Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: [OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution (Read 11346 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Quote from: Ethan Winer on
Nice to see this topic here where it can be discussed calmly and rationally.


I'm wondering why this thread isn't getting more attention. It should be much more original HA territory than the "Why we need audiophiles" juggernaut.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #1 –
Probably because it's Sunday

Chris
If I don't reply to your reply, it means I agree with you.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #2 –
Oh, I am definitely taking a stand on this. I think I've spent 10+ hours writing a response in the last week. I'm trying to punch it out as soon as possible (now that the discussion is heating up both on here and AA).

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #3 –
I'm looking forward to that!

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #4 –
Axon,

just email them to me at luxaeternaaudio@gmail.com

I will wait, of course.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #5 –
Quote from: NullC on
…Because other sampling methods don't require band-limited signals?



Oh, what sampling methods are we talking about here?
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
 

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #7 –
Quote from: krabapple on
It may well be that Dr. Kunchur's audio work is getting more thorough 'peer review' here than he's gotten so far.  ;>

It shall be interesting to see the response.


Why you insist on spewing such counterproductive nonsense is beyond me.  I have spoken with Dr. Kunchur personally (via phone) and know that his work has been rigorously reviewed by authorities in many fields. He describes this process/experience in great detail in his writings.

so....Could you please stop being confrontational and rude??  I mean...firs the jab at the Stereophile forum, now another jab at Dr. Kunchur.
If you aren't going to be polite(like the rest have), please do not pollute this thread as you have elsewhere.

your comments have added nothing.

thanks.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #8 –
Quote from: Canar on
Quote from: ncdrawl on
Could you please stop being confrontational and rude??
He might have been so elsewhere, but there's really little to critique about his posts in this thread. Your response is more "confrontational and rude" than his initial post. He was just commenting that he expects to see some engaging peer-review here, which is a very valid belief.



um...no. you are wrong.. he was implying that the peer review Dr. Kunchur has gotten thus far was bogus (as indicated by his quotes around the words "peer review")...

and this one...

Quote
Hence the uproar on Stereophile's forum, where it's delightful to see what fulsome respect the letters 'PhD' can garner from audiophiles when they really want to believe


I am a member of the sphile forum, and do not appreciate his attacks.

................and we shall know them by the fruits that they bear.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #9 –
Quote from: ncdrawl on
Quote from: Canar on
Quote from: ncdrawl on
Could you please stop being confrontational and rude??
He might have been so elsewhere, but there's really little to critique about his posts in this thread. Your response is more "confrontational and rude" than his initial post. He was just commenting that he expects to see some engaging peer-review here, which is a very valid belief.



um...no. you are wrong.. he was implying that the peer review Dr. Kunchur has gotten thus far was bogus (as indicated by his quotes around the words "peer review")...


I don't think thats what he was implying, and regardless, you need to calm down. 

Quote from: ncdrawl on
I am a member of the sphile forum, and do not appreciate his attacks.

................and we shall know them by the fruits that they bear.


Being upset at some perceived slight does not mean you should be obnoxious in an otherwise interesting thread.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #10 –
Quote from: ncdrawl on
Quote from: Canar on
Quote from: ncdrawl on
Could you please stop being confrontational and rude??
He might have been so elsewhere, but there's really little to critique about his posts in this thread. Your response is more "confrontational and rude" than his initial post. He was just commenting that he expects to see some engaging peer-review here, which is a very valid belief.



um...no. you are wrong.. he was implying that the peer review Dr. Kunchur has gotten thus far was bogus (as indicated by his quotes around the words "peer review")...



You got it exactly backwards.  I put quotes around the phrase because the 'peer review' was taking place *here*, in a nontraditional forum, rather than in private amongst academics (as for publication peer review) or in a scientific conference (for presentations). 



Quote
and this one...

Quote
Hence the uproar on Stereophile's forum, where it's delightful to see what fulsome respect the letters 'PhD' can garner from audiophiles when they really want to believe


I am a member of the sphile forum, and do not appreciate his attacks.

................and we shall know them by the fruits that they bear.




The laughably hypocritical  behavior I was 'attacking' with my sarcasm --  mindlessly abject appeal to scientific credentials from those normally disposed to dismiss science -- was fully deserving of it, and more.  And isn't it curious how quiet you are over there, when 'attacks'  are directed far more venomously, personally, and often at HA, jj, and myself?

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #11 –
Quote from: krabapple on
blah snip blah


what are your credentials?

One need not be a scientist to recognize rudeness. You are acting like a jerk. I could be an illiterate fool and still be spot on about your being antagonistic.


it was pointed out over there, and now I am pointing it out here.

this place is a canoe club of sorts so you may get by with it more... but ill call a spade when I see it...Herr Spade.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #12 –
Quote from: Mike Giacomelli on
Being upset at some perceived slight does not mean you should be obnoxious in an otherwise interesting thread.



I am not upset. I was simply pointing out the guy's personality flaws.

I know the thread is interesting....I started the damned thing!

so...yeah, id like it to stay on topic, free of egoistic chest thumping, or trolling....or "attaboys". no need for any of that stuff.

I am justified in my call for manners. Thanks.

/out

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #14 –
Quote from: ncdrawl on
Quote from: krabapple on
blah snip blah


what are your credentials?

One need not be a scientist to recognize rudeness. You are acting like a jerk. I could be an illiterate fool and still be spot on about your being antagonistic.

it was pointed out over there, and now I am pointing it out here.

this place is a canoe club of sorts so you may get by with it more... but ill call a spade when I see it...Herr Spade.



(shrug)

Audible, MichaelW, Woodinville, gnypp, Canar have understood and amply fleshed out the point I was making.  I hope you read their posts.

I won't extend this into a pissing match about credentials.  So, back to the technical discussion.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #15 –
Quote from: Audible! on
To be perfectly honest, my credentialed competencies don't relate directly to these topics


you could have stated that first and saved me from reading the rest. 




Quote
Therefore, with all due respect, pimping Dr. Kuncher's general scholastic record is less interesting


Straw man.  no-one has been pimping anything..with all due respect, of course.



[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #16 –
Quote from: andy_c on
but according to Axon's communications with Dr. Kunchur, the spectrum computation takes days(?).


One wonders what goes into those spectra.

Now for a decent goulash ...



Werner, count Gulyázi

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #17 –
Quote from: honestguv on
Quote from: Axon on
BTW, I find this behavior highly unprofessional. I would almost find it tantamount to lying.

Little sympathy for a man with problems?



And this sort of thing is appropriate, Moderator?? You know..the more I observe the behaviour here, the more the place seems like a "old boys club"  or country club, clique...where anyone that dares to speak out against the status quo is met with hostility. 

grandfathered members(maybe donating members?) are given free reign to insult/demean, but how dare someone else do it, eh?


Krabapple
honestguv
werner (not surprising , this one...the Teutonic thing grants him a bit more leeway since he cant help it..part of his pedigree)

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #18 –
You've thrown food as well ncdrawl; don't pretend to be innocent.

In the meantime, perhaps you can address the technical comments here, or are you just a proxy?  If so, I think we'd prefer to converse with someone that demonstrates some technical acumen on the subject.  My take is that you're little more than a cheerleader for the flat-earth subjectivist camp.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #19 –
Quote from: greynol on
You've thrown food as well ncdrawl; don't pretend to be innocent.

In the meantime, perhaps you can address the technical comments here, or are you just a proxy?  If so, I think we'd prefer to converse with someone that demonstrates some technical acumen on the subject.  My take is that you're little more than a cheerleader for the flat-earth subjectivist camp.


What I find interesting is that questioning glaringly obvious, egregious errors about sampling was regarded as not only throwing food over there at stereopile, but was actually regarded as throwing excrement.
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #20 –
I'm not concerned with what goes on at other forums until it is brought over here.

Now what I find interesting is how people like to cry foul or debate debating instead of acknowledge or challenge points made on the actual topic at hand.

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #21 –
Quote from: greynol on
You've thrown food as well ncdrawl; don't pretend to be innocent.

In the meantime, perhaps you can address the technical comments here, or are you just a proxy?  If so, I think we'd prefer to converse with someone that demonstrates some technical acumen on the subject.  My take is that you're little more than a cheerleader for the flat-earth subjectivist camp.



so in other words.... you are allowing it..awesome moderating! instead of saying "yeah, that is screwed up, I will address it!" you side with them!... this place is everything they say it is. 

sad, really. a closed minded canoe club, hostile to outsiders or anyone that does not toe the "science party line"

[OFF-TOPIC/USELESS] From: Interesting Papers re temporal resolution

Reply #22 –
Quote from: Woodinville on
Quote from: greynol on
You've thrown food as well ncdrawl; don't pretend to be innocent.

In the meantime, perhaps you can address the technical comments here, or are you just a proxy?  If so, I think we'd prefer to converse with someone that demonstrates some technical acumen on the subject.  My take is that you're little more than a cheerleader for the flat-earth subjectivist camp.


What I find interesting is that questioning glaringly obvious, egregious errors about sampling was regarded as not only throwing food over there at stereopile, but was actually regarded as throwing excrement.



Johnston, I dont care that you disagree. I do care about the manner in which you frame your disagreements. If you act like a jerk, you are going to get called on it. (well, not here, apparently, but most places)

If you had discussed the issues appropriately, things would not have blown up.... I am sorry, but no-one starts slinging mud unprovoked. Ask yourself "what did I do to incite this behaviour, and how can I improve in the future?"

Axon, for example(though I know very well what side he sits on), has been well-behaved. AndyC, Krapabble, and you, JJ(though you have gotten better) ===not so much.