: »

heiney9 wrote: »

Is it possible for you to discuss other audio related things? There is a lot about this hobby that is also worth talking about as well as 100's of other threads to discuss.

I do fear you were here for a singular reason, if that's the case then you have contributed all you need to and perhaps it is time for you to move along.

Why not share your other 40 years of experiences, especially the one's none of us have experience before? Why hang your hat so emphatically on a narrow, singular subject matter?

You see, your posts, both with passive/aggressive tones, and now the surrender "white flag" speech, and how your innocent and only trying to educate newbies, is old hat and been seen many times before.

It's a formula, and you are following it like a set of instructions.

H9

Why not just drop it? You are as bad as a modern university. You have no tolerance at all for dissenting information. I'll leave as soon as the site asks me to, not because you ask me to.

I could ask you the same thing, but I'm sure your ego won't let you drop it. When I said "move along", I wasn't asking you to leave (apparently other places have asked since you jumped to that conclusion) I was simply asking you to move on to another subject or experience as you've stated your opinions about this one quite emphatically. I'd love to hear about the audio experiences you've had that the rest of us haven't. I've only been in/around/practicing this hobby for 37 years, so I'm anxious to hear about your exclusive experience that the rest of us have never experienced.

I have seen your other posts, that's good you're branching out. Eventually you might get some credibility back. It will be essential to stroke that ego of yours.

Anyway I fear I now have become a broken record so I am moving on.

Cheers

H9

fmw

heiney9 wrote: »

fmw wrote: »

Why not share your other 40 years of experiences, especially the one's none of us have experience before? Why hang your hat so emphatically on a narrow, singular subject matter?

You see, your posts, both with passive/aggressive tones, and now the surrender "white flag" speech, and how your innocent and only trying to educate newbies, is old hat and been seen many times before.

It's a formula, and you are following it like a set of instructions.

H9

I'd love to hear about the audio experiences you've had that the rest of us haven't. I've only been in/around/practicing this hobby for 37 years, so I'm anxious to hear about your exclusive experience that the rest of us have never experienced.

The experiences not shared by others on the forum are those of bias controlled testing. Every time I mention it the roof comes down on my head. So it is obvious to me that dissenting information is not welcome here. But I will continue to post what I know unless the site asks me to leave.

heiney9 wrote: »

fmw wrote: »

heiney9 wrote: »

Is it possible for you to discuss other audio related things? There is a lot about this hobby that is also worth talking about as well as 100's of other threads to discuss.

I do fear you were here for a singular reason, if that's the case then you have contributed all you need to and perhaps it is time for you to move along.

Why not share your other 40 years of experiences, especially the one's none of us have experience before? Why hang your hat so emphatically on a narrow, singular subject matter?

You see, your posts, both with passive/aggressive tones, and now the surrender "white flag" speech, and how your innocent and only trying to educate newbies, is old hat and been seen many times before.

It's a formula, and you are following it like a set of instructions.

H9

Why not just drop it? You are as bad as a modern university. You have no tolerance at all for dissenting information. I'll leave as soon as the site asks me to, not because you ask me to.

I could ask you the same thing, but I'm sure your ego won't let you drop it. When I said "move along", I wasn't asking you to leave (apparently other places have asked since you jumped to that conclusion) I was simply asking you to move on to another subject or experience as you've stated your opinions about this one quite emphatically. I'd love to hear about the audio experiences you've had that the rest of us haven't. I've only been in/around/practicing this hobby for 37 years, so I'm anxious to hear about your exclusive experience that the rest of us have never experienced.

I have seen your other posts, that's good you're branching out. Eventually you might get some credibility back. It will be essential to stroke that ego of yours.

Anyway I fear I now have become a broken record so I am moving on.

Cheers

H9

ZLTFUL

How do you KNOW that none of us have engaged in bias controlled testing?

Perhaps we found the process tedious and a waste of time only to discover things we already knew. Perhaps we discovered that the extra work of the tests in question didn't bring about a difference in our ability to discern differences.

You are still discounting others experiences of which you know absolutely nothing about and now you are playing the oppressed victim card. All of which is pathetic really when your only intent is to stir **** and then claim it is everyone else treating you badly instead of you instigating a debate that you are very ill equipped to have.

"We only tested for our own benefit so we didn't document the results."
"I am here trying to educate those new to the hobby."

Seems to me that if your honest intent was education, then you would have the data to back it up. But your intent isn't education, it is instigation.

tonyb

We have over 16 years of education already on the forum from all walks of life and levels in audio. If someone thinks biases have not been covered in over 16 years then they are too lazy to look up the threads.

Nothing being said is new to the forum, matter of fact it's rather old hat. Some like to hold on to those old hats though.

F1nut

fmw wrote:

I don't understand how amps can match speakers so I can't comment on that.

Truly amazing that someone who claims to have been into audio for 40 years has no idea about matching amps and speakers. In fact, your comment makes it appear that you have been into audio for 10 seconds.

cnh

fmw wrote: »

heiney9 wrote: »

Is it possible for you to discuss other audio related things? There is a lot about this hobby that is also worth talking about as well as 100's of other threads to discuss.

I do fear you were here for a singular reason, if that's the case then you have contributed all you need to and perhaps it is time for you to move along.

Why not share your other 40 years of experiences, especially the one's none of us have experience before? Why hang your hat so emphatically on a narrow, singular subject matter?

You see, your posts, both with passive/aggressive tones, and now the surrender "white flag" speech, and how your innocent and only trying to educate newbies, is old hat and been seen many times before.

It's a formula, and you are following it like a set of instructions.

H9

Thanks, I didn't know that. I've made posts elsewhere on the site but you probably don't visit those threads. Why do you keep challenging me to keep posting in this thread? Why not just drop it? You are as bad as a modern university. You have no tolerance at all for dissenting information. I'll leave as soon as the site asks me to, not because you ask me to.

OMG! Our Universities and colleges are the "envy" of the world. Most first rate minds come "here" to study! And yet, a small number of right wing "nut jobs" keep making this same retort! Fair and balanced, right!

Find a better University system in another country, why don't you? Give it a rest, No Agenda Dude!

DarqueKnight

fmw wrote: »

The experiences not shared by others on the forum are those of bias controlled testing. Every time I mention it the roof comes down on my head. the rest of us have never experienced.

You seem to believe that blind/double blind testing is the only form of bias controlled testing. There are many types of bias controlled tests specified for different types of sensory stimuli and different types of test subjects. The peer-reviewed sensory science literature has much credible information for those with an honest interest in the subject.

Descriptive testing is a far more powerful method of bias control than simple discrimination tests, particularly for complex sensory stimuli like a stereophonic sound field.

You need to do a more in-depth study of what kind of bias control testing is appropriate for a specific audio scenario, then come back and speak from knowledge, rather than limited experience and shallow understanding.

You assumed that you are the only one here with experience in bias controlled experiments. Why would you say such a thing and you have no knowledge of the academic and professional backgrounds of the members? In my case, I did many years of bias controlled experiments on sound quality of telephone equipment as a manufacturing and research and development engineer for AT&T and Bell Laboratories.

The simple-minded "one kind of test fits all audio" mindset is indicative of a crippling lack of intellectual curiosity and honesty. It is also indicative of the most shallow understanding of basic scientific audio concepts. The fact that you think that a "digital" cable cannot make an audible difference because "it is only transmitting 1s and 0s" is a common misunderstanding. There is no such thing as a binary digital signal. Such a signal only exists as a theoretical abstract concept. There is no method known to science that will generate a signal that can instantaneously switch between only two discrete amplitudes (high and low value). What is transmitted in digital cables is an analog approximation of a digital signal. The signal ramps up to a true maximum value (maximum overshoot) then settles down into a relatively flat, but rippled, nominal maximum value, then ramps down to true minimum value (maximum undershoot), then settles up into a relatively flat, but rippled, nominal minimum value, then the process repeats for respective "high" and "low" pulses. In this regard, a "digital" signal is actually a "pseudo-digital" signal that has the same infinitely-varying amplitude characteristics of an analog signal.

fmw

Thanks but my experiences say otherwise.

fmw

BlueFox wrote: »

As an FYI, since it appears you do not know this, 'digital' audio cables do not carry digital information. They carry an analog signal that represents a digital signal. The receiver takes the analog signal, and then creates a digital signal. Depending on how degraded the analog signal is by the cable, it is possible to introduce jitter into the newly created digital bit stream. Thus 'digital' cables can affect the sound of the audio.

We are still waiting for links to your testing so we can evaluate the tests, methods, and results.

Yes, we call it pulse code modulation. I was simply trying to make post simpler. I assume this group would understand that a digital cable transmits PCM. You will be waiting a long time for links that do not exist.

F1nut

fmw wrote: »

Thanks but my experiences say otherwise.

Translation:

fmw wrote: »

I don't understand any of this, but I'll keep side stepping and hopefully they won't notice.

F1nut

Another gem of the 10 second method.

fmw wrote:

If it helps the OP our group tested a number of DAC's and CD players ranging from a portable CD player to a $4500 DAC/Transport unit and weren't able to hear an audible difference between any of them in a bias controlled comparison.

Just in case it hasn't become obvious to any newcomer, the so-called experiences of fmw are seriously flawed, ignore them and him.

txcoastal1

Moral of the story, anything dealing with the perception of the 5 senses cannot be judged with blanket statements without substantiated evidence. Art, sound, food, and objects of touch are personal.

You can give examples of experience but not deny what others perceive...because you just don't know.

ZLTFUL

I find your statements considerably hypocritical, X. Especially when you are one of the biggest bullies on this and other forums.

F1nut

Yeah, it is true. For example, your complaints about some threads here amounts to bullying.

DarqueKnight

xcapri79 wrote: »

I find that there are some exaggerations made of the "analog" significance of digital signals on a cable which doesn't properly recognize how digital signal processing and error correction is truly achieved.

Please be more specific with regard to the exaggerations you found.

machone

Time is the one thing that cannot be bartered, purchased or even stolen. Why waste it arguing with people like fmw or x? It always ends the same way. Ignore them.

mikeyb128

nbrowser wrote: »

Ok keyboard cowboys, stand down, chill out, fire up your perfectly assembled stereos and just turn it up a notch or ten...maybe add in an adult beverage and enjoy your finely crafted sound. I know I will be doing just that, tomorrow night

Me too! And I'm gonna leave my amps on all day for a nice warm up hehehehe

BlueFox

Me too. In fact I turned the amps on when I got home tonight, so they will be ready to rock tomorrow night. Unfortunately, it is poker night so I won't be able to get to them until around 1 AM Saturday. Now they are playing, but even better, heating the house.

fmw

DarqueKnight wrote: »

fmw wrote: »

The experiences not shared by others on the forum are those of bias controlled testing. Every time I mention it the roof comes down on my head. the rest of us have never experienced.

I owe you a better answer than the hand wave I wrote before. It was bed time

You seem to believe that blind/double blind testing is the only form of bias controlled testing. There are many types of bias controlled tests specified for different types of sensory stimuli and different types of test subjects. The peer-reviewed sensory science literature has much credible information for those with an honest interest in the subject.

I don't know why you think that because I didn't say that. All I have said is that some audible differences in audio equipment disappear in blind tests. I don't know what others have said.

Descriptive testing is a far more powerful method of bias control than simple discrimination tests, particularly for complex sensory stimuli like a stereophonic sound field.

OK, but we didn't test any complex sensory stimuli. We did our best to eliminate all of them except for hearing and only tested for the existence of audible differences.

You need to do a more in-depth study of what kind of bias control testing is appropriate for a specific audio scenario, then come back and speak from knowledge, rather than limited experience and shallow understanding.

You think I should study something that has not been studied and written about. I would suggest to you that you do some tests like we did and come back. Then we will talk. My limited experience about audible difference testing is a quantum leap ahead of those on this forum.

You assumed that you are the only one here with experience in bias controlled experiments. Why would you say such a thing and you have no knowledge of the academic and professional backgrounds of the members? In my case, I did many years of bias controlled experiments on sound quality of telephone equipment as a manufacturing and research and development engineer for AT&T and Bell Laboratories.

That is a completely different test. In those tests you were comparing audible differences and judging which was the more intelligible. You listened and voted for the preferred sound. It is something like a preference test like those done by Dr. Olive at Harman. If you had encountered a comparison with the same sound on both sides your results would been similar to guesswork.

It is that audible difference we tested. Which of the two units did you just hear, A or
B? Guess works proves there is no audible difference. Majority right or wrong answers prove that there is an audible difference. It is not a preference test.

The simple-minded "one kind of test fits all audio" mindset is indicative of a crippling lack of intellectual curiosity and honesty. It is also indicative of the most shallow understanding of basic scientific audio concepts.

Above you talked about sensory stimuli so you certainly understand that, when the ears and brain can't make a determination about a difference, it takes shortcuts and factors in other stimuli - sight, expectation, preference, mood etc. It is strange to me that a scientific person like you can't understand that removing these stimuli gets down to an unvarnished truth about audible differences. I can't explain it to myself except to assume denial on your part.

The fact that you think that a "digital" cable cannot make an audible difference because "it is only transmitting 1s and 0s" is a common misunderstanding. There is no such thing as a binary digital signal. Such a signal only exists as a theoretical abstract concept. There is no method known to science that will generate a signal that can instantaneously switch between only two discrete amplitudes (high and low value). What is transmitted in digital cables is an analog approximation of a digital signal. The signal ramps up to a true maximum value (maximum overshoot) then settles down into a relatively flat, but rippled, nominal maximum value, then ramps down to true minimum value (maximum undershoot), then settles up into a relatively flat, but rippled, nominal minimum value, then the process repeats for respective "high" and "low" pulses. In this regard, a "digital" signal is actually a "pseudo-digital" signal that has the same infinitely-varying amplitude characteristics of an analog signal.

As you know, we represent digital information by changes between positive and negative or higher voltage and lower voltage or short pulse and long pulse. We need to do that in order to transmit it. With PCM we vary the pulse duration while in a computer, for instance, we vary the polarity of the voltage. And so it goes.

In order to make a change in the stream something has to change in the pulse or the voltage to alter the digital value of the signal. Common sense tells you that cables don't do that. My tests tell me beyond any shadow of a doubt that cables don't do that. Any audible differences with digital cables are hearing bias, not the cables. Every audible difference in digital cables will disappear in a blind test. Every time. Try it. It is a very easy test because it doesn't require any level matching. Seriously, if you truly believe that a cable can alter the digital value of the signal, you should have no fear of such a test.

Again, I'm sorry that I responded so curtly to your post.

tonyb

F1nut wrote: »

Another gem of the 10 second method.

fmw wrote:

If it helps the OP our group tested a number of DAC's and CD players ranging from a portable CD player to a $4500 DAC/Transport unit and weren't able to hear an audible difference between any of them in a bias controlled comparison.

Just in case it hasn't become obvious to any newcomer, the so-called experiences of fmw are seriously flawed, ignore them and him.

His test group......we have hundreds in our test group who will mostly say the exact opposite.

This is why newbies who just start getting into better audio are confused. The internet provides vast opinions to both sides of anything. This is why one needs to try things for themselves.

fmw

tonyb wrote: »

F1nut wrote: »

Another gem of the 10 second method.

fmw wrote:

If it helps the OP our group tested a number of DAC's and CD players ranging from a portable CD player to a $4500 DAC/Transport unit and weren't able to hear an audible difference between any of them in a bias controlled comparison.

Just in case it hasn't become obvious to any newcomer, the so-called experiences of fmw are seriously flawed, ignore them and him.

His test group......we have hundreds in our test group who will mostly say the exact opposite.

This is why newbies who just start getting into better audio are confused. The internet provides vast opinions to both sides of anything. This is why one needs to try things for themselves.

Apparently his advice applies to everyone but himself.

tonyb

fmw wrote: »

tonyb wrote: »

F1nut wrote: »

Another gem of the 10 second method.

fmw wrote:

If it helps the OP our group tested a number of DAC's and CD players ranging from a portable CD player to a $4500 DAC/Transport unit and weren't able to hear an audible difference between any of them in a bias controlled comparison.

Just in case it hasn't become obvious to any newcomer, the so-called experiences of fmw are seriously flawed, ignore them and him.

His test group......we have hundreds in our test group who will mostly say the exact opposite.

This is why newbies who just start getting into better audio are confused. The internet provides vast opinions to both sides of anything. This is why one needs to try things for themselves.

Apparently his advice applies to everyone but himself.

How so ?

F1nut

fmw wrote:

My limited experience about audible difference testing is a quantum leap ahead of those on this forum.

All 10 seconds? Your testing methods are a joke.

vmaxer

machone wrote: »

Time is the one thing that cannot be bartered, purchased or even stolen. Why waste it arguing with people like fmw or x? It always ends the same way. Ignore them.

Agreed, but it is a bit entertaining. I have listened to the experienced here a have a much better system because of them. I appreciate it a lot.

motorhead43026

Deleted