Hydrogenaudio Forums

Hydrogenaudio Forum => General Audio => Topic started by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 12:59:36 PM

Title: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 12:59:36 PM
When my post was ridiculed on Audio Asylum, I noted the following post: https://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/115/1158857.html

The dude claims that I don't understand audio quality. Well, let's see.

My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003% over most of the power range (1W-95W), very low noise (The A-weighted noise of the power section is -113dB!), an excellent DAC, one resonant power supply per channel and well engineered thermal management.  So, for most practical sound levels the distortion of my amplifier+DAC system is below the threshold of hearing. My speakers are also quite accurate.

An then some dude with tube gear accuses ME of "living in a bubble when it comes to quality audio playback". That is beyond ridiculous.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 04 December, 2017, 01:17:16 PM
Interesting, but why waste time to read what those dudes have to say? Their views are irrelevant as is their forum.

When my post was ridiculed on Audio Asylum, I noted the following post

The dude claims that I don't understand audio quality.

An then some dude with tube gear accuses ME of "living in a bubble when it comes to quality audio playback". That is beyond ridiculous.
::)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 01:19:22 PM
Interesting, but why waste time to read what those dudes have to say? Their views are irrelevant as is their forum.

When my post was ridiculed on Audio Asylum, I noted the following post

The dude claims that I don't understand audio quality.

An then some dude with tube gear accuses ME of "living in a bubble when it comes to quality audio playback". That is beyond ridiculous.
::)


Yea, OK. I got miffed by their insults.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 04 December, 2017, 01:47:34 PM
My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003%
My speakers are also quite accurate.

Yea, OK. I got miffed by their insults.
Well don't embarrass yourself then. You don't prefer the sound of your stereo for either of those reasons, any more than the vinyl guys do for all that idiocy they come up with. Just go with you prefer the sound of your stereo playing digital vs vinyl. Don't "justify" it with nonsense.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 02:19:17 PM
My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003%
My speakers are also quite accurate.

Yea, OK. I got miffed by their insults.
Well don't embarrass yourself then. You don't prefer the sound of your stereo for either of those reasons, any more than the vinyl guys do for all that idiocy they come up with. Just go with you prefer the sound of your stereo playing digital vs vinyl. Don't "justify" it with nonsense.


What are you talking about? I select audio systems based on measurements (i.e. good specs) and the quality of engineering. All good amplifiers sound the same anyway. You go for the best engineering and specs.

What you suggest is a subjectivist trap -- essentially saying that I should like a system because I like that system. No, I have a good reasons to like my system and laugh at subjectivists and those reasons are good specs and good engineering. Audio gear can be ranked and inferior audio gear does not measure well. It is that simple.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 04 December, 2017, 02:27:34 PM
THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

...and despite the erroneous belief one of our highly astute members has about this community (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115012.msg948356.html#msg948356), Sound quality is not determined through electrical measurements.

Yes, he did call you a Nazi, though it is clearly not "a reflexive (and rather dramatic) overreaction".  Then again if we manage to assume "an intonation that partially negates the actual words written" then it wouldn't be so bad.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 02:46:52 PM
THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

...and despite the erroneous belief one of our highly astute members has about this community (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115012.msg948356.html#msg948356), Sound quality is not determined through electrical measurements.

Yes, he did call you a Nazi, though it is clearly not "a reflexive (and rather dramatic) overreaction".

0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases. What subjectivists don’t get is that there is a certain elegance in good engineering and top level specs as well. It saddens me that some people here think like subjectivists.

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: pdq on 04 December, 2017, 03:03:56 PM
THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

...and despite the erroneous belief one of our highly astute members has about this community (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115012.msg948356.html#msg948356), Sound quality is not determined through electrical measurements.

Yes, he did call you a Nazi, though it is clearly not "a reflexive (and rather dramatic) overreaction".

0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases. What subjectivists don’t get is that there is a certain elegance in good engineering and top level specs as well. It saddens me that some people here think like subjectivists.


What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 04:23:44 PM
THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

...and despite the erroneous belief one of our highly astute members has about this community (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115012.msg948356.html#msg948356), Sound quality is not determined through electrical measurements.

Yes, he did call you a Nazi, though it is clearly not "a reflexive (and rather dramatic) overreaction".

0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases. What subjectivists don’t get is that there is a certain elegance in good engineering and top level specs as well. It saddens me that some people here think like subjectivists.


What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

I suggest reading this: https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/interpreting-thd-measurements-think-db-not-percent

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 04 December, 2017, 04:48:17 PM
I pulled 0.03% out of my ass. It could have been 0.005%. I suggest you step back consider what sound quality literally is.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 05:04:36 PM
I pulled 0.03% out of my ass. It could have been 0.005%. I suggest you step back consider what sound quality literally is.

I have considered that very carefully. No biggie if you disagree. But you may wish to take a look at the above link to a paper by Benchmark Media and you will see why some of us strive to get distortion below the absolute threshold of audibility.

Cheers.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 04 December, 2017, 05:10:09 PM
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115054.msg948767.html#msg948767
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 05:22:29 PM
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115054.msg948767.html#msg948767

OK, if you insist: 0.03% is not bad, but it does offer an absolute guarantee that it is below the threshold of audibility. Benchmark thinks that you need at least 0.001% for that in practical cases.

There is subtle point here: 0.03% might not be audible, but it is not guaranteed to be inaudible; 0.001% or better is guaranteed to be inaudible in almost all practical cases.

Finally, at least this is how I see things, excellent specs have an aesthetic quality of their own. Frankly, I'm surprised that I have to emphasize this here -- this is supposed to be a forum for objectivists and admirers of superlative engineering.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 04 December, 2017, 05:26:36 PM
this is supposed to be a forum for objectivists and admirers of superlative engineering.
That's a bit presumptuous (and incorrect).

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.html
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 05:31:20 PM
this is supposed to be a forum for objectivists and admirers of superlative engineering.
That's a bit presumptuous (and incorrect).

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,3974.html

Well, I guess I've interpreted point 8 of the TOS too broadly. To me, if you believe in ABX, you are an objectivist. And if you are an objectivist, you love good engineering. How can it be otherwise?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 04 December, 2017, 05:35:31 PM
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases. What subjectivists don’t get is that there is a certain elegance in good engineering and top level specs as well. It saddens me that some people here think like subjectivists.
I did warn you might embarrass yourself like those subjectivists on AA. The Benchmark link is nonsense. There are no listening tests involved, just numbers thrown out and assumptions. Its more of a sales pitch, but you didn't understand it.
THD is a near useless metric for audibility of distortion. Try this instead http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/The%20Perception%20of%20Distortion.pdf (http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/The%20Perception%20of%20Distortion.pdf)
Or better yet, spend $100, join AES, then I can link you to a dozen articles only available to members.
One more time, the two reasons I quoted above are not why you prefer your stereo.

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 04 December, 2017, 05:42:36 PM
May have found a freebie.
 While it lasts, link http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20171204/16624.pdf (http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20171204/16624.pdf)

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16624 (http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16624)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 05:49:16 PM
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases. What subjectivists don’t get is that there is a certain elegance in good engineering and top level specs as well. It saddens me that some people here think like subjectivists.
I did warn you might embarrass yourself like those subjectivists on AA. The Benchmark link is nonsense. There are no listening tests involved, just numbers thrown out and assumptions. Its more of a sales pitch, but you didn't understand it.
THD is a near useless metric for audibility of distortion. Try this instead http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/The%20Perception%20of%20Distortion.pdf (http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/The%20Perception%20of%20Distortion.pdf)
Or better yet, spend $100, join AES, then I can link you to a dozen articles only available to members.
One more time, the two reasons I quoted above are not why you prefer your stereo.

Dude, if you understood the Benchmark paper, you would get the following simple fact -- you don't need a listening test if you drive THD low enough, i.e. below the threshold of hearing.

BTW, the paper that you linked is a "curious" piece of work. I mean, charts with unknown units on the axis, unclear how the correlations were calculated (Pearson or Spearman) etc. Dude, before you try to bedazzle me with empirical analysis again, take into account that I do statistics for a living.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 05:54:14 PM
May have found a freebie.
 While it lasts, link http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20171204/16624.pdf (http://www.aes.org/tmpFiles/elib/20171204/16624.pdf)

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16624 (http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=16624)

Many thanks. I might join the AES for fun.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 04 December, 2017, 05:56:26 PM
you don't need a listening test
I do. It's critical actually.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 04 December, 2017, 05:58:18 PM
Dude, before you try to bedazzle me with empirical analysis again, take into account that I do statistics for a living.
I knew it wasn't engineering and/or perception.  ;)
No biggie
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 06:02:29 PM
you don't need a listening test
I do. It's critical actually.


Well, I don't. I buy equipment with specs that are good enough to guarantee audio fidelity. The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment. Why pollute your audio buying decision by auditioning the gear? Rely on the math, dude!
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 06:03:49 PM
Dude, before you try to bedazzle me with empirical analysis again, take into account that I do statistics for a living.
I knew it wasn't engineering and/or perception.  ;)
No biggie


Agree, no biggie.

Cheers.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: old tech on 04 December, 2017, 06:25:29 PM
When my post was ridiculed on Audio Asylum, I noted the following post: https://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/115/1158857.html

The dude claims that I don't understand audio quality. Well, let's see.

My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003% over most of the power range (1W-95W), very low noise (The A-weighted noise of the power section is -113dB!), an excellent DAC, one resonant power supply per channel and well engineered thermal management.  So, for most practical sound levels the distortion of my amplifier+DAC system is below the threshold of hearing. My speakers are also quite accurate.

An then some dude with tube gear accuses ME of "living in a bubble when it comes to quality audio playback". That is beyond ridiculous.
It is not surprising.  You'd get the same responses posting objective medical information on a homeopathy forum.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 06:47:04 PM
When my post was ridiculed on Audio Asylum, I noted the following post: https://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/115/1158857.html

The dude claims that I don't understand audio quality. Well, let's see.

My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003% over most of the power range (1W-95W), very low noise (The A-weighted noise of the power section is -113dB!), an excellent DAC, one resonant power supply per channel and well engineered thermal management.  So, for most practical sound levels the distortion of my amplifier+DAC system is below the threshold of hearing. My speakers are also quite accurate.

An then some dude with tube gear accuses ME of "living in a bubble when it comes to quality audio playback". That is beyond ridiculous.
It is not surprising.  You'd get the same responses posting objective medical information on a homeopathy forum.

Nicely put.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 04 December, 2017, 09:17:58 PM
you don't need a listening test
I do. It's critical actually.

Well, I don't. I buy equipment with specs that are good enough to guarantee audio fidelity.
You may want to look up oxymoron.
Best get used to the concept of absolutely needing listening tests to determine audio anything around here, including "fidelity".

The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.
It is precise enough to analyze audio.
You may want to become a bit more aware of your surroundings here.

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 09:43:43 PM
you don't need a listening test
I do. It's critical actually.

Well, I don't. I buy equipment with specs that are good enough to guarantee audio fidelity.
You may want to look up oxymoron.
Best get used to the concept of absolutely needing listening tests to determine audio anything around here, including "fidelity".

The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.
It is precise enough to analyze audio.
You may want to become a bit more aware of your surroundings here.



What are you talking about? The ear is quite inaccurate, including for audio. Have you ever heard of auditory illusions? Check out the TED video I posted on this forum. You'll see how you can "hear the difference" where there is none. Your talk about accurate ears leads me to believe that you a subjectivist on the inside.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 04 December, 2017, 09:55:28 PM
Which is precisely why you have no business using electrical measurements to gauge audio quality on this forum.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 10:05:35 PM
Which is precisely why you have no business using electrical measurements to gauge audio quality on this forum.

Wow, that was kinda harsh. But I agree with you; I've been quite sloppy today, interchanging quality and fidelity and such. (In my mind they are the same, but I don't speak for everyone here.)

So, how about judging AUDIO FIDELITY by using electrical measurements? Would that be OK with you?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 04 December, 2017, 10:22:40 PM
Harsh? I'm blunt and you didn't familiarize yourself with the community as I implored you to do on more than one occasion, so yeah, I guess so.

I'm not interested in semantics, rather this was making sure you understand the deal about sound quality in these parts.

This little mantra should get you through: everything should be assumed to sound the same until demonstrated otherwise in accordance with TOS8, unless it could be trivially and readily demonstrated by rational people who prescribe to TOS8 and are behaving sensibly and rationally (IOW: not controversial among non-placebophiles).

The main exceptions are headphones and speakers.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 04 December, 2017, 10:57:31 PM
Harsh? I'm blunt and you didn't familiarize yourself with the community as I implored you to do on more than one occasion, so yeah, I guess so.

I'm not interested in semantics, rather this was making sure you understand the deal about sound quality in these parts.

This little mantra should get you through: everything should be assumed to sound the same until demonstrated otherwise in accordance with TOS8, unless it could be trivially and readily demonstrated by rational people who prescribe to TOS8 and are behaving sensibly and rationally (IOW: not controversial among non-placebophiles).

The main exceptions are headphones and speakers.

1. Fair enough, I like blunt types myself. Beats passive aggressive BS any time of day,

2. IMHO: quality vs fidelity (accuracy) is not semantics -- you are talking to a fan of David Hume here :)) One is subjective, the other one is not -- fidelity (or accuracy) deals with the degree signals are distorted and is measurable electrically. So, I think that TOS8 does not apply to discussions of fidelity (or accuracy).

3. The above point notwithstanding, I get the purpose of TOS8 now. It is quite clever, actually. A mild but sneaky weapon against subjectivists.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 04 December, 2017, 11:01:27 PM
I believe you are correct about fidelity and the rest.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 05 December, 2017, 08:57:26 PM
our talk about accurate ears leads me to believe that you a subjectivist on the inside.
Audio quality is subjective. You're way outside of statistics. Stay in your lane.
Look around here, join AES, learn what listening tests are for.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 05 December, 2017, 10:44:07 PM
our talk about accurate ears leads me to believe that you a subjectivist on the inside.
Audio quality is subjective. You're way outside of statistics. Stay in your lane.
Look around here, join AES, learn what listening tests are for.


With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time. I wanted to use some stronger words, but you are smart and can read between the lines.

Cheers.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: krabapple on 05 December, 2017, 11:53:54 PM
With all due respect....you don't know what you're talking about.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: polemon on 06 December, 2017, 03:39:16 AM
It seems this entire conversation has gone way beyond what every person even knows what they're talking about.

From an engineers perspective (and I'm an electronics engineer and embedded developer working with signal processing, not an audio engineer), the term "fidelity" is pretty misleading. When you're working with radars and, ranging, image processing, or communications, things like noise and distortion are of course measurable and quantifiable.

When signals are processed, units are calibrated and adjusted against. In the areas where I work, it's not just noise, noise is only one such component in a range of quite a large number of things that influence a signal, beyond it's representation.

When it comes to fidelity in the audio world, it is usually conflated with with terms like low noise and high dynamic range. Also "fidelity" is supposed to mean "exactness" or "accuracy", not "precision", mind you! But exactness to what, really? If it is "the recording", well, then it kinda depends on what the recording was made. You might argue, that all audio recordings aren't geared for "exactness", because that's not really the point.

If you were to make a measurement of "audio fidelity", I'd ask for each component to be tested individually, in a controlled test chamber, especially when it comes to transducers. They better be temperature controlled and in a controlled atmosphere, otherwise the results aren't quantifiable. The source signal should be scanned and reconstructed such that the plain signal is able to be analyzed by itself and then fed through the system in order to measure the entirety of the system. And by scanning, I mean something like really scanning, not recording using an audio ADC.

In terms of signal processing test gear, all audio equipment, no matter how much money you throw at it, is "lo-fi". If your amp cannot work on a range of 100Hz - 1GHz, and has no frequency standard in a physics package (sic) as a reference, It's like comparing an assortment of various ages and quality ranges of butter knifes to a laser scalpel.

The whole notion of analogue audio be it Vinyl or otherwise, expensive or not, is not "clarity", "fidelity", "clearness", "un-veil-ness", or any other of such terms. The idea behind listening to a system like that, is to be OK with the type of distortion it introduces. Vinyl and all components in a setup using nice tube amps, and speakers with large drivers, etc. it's all about the right playback capability, while accepting the type of distortion each component introduces into the chain. The record player, the cartridge, the vinyl itself, the amp and the speaker (and to be fair, the dust on the vinyl itself) is part of the sound generation element. And that's all before even going to things like the tactility of analogue audio and the eye candy they bring. Whether that is a nice vinyl spinning on top of an opulent record player or a nice reel to reel machine slowly spinning away.

There is an entire range of music geared towards lo-fi, btw.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyNYkWKHf1Q and I can totally see the appeal. In fact lo-fi distrotion is often used in music as an effect these days.

When your quest is for precision in the signal itself, going to expensive audio equipment is simply the wrong way, because "audio" is the wrong way. Precise signals is not about "sounding good" it's about data. When we're talking about audio, we're talking about an experience, which comes in a variety of flavors.

I love listening to vinyl, mainly because of the tactility and the way the sound reproduction is flawed in a way that is actually quite pleasing. I love listening to my Uher reel-to-reel more, mainly because playing with it, is almost like playing with an electric train set. It's a great toy for me, and it also makes pretty sweet sounds, too. Also it's able to record, and yes, the quality is also very friggin awesome, especially when you take care of it!.

The Analog Scott person over at Analog Asylum recently posted this gem when it comes to listening to music:
Quote
That isn't what one hears. That is what one feels.
If you wouldn't hear it, you wouldn't feel it, except if he means visual or tactile music, which I doubt. He obviously is not understanding what is a quantifiable measure, and what is an assumption, but that would be really as low-hanging as strawberries.
The person he's answering to, is asking about how you'd measure (or quantify) musicality and involvement. The tangent goes out of the window, when we talk about quantifiability, because we end up in psychoanalysis territory, and then we eventually start coming full circle.

Something like this lets me just put my hand to the forehead and sigh slightly:
Quote
Posted by Ralph (M) on December 5, 2017 at 13:29:59
In Reply to: RE: Why do you waste your time posting there? posted by John Elison on December 4, 2017 at 22:42:08:

The human ear is far less sensitive than electronic measurement equipment. Therefore, we can measure all sorts of distortion and other things that no human can hear. Everyone knows this. If you think you can hear frequencies that cannot be measured you're delusional.

This is a common myth. IOW, the statement above is false, although if the opening statement were to read something like 'The human ear is **usually** far less sensitive...' it would be more accurate.

We can easily hear some forms of distortion, in particular higher ordered harmonics. The reason for this is that the ear uses higher ordered harmonics on order to sense sound pressure. We have about a 140 db range (although the upper limits will cause damage as you know).

GE proved this back in the 1960s but the implications have been largely ignored to this day. In fact we've had inklings regarding our sensitivity to higher ordered harmonics going back to the 1930s (see Radiotron Designer's Handbook 2nd edition).

The ear converts most forms of distortion to tonality. Most engineers know that the 2nd harmonic of tubes contributes to their 'warmth' or 'richness'. Trace amounts (that can be difficult to measure) of higher ordered harmonics are what make solid state amps sound bright and contributes to harshness.

It is the presence of higher ordered harmonic content in SETs that causes them to sound 'dynamic'. Its my supposition and experience that when audiophiles are using the word 'dynamics' that they are usually talking about distortion and that the two terms can be exchanged without changing the meaning of the conversation. That might sound cynical to some but that's my experience.
Ref.: https://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/115/1159235.html

This is what I mean with this: This person obviously has never visited a cal lab or any lab dealing with signal analysis. I won't judge someone's relationship with science, but I'd advise at least reading a book about how human hearing works, how hearing aids are made, and how human perception and sound works in general. Maybe not necessarily reading a book, but just watching a youtube video or two, or just talking to people working in those fields would be beneficial. There is also one thing about "proving" and "providing evidence", studies confirming findings of other studies, etc.

When someone talks about "trace amounts" of something like a harmonic (which is a continuous object of a spectrum), it's pretty clear there is some misunderstanding there. The second harmonic of a time-invariant signal is a mathematical property, there are no "trace amounts" possible of such thing. He also said "they can be difficult to measure", there is no need to measure those, because they can be calculated from oversampling. Simply analyse the signal path with a precise instrument, like a nice Tektronix MSO48, which even at its lowest setting provides 125M samples per second. Provide a standard deviation map, apply against the data gathered and check whether the data is indicative of it. There are well defined procedures in place for exactly such measurements. Whether you're looking at p-values or other means of measuring indicativity.

https://d35c7d8c.web.cern.ch/sites/d35c7d8c.web.cern.ch/files/styles/responsive_front_page/public/CMSLHCb_EDfig2_1_0.png

We measure and then analyse the data gathered. If things are difficult to measure, we need to use a better instruments. That's how we derive knowledge, not by intuition about something.

Also, "warmth", "richness", "harshness", "brightness"...

As someone working in the fields of science and engineering, I learned to be very careful when dealing with people like moon-hoaxers, flat-earthers, global-warming deniers, or audiophools. I advise everyone else, to just ignore those people, this seems to be the best way of dealing with subjects where people get easily offended. People seem to love to cling to beliefs, when insight and knowledge is lacking. It is uncomfortable to be told wrong, and proven with evidence. Evidence should be examined, and not shunned first and then looked at. On the other hand, I don't see the point in people getting aggressive and argumentative, though. When someone is unable to understand, then it's better to simply ignore them, in my experience. This is not a middle school course where teachers are expected to explain again and again until the last student with terminal ADHD has understood the subject matter. But I don't see the point at being a dick to people, even if they're dicks themselves...

When doing ABX testing of digital audio - or any audio really, you'd look for specific artifacts. The idea behind ABX-ing is ruling out ones own bias, nothing more, nothing less.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: includemeout on 06 December, 2017, 04:27:37 AM
I get the purpose of TOS8 now. It is quite clever, actually. A mild but sneaky weapon against subjectivists.
Hallelujah!! Not that you haven't been advised to read the TOS's and everything after practically from day one (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,114917.msg947357.html#msg947357) (I, for once, have almost been at the end of my tether).


But do you, actually?

Though I still hope you finally realize how doing things over here the other way around ends up getting you nowhere.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 05:53:20 AM
I get the purpose of TOS8 now. It is quite clever, actually. A mild but sneaky weapon against subjectivists.
Hallelujah!! Not that you haven't been advised to read the TOS's and everything after practically from day one (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,114917.msg947357.html#msg947357) (I, for once, have almost been at the end of my tether).


But do you, actually?

Though I still hope you finally realize how doing things over here the other way around ends up getting you nowhere.


Your interventions are really tiresome and contribute nothing to the discussion. If you have nothing of substance to contribute to the topic, then kindly keep your sanctimonious proclamations to yourself.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 05:54:54 AM
With all due respect....you don't know what you're talking about.

Kindly spare us your information free cheap shots. I hope you can manage that.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 06:10:07 AM
It seems this entire conversation has gone way beyond what every person even knows what they're talking about.

From an engineers perspective (and I'm an electronics engineer and embedded developer working with signal processing, not an audio engineer), the term "fidelity" is pretty misleading. When you're working with radars and, ranging, image processing, or communications, things like noise and distortion are of course measurable and quantifiable.

When signals are processed, units are calibrated and adjusted against. In the areas where I work, it's not just noise, noise is only one such component in a range of quite a large number of things that influence a signal, beyond it's representation.

When it comes to fidelity in the audio world, it is usually conflated with with terms like low noise and high dynamic range. Also "fidelity" is supposed to mean "exactness" or "accuracy", not "precision", mind you! But exactness to what, really? If it is "the recording", well, then it kinda depends on what the recording was made. You might argue, that all audio recordings aren't geared for "exactness", because that's not really the point.

If you were to make a measurement of "audio fidelity", I'd ask for each component to be tested individually, in a controlled test chamber, especially when it comes to transducers. They better be temperature controlled and in a controlled atmosphere, otherwise the results aren't quantifiable. The source signal should be scanned and reconstructed such that the plain signal is able to be analyzed by itself and then fed through the system in order to measure the entirety of the system. And by scanning, I mean something like really scanning, not recording using an audio ADC.

In terms of signal processing test gear, all audio equipment, no matter how much money you throw at it, is "lo-fi". If your amp cannot work on a range of 100Hz - 1GHz, and has no frequency standard in a physics package (sic) as a reference, It's like comparing an assortment of various ages and quality ranges of butter knifes to a laser scalpel.

The whole notion of analogue audio be it Vinyl or otherwise, expensive or not, is not "clarity", "fidelity", "clearness", "un-veil-ness", or any other of such terms. The idea behind listening to a system like that, is to be OK with the type of distortion it introduces. Vinyl and all components in a setup using nice tube amps, and speakers with large drivers, etc. it's all about the right playback capability, while accepting the type of distortion each component introduces into the chain. The record player, the cartridge, the vinyl itself, the amp and the speaker (and to be fair, the dust on the vinyl itself) is part of the sound generation element. And that's all before even going to things like the tactility of analogue audio and the eye candy they bring. Whether that is a nice vinyl spinning on top of an opulent record player or a nice reel to reel machine slowly spinning away.

There is an entire range of music geared towards lo-fi, btw.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyNYkWKHf1Q and I can totally see the appeal. In fact lo-fi distrotion is often used in music as an effect these days.

When your quest is for precision in the signal itself, going to expensive audio equipment is simply the wrong way, because "audio" is the wrong way. Precise signals is not about "sounding good" it's about data. When we're talking about audio, we're talking about an experience, which comes in a variety of flavors.

I love listening to vinyl, mainly because of the tactility and the way the sound reproduction is flawed in a way that is actually quite pleasing. I love listening to my Uher reel-to-reel more, mainly because playing with it, is almost like playing with an electric train set. It's a great toy for me, and it also makes pretty sweet sounds, too. Also it's able to record, and yes, the quality is also very friggin awesome, especially when you take care of it!.

The Analog Scott person over at Analog Asylum recently posted this gem when it comes to listening to music:
Quote
That isn't what one hears. That is what one feels.
If you wouldn't hear it, you wouldn't feel it, except if he means visual or tactile music, which I doubt. He obviously is not understanding what is a quantifiable measure, and what is an assumption, but that would be really as low-hanging as strawberries.
The person he's answering to, is asking about how you'd measure (or quantify) musicality and involvement. The tangent goes out of the window, when we talk about quantifiability, because we end up in psychoanalysis territory, and then we eventually start coming full circle.

Something like this lets me just put my hand to the forehead and sigh slightly:
Quote
Posted by Ralph (M) on December 5, 2017 at 13:29:59
In Reply to: RE: Why do you waste your time posting there? posted by John Elison on December 4, 2017 at 22:42:08:

The human ear is far less sensitive than electronic measurement equipment. Therefore, we can measure all sorts of distortion and other things that no human can hear. Everyone knows this. If you think you can hear frequencies that cannot be measured you're delusional.

This is a common myth. IOW, the statement above is false, although if the opening statement were to read something like 'The human ear is **usually** far less sensitive...' it would be more accurate.

We can easily hear some forms of distortion, in particular higher ordered harmonics. The reason for this is that the ear uses higher ordered harmonics on order to sense sound pressure. We have about a 140 db range (although the upper limits will cause damage as you know).

GE proved this back in the 1960s but the implications have been largely ignored to this day. In fact we've had inklings regarding our sensitivity to higher ordered harmonics going back to the 1930s (see Radiotron Designer's Handbook 2nd edition).

The ear converts most forms of distortion to tonality. Most engineers know that the 2nd harmonic of tubes contributes to their 'warmth' or 'richness'. Trace amounts (that can be difficult to measure) of higher ordered harmonics are what make solid state amps sound bright and contributes to harshness.

It is the presence of higher ordered harmonic content in SETs that causes them to sound 'dynamic'. Its my supposition and experience that when audiophiles are using the word 'dynamics' that they are usually talking about distortion and that the two terms can be exchanged without changing the meaning of the conversation. That might sound cynical to some but that's my experience.
Ref.: https://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/115/1159235.html

This is what I mean with this: This person obviously has never visited a cal lab or any lab dealing with signal analysis. I won't judge someone's relationship with science, but I'd advise at least reading a book about how human hearing works, how hearing aids are made, and how human perception and sound works in general. Maybe not necessarily reading a book, but just watching a youtube video or two, or just talking to people working in those fields would be beneficial. There is also one thing about "proving" and "providing evidence", studies confirming findings of other studies, etc.

When someone talks about "trace amounts" of something like a harmonic (which is a continuous object of a spectrum), it's pretty clear there is some misunderstanding there. The second harmonic of a time-invariant signal is a mathematical property, there are no "trace amounts" possible of such thing. He also said "they can be difficult to measure", there is no need to measure those, because they can be calculated from oversampling. Simply analyse the signal path with a precise instrument, like a nice Tektronix MSO48, which even at its lowest setting provides 125M samples per second. Provide a standard deviation map, apply against the data gathered and check whether the data is indicative of it. There are well defined procedures in place for exactly such measurements. Whether you're looking at p-values or other means of measuring indicativity.

https://d35c7d8c.web.cern.ch/sites/d35c7d8c.web.cern.ch/files/styles/responsive_front_page/public/CMSLHCb_EDfig2_1_0.png

We measure and then analyse the data gathered. If things are difficult to measure, we need to use a better instruments. That's how we derive knowledge, not by intuition about something.

Also, "warmth", "richness", "harshness", "brightness"...

As someone working in the fields of science and engineering, I learned to be very careful when dealing with people like moon-hoaxers, flat-earthers, global-warming deniers, or audiophools. I advise everyone else, to just ignore those people, this seems to be the best way of dealing with subjects where people get easily offended. People seem to love to cling to beliefs, when insight and knowledge is lacking. It is uncomfortable to be told wrong, and proven with evidence. Evidence should be examined, and not shunned first and then looked at. On the other hand, I don't see the point in people getting aggressive and argumentative, though. When someone is unable to understand, then it's better to simply ignore them, in my experience. This is not a middle school course where teachers are expected to explain again and again until the last student with terminal ADHD has understood the subject matter. But I don't see the point at being a dick to people, even if they're dicks themselves...

When doing ABX testing of digital audio - or any audio really, you'd look for specific artifacts. The idea behind ABX-ing is ruling out ones own bias, nothing more, nothing less.

TL;DR
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: includemeout on 06 December, 2017, 06:37:36 AM
Your snarky interventions are really tiresome. If you have nothing to contribute to the topic, then kindly keep quiet and stop polluting my thread. Ok?
Your persistence in ignoring all the good advice that has been given to you so far, either attests an utter lack of perspective or the fact you are just plain thick!

Edit: 3rd person "s"
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: includemeout on 06 December, 2017, 06:42:02 AM
Quote
then kindly keep quiet and stop polluting my thread. Ok?
Dear cocky, presposterous, lil' piece of...  "wast of time",  mmrkaic sir,

Please, do not worry yourself. I will alas, follow your erm, "order".

Certainly not because I think you are in the position of bossing anyone around here, but indeed because I will, as I guess some members of this community will, give up on you as a lost case, given all the animosity you, from the height of your arrogance and donquixotean "brothers unite" posts, have already managed to attract to your person - out of sheer sttuborness in recognizing that other folks are, sometimes, right, and that through the afore-mentioned tip-offs, they have been trying to put you on the right track as to what all this ojective thingy is roughly all about - definitely not the imaginary cruzade you have been on about!

And you've managed to concur into all that negativeness in what? Barely a month!

Hence this self-imposed cease & desist message of mine.

Best,

includemeout

(https://www.thinkingchristian.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/facepalm2.jpg)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 06:56:36 AM
Quote
then kindly keep quiet and stop polluting my thread. Ok?
Dear cocky, presposterous, lil' piece of...  "wast of time",  mmrkaic sir,

Please, do not worry yourself. I will alas, follow your erm, "order".

Certainly not because I think you are in the position of bossing anyone around here, but indeed because I will, as I guess some members of this community will, give up on you as a lost case, given all the animosity you, from the height of your arrogance and donquixotean "brothers unite" posts, have already managed to attract to your person - out of sheer sttuborness in recognizing that other folks are, sometimes, right, and that through the afore-mentioned tip-offs, they have been trying to put you on the right track as to what all this ojective thingy is roughly all about - definitely not the imaginary cruzade you have been on about!

And you've managed to concur into all that negativeness in what? Barely a month!

Hence this self-imposed cease & desist message of mine.

Best,

includemeout

(https://www.thinkingchristian.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/facepalm2.jpg)


Many thanks -- sincerely grateful.

Since you have so generously dispensed with advice, allow me to reciprocate -- could you kindly stop posing as some sort of representative of or spokesperson for this "community"? You started responding to my posts as some sort of community leader. That pose, in no small part, contributed to my dislike of your posts.

I also wish you all the best.

P.S. You may wish to use a spellchecker. "Cruzade" is not a word.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: Case on 06 December, 2017, 07:09:47 AM
Actually TOS8 has been perverted in recent years. Its point was not to claim the fact that superior equipment that measures better isn't better. It's there to tell that claims about audible differences need proof from listening tests. Attacking mmrkaic's point that there's no need to listen when equipment is measured to be transparent is idiotic.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: includemeout on 06 December, 2017, 07:31:39 AM
Since you have so generously dispensed with advice, allow me to reciprocate -- could you kindly stop posing as some sort of representative of or spokesperson for this "community"? You started responding to my posts as some sort of community leader. That pose, in no small part, contributed to my dislike of your posts.

I also wish you all the best.

P.S. You may wish to use a spellchecker. "Cruzade" is not a word.
Me? A community leader!?
Nah! It's just your imagination running wild - again.

Quote
P.S. You may wish to use a spellchecker. "Cruzade" is not a word.
Oh, dear!

(https://www.thinkingchristian.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/facepalm2.jpg)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: includemeout on 06 December, 2017, 07:38:39 AM
PPS: You may wish to use a spell-checker. "spellchecker" is spelled "spell-checker", according to Webster's (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spell-checker).

See how pedantic you are?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 07:40:51 AM
Since you have so generously dispensed with advice, allow me to reciprocate -- could you kindly stop posing as some sort of representative of or spokesperson for this "community"? You started responding to my posts as some sort of community leader. That pose, in no small part, contributed to my dislike of your posts.

I also wish you all the best.

P.S. You may wish to use a spellchecker. "Cruzade" is not a word.
Me? A community leader!?
Nah! It's just your imagination running wild - again.

Quote
P.S. You may wish to use a spellchecker. "Cruzade" is not a word.
Oh, dear!

(https://www.thinkingchristian.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/facepalm2.jpg)


Wish you could not break your own promises. You keep replying even after your "cease and desist" message. A bit thin-skinned, aren't we? :)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 07:45:31 AM
PPS: You may wish to use a spell-checker. "spellchecker" is spelled "spell-checker", according to Webster's (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spell-checker).

See how pedantic you are?


Takes one to know one. But still, a good move.

About that other thing, dear sir, how is that cease & desists "order" working for you. Cannot stop, can you? :)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 08:14:59 AM
With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time.
Then you're either a troll or dense. Possibly both.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 08:22:16 AM
With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time.

Actually TOS8 has been perverted in recent years. Its point was not to claim the fact that superior equipment that measures better isn't better. It's there to tell that claims about audible differences need proof from listening tests.
Speaking of idiotic....

Attacking mmrkaic's point that there's no need to listen when equipment is measured to be transparent is idiotic.
How was that "transparency" determined to correlate the measured vales?
The Benchmark "paper" he linked to was nonsense. Case, do you believe the Benchmark amp is distinguishable vs a higher THD amp than the numbers stated as "minimum", using ears only/listening to music  testing?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 08:30:25 AM
Something like this lets me just put my hand to the forehead and sigh slightly:
Quote
Posted by Ralph (M) on December 5, 2017 at 13:29:59
In Reply to: RE: Why do you waste your time posting there? posted by John Elison on December 4, 2017 at 22:42:08:

The human ear is far less sensitive than electronic measurement equipment. Therefore, we can measure all sorts of distortion and other things that no human can hear. Everyone knows this. If you think you can hear frequencies that cannot be measured you're delusional.

This is a common myth. IOW, the statement above is false, although if the opening statement were to read something like 'The human ear is **usually** far less sensitive...' it would be more accurate.

We can easily hear some forms of distortion, in particular higher ordered harmonics. The reason for this is that the ear uses higher ordered harmonics on order to sense sound pressure. We have about a 140 db range (although the upper limits will cause damage as you know).

GE proved this back in the 1960s but the implications have been largely ignored to this day. In fact we've had inklings regarding our sensitivity to higher ordered harmonics going back to the 1930s (see Radiotron Designer's Handbook 2nd edition).

The ear converts most forms of distortion to tonality. Most engineers know that the 2nd harmonic of tubes contributes to their 'warmth' or 'richness'. Trace amounts (that can be difficult to measure) of higher ordered harmonics are what make solid state amps sound bright and contributes to harshness.

It is the presence of higher ordered harmonic content in SETs that causes them to sound 'dynamic'. Its my supposition and experience that when audiophiles are using the word 'dynamics' that they are usually talking about distortion and that the two terms can be exchanged without changing the meaning of the conversation. That might sound cynical to some but that's my experience.
Ref.: https://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/115/1159235.html

This is what I mean with this: This person obviously has never visited a cal lab or any lab dealing with signal analysis.
Go easy on Ralph, he spent a year in a UMinn EE program taking electives, like 50yrs ago. You can't help but see the humor with the Dunning-Kruger audio chumplings. Can't make this stuff up.  ;)
Them "laughing" at us "lofi" folks, with zero cognizance, makes it 10x as funny.  ;D
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: polemon on 06 December, 2017, 08:41:29 AM
Go easy on Ralph, he spent a year in a UMinn EE program taking electives, like 50yrs ago. You can't help but see the humor with the Dunning-Kruger audio chumplings. Can't make this stuff up.  ;)
Hmm, I don't know, I certainly hope I don't end up having a degree worth nothing in 50 years...

Them "laughing" at us "lofi" folks, with zero cognizance, makes it 10x as funny.  ;D
To be honest, I don't think this is funny at all. I think this is a little bit sad, but otherwise it's just uncomfortable, and tbh, I don't see why this is a place to discuss "them".
What's essentially happening here, is HA pointing fingers at AA, while they do the same thing. Who's right and wrong is not important at this point anymore, because both side behave like idiots, and to be honest, I'm kinda ashamed of that.

I'd rather be the smart person and don't interact with these people, and simply ignore them and their forum.

There is zero reason for laughing at them or calling them names, we might discuss the subject matter they present, but that's about it, really. I have no intentions wasting time on them.

If this is a science and technology based forum, let's discuss science and technology, rather than the typical "look at them! such idots, hahaha!" It brings absolutely nothing.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: EekWit on 06 December, 2017, 08:45:27 AM
With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time.
When choosing an amplifier or CD player, I agree entirely. The problems which CD players and amplifiers are supposed to solve have only a single correct solution. You get closer to that solution by minimizing distortion etc. If measuring performance with respect to distortion etc. is quicker and easier than listening tests, why bother with listening tests?

Obviously, when talking about speakers, headphones and listening environment it is a different matter.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 08:58:38 AM
If measuring performance with respect to distortion etc. is quicker and easier than listening tests, why bother with listening tests?
Because without them, you have no way of establishing audibility thresholds for what you're measuring. That shouldn't be a difficult concept on this site. 100x lower than thresholds gains nothing, except silly ad material for the clueless.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 09:06:17 AM
Hmm, I don't know, I certainly hope I don't end up having a degree worth nothing in 50 years...
My guess is you got a bit further than electives and may have a bit more retention.  ;)

To be honest, I don't think this is funny at all.
I do. Having met countless in person, hearing their D-K jewelry, being immersed in the voodoo, makes for some serious fun.
Try it, you'll see. :D
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: EekWit on 06 December, 2017, 09:09:34 AM
Because without them, you have no way of establishing audibility thresholds for what you're measuring. That shouldn't be a difficult concept on this site. 100x lower than thresholds gains nothing, except silly ad material for the clueless.
I don't know much/anything about the current state of the amplifier market in the US. Is distortion below the threshold of audibility available to the middle 90% of the market?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 09:18:32 AM
Is distortion below the threshold of audibility available to the middle 90% of the market?
Perhaps you can quantify distortion, % THD, which is a specific metric, as we have been discussing, Cosmik.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: EekWit on 06 December, 2017, 09:43:32 AM
Perhaps you can quantify distortion, % THD, which is a specific metric, as we have been discussing, Cosmik.
I'm referring to all of the side-effects induced by the amplifier in addition to doing what it is supposed to do - amplifying the signal. If THD is a suitable metric then yes I'm referring to THD.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 09:52:05 AM
If THD is a suitable metric then yes I'm referring to THD.
If? You don't know? Have you been following the discussion, from page 1?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: EekWit on 06 December, 2017, 10:10:39 AM
If? You don't know? Have you been following the discussion, from page 1?
I think you misunderstand me. The reason I ask questions on HA instead of other forums is because I want answers from people who know what they're talking about.

I have a purely amateur interest in audio tech, as do many people. However, unlike many other amateurs on the internet, I don't like to chuck around technical terms whose meaning I don't fully understand. E.g. total harmonic distortion. If I describe what I'm referring to in lay terms then there is less chance of talking garbage.

You still haven't answered my question: is THD below the threshold of audibility available to the middle 90% of the US amplifier market?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 10:24:01 AM
My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003%
With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time.
When choosing an amplifier or CD player, I agree entirely.

I think you misunderstand me.
There is nothing to misunderstand. You agree with the nonsense posted by the OP.

You still haven't answered my question: is THD below the threshold of audibility available to the middle 90% of the US amplifier market?
Because Cosmik, you still haven't answered my question as to quantifying THD. You don't get to shift the goal posts. If it's the number mmrkaic threw out..and you agreed with, I now need to see your valid listening tests establishing such thresholds. Otherwise, your "question" has no relevance (never mind the specious cultural aspect)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: EekWit on 06 December, 2017, 10:40:35 AM
My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003%
With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time.
When choosing an amplifier or CD player, I agree entirely.
Those two statements by mmrkaic were in two differents posts. Don't wilfully misrepresent me.

If THD is a poor metric for quantifying audibility of distortion then you are free to suggest another. Others exist.

Regarding the relevance of my question. If a large part of the market consists of amplifiers with audible (defined according to results of listening tests in published papers) levels of distortion then using measurements is a valid means to inform a purchase. Suppose that within your budget all candidate amplifiers have levels of distortion audible to the average listener. It is then a valid strategy to order the candidates according to their measurements and pick the best.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 10:42:45 AM
My amplifier has THD of less than 0.003%
With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time.
When choosing an amplifier or CD player, I agree entirely.

I think you misunderstand me.
There is nothing to misunderstand. You agree with the nonsense posted by the OP.

You still haven't answered my question: is THD below the threshold of audibility available to the middle 90% of the US amplifier market?
Because Cosmik, you still haven't answered my question as to quantifying THD. You don't get to shift the goal posts. If it's the number mmrkaic threw out..and you agreed with, I now need to see your valid listening tests establishing such thresholds. Otherwise, your "question" has no relevance (never mind the specious cultural aspect)

Dude, I am one of those who post sense here, while You keep avoiding numbers and measurements. Are you are subjectivist at heart?

Listening tests of amplifiers, CDs, DACs etc are a waste of time if those devices are well designed and built. We also know the lower bound of sound pressure that is audible. There is nothing more listening tests can do.

Incidentally, I have a question for you. Ralf Atmasphere studied one year of EE 50 years ago. What did you study?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 10:43:25 AM
There is subtle point here: 0.03% might not be audible
Let's see if you and Cosmik can figure out how...
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 10:45:18 AM
If THD is a poor metric for quantifying audibility
How would you find out?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 10:49:41 AM
We also know the lower bound of sound pressure that is audible.
How do "we" know this? Using what method? Keep in mind: "With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time."

Btw, 0.003% THD isn't "sound pressure"
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: EekWit on 06 December, 2017, 10:55:27 AM
If THD is a poor metric for quantifying audibility
How would you find out?
I would look at the results of controlled listening tests published in reputable journals.

With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time.
When choosing an amplifier or CD player, I agree entirely.
Look at what I actually said.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 11:02:11 AM
Dude, I frigging know that THD is not sound pressure. But one of the easiest things for someone with a masters in physics (me) is to go from THD to sound pressure. 
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 11:06:30 AM
We also know the lower bound of sound pressure that is audible.
How do "we" know this? Using what method? Keep in mind: "With all due respect -- listening tests are a waste of time."

Btw, 0.003% THD isn't "sound pressure"

Dude, I have a strong suspicion that you know very little science.
I
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 11:06:48 AM
I would look at the results of controlled listening tests published in reputable journals.
Great, so I guess listening tests are important before they are not. When you find those results, then you can answer your own question: You still haven't answered my question: is THD below the threshold of audibility available to the middle 90% of the US amplifier market?

Good luck with your search, come back when you find something meaningful about THD
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 11:10:00 AM
Dude, I frigging know that THD is not sound pressure. But one of the easiest things for someone with a masters in physics (me) is to go from THD to sound pressure. 
So is 0.03% audible? Vs 0.003%? Let's see your evidence and how it was determined without those useless listening tests.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 11:24:08 AM
Dude, I frigging know that THD is not sound pressure. But one of the easiest things for someone with a masters in physics (me) is to go from THD to sound pressure. 
So is 0.03% audible? Vs 0.003%? Let's see your evidence and how it was determined without those useless listening tests.

I can do the math for you, you clearly cannot do it yourself. Listening tests to establish the threshold of audible sound pressure were done years ago. Only an amateur would keep repeating the same experiments instead of using the results.

Which leads me to ask you: why are you afraid to answer my question— what did you study?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: krabapple on 06 December, 2017, 11:33:33 AM
Listening tests of amplifiers, CDs, DACs etc are a waste of time if those devices are well designed and built. We also know the lower bound of sound pressure that is audible. There is nothing more listening tests can do.


See, it isn't so hard to properly qualify a claim, is it?

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: krabapple on 06 December, 2017, 11:37:59 AM
What's essentially happening here, is HA pointing fingers at AA, while they do the same thing. Who's right and wrong is not important at this point anymore, because both side behave like idiots, and to be honest, I'm kinda ashamed of that.


Yikes, this reminds me of election season.  "Both sides are just as bad...."

Anyway, you get to feel that way, and others get to feel that 'what's right and wrong' is still  (more) important.

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 11:43:21 AM
Dude, I frigging know that THD is not sound pressure. But one of the easiest things for someone with a masters in physics (me) is to go from THD to sound pressure. 
So is 0.03% audible? Vs 0.003%? Let's see your evidence and how it was determined without those useless listening tests.
I can do the math for you,
Great, lets see your THD audibility thresholds "math". Ought to be a doozy  :))

Which leads me to ask you: why are you afraid to answer my question— what did you study?
Reading comprehension.

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 12:51:00 PM
Dude, I frigging know that THD is not sound pressure. But one of the easiest things for someone with a masters in physics (me) is to go from THD to sound pressure. 
So is 0.03% audible? Vs 0.003%? Let's see your evidence and how it was determined without those useless listening tests.
I can do the math for you,
Great, lets see your THD audibility thresholds "math". Ought to be a doozy  :))

Which leads me to ask you: why are you afraid to answer my question— what did you study?
Reading comprehension.



No science then. Ok, no problem. I understand your point of view better now.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: jjb70 on 06 December, 2017, 12:52:59 PM
Is there not an element of subjectivity in all of us? I hate the nonsense promoted by some hifi magazines, websites and manufacturers and think that measurement and blind testing is important. However when it comes to speakers and headphones I find my buying decisions to be very subjective.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 01:05:42 PM
Go easy on Ralph, he spent a year in a UMinn EE program taking electives, like 50yrs ago. You can't help but see the humor with the Dunning-Kruger audio chumplings. Can't make this stuff up.  ;)
Hmm, I don't know, I certainly hope I don't end up having a degree worth nothing in 50 years...

Them "laughing" at us "lofi" folks, with zero cognizance, makes it 10x as funny.  ;D

What's essentially happening here, is HA pointing fingers at AA, while they do the same thing. Who's right and wrong is not important at this point anymore, because both side behave like idiots, and to be honest, I'm kinda ashamed of that.

If this is a science and technology based forum, let's discuss science and technology, rather than the typical "look at them! such idots, hahaha!" It brings absolutely nothing.

Dear Sir, these disagreements about audio are not innocent. They reflect a bigger problem--war on science. I will paraphrase Trotsky, because it is very fitting in this context, "You may not be interested in war on science, but war on science is interested in you."
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 01:21:55 PM
Dear Sir, these disagreements about audio...
Unfortunately you have no clue what the word means. It's in the website name too.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 01:35:03 PM
Dear Sir, these disagreements about audio...
Unfortunately you have no clue what the word means. It's in the website name too.

You are grasping at straws, dear Sir.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 01:46:51 PM
There is subtle point here: 0.03% might not be audible

You are grasping at straws, dear Sir.
Audio
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: Arnold B. Krueger on 06 December, 2017, 02:13:43 PM
Is there not an element of subjectivity in all of us? I hate the nonsense promoted by some hifi magazines, websites and manufacturers and think that measurement and blind testing is important. However when it comes to speakers and headphones I find my buying decisions to be very subjective.

Of course we are all subjective and have likes and dislikes that have various amounts of evidence and logic behind them, including none.

However, there is something to be said for selecting higher priority judgments of value and attempting to make them as evidence-based and rational as is reasonably possible.

When it comes to things like appearance and comfort, then greater amounts of subjectivity may be in order.

I think it is possible to make decisions about the sound quality of speakers and headphones primarily based on reliable evidence and logic.  One key finding is that frequency response is very important in perceptions of sound quality and it is very easy to adjust to suit. Therefore, the details related to the frequency response of speakers and headphones may be less important that other parameters such as dynamic range, within reasonable limits.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: polemon on 06 December, 2017, 03:39:58 PM
Yikes, this reminds me of election season.  "Both sides are just as bad...."
Yeah, wenn you go down to that level of glitterbombing and turd throwing, I guess it kinda is, isn't it.
Anyway, you get to feel that way, and others get to feel that 'what's right and wrong' is still  (more) important.
Oh I still think what is and what isn't wrong is (more) important. But arguing about it on such level is meaningless, etc.

I tend to simply limit myself to: "no, this is wrong because ...". If people are unable to understand no matter how much effort I put into explaining and providing examples, etc. I usually just accept that either the other person is in fact unable to understand the subject matter, or perhaps I'm explaining it in a way the other person is unable to understand it, i.e. not well enough.

I kinda step away from then on, etc. I'm not a teacher as such, etc.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: jjb70 on 06 December, 2017, 04:29:25 PM
Is there not an element of subjectivity in all of us? I hate the nonsense promoted by some hifi magazines, websites and manufacturers and think that measurement and blind testing is important. However when it comes to speakers and headphones I find my buying decisions to be very subjective.

Of course we are all subjective and have likes and dislikes that have various amounts of evidence and logic behind them, including none.

However, there is something to be said for selecting higher priority judgments of value and attempting to make them as evidence-based and rational as is reasonably possible.

When it comes to things like appearance and comfort, then greater amounts of subjectivity may be in order.

I think it is possible to make decisions about the sound quality of speakers and headphones primarily based on reliable evidence and logic.  One key finding is that frequency response is very important in perceptions of sound quality and it is very easy to adjust to suit. Therefore, the details related to the frequency response of speakers and headphones may be less important that other parameters such as dynamic range, within reasonable limits.


I wouldn't disagree that you can make many decisions on speakers and headphones using objective data and analysis, but I still think that speakers and headphones are probably the two items where subjective assessment has real value. In the case of headphones they are fundamentally different to other audio equipment in that you wear them so they need to be comfortable. I believe that the sound quality of headphones is second to comfort as it doesn't matter how great they sound if you hate wearing them. Maybe I'm tone death, but I find that most CD players, amplifiers, DACs etc sound pretty transparent and I generally struggle to identify much of a difference, whereas even my ears can readily discern differences between speakers and headphones.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: greynol on 06 December, 2017, 04:36:11 PM
I'm pretty well convinced our number chasing friend(s) couldn't find a single piece of commercial content that would sound better with 0.003% THD than it would with 0.05% THD.

PS: Is it time I bring my old signature back?  Seems apropos to this Case.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: krabapple on 06 December, 2017, 04:44:49 PM

Oh I still think what is and what isn't wrong is (more) important. But arguing about it on such level is meaningless, etc.

I tend to simply limit myself to: "no, this is wrong because ...". If people are unable to understand no matter how much effort I put into explaining and providing examples, etc. I usually just accept that either the other person is in fact unable to understand the subject matter, or perhaps I'm explaining it in a way the other person is unable to understand it, i.e. not well enough.

I kinda step away from then on, etc. I'm not a teacher as such, etc.

Fair enough.

FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement...neither being anywhere near an 'audiophool'.    
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 06 December, 2017, 04:58:32 PM
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement
Umm, no.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 06 December, 2017, 11:53:48 PM
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement
Umm, no.

This is the only agreement we have—we don’t agree. :)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 07 December, 2017, 08:43:41 AM
This is the only agreement we have—we don’t agree. :)
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the importance of listening tests.
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the audibility of THD
You disagree with science and common sense regarding the "accuracy" of your loudspeakers.
Etc, etc, etc.
Those are your disagreements, not with "me". Several others have pointed this out in these threads.
Start here (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115054.0.html), read all responses slowly, including links
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: polemon on 07 December, 2017, 11:04:47 AM
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement...neither being anywhere near an 'audiophool'.   

Ah well, whether they are agreeing or disagreeing violently is kinda meh' either way. It doesn't take an audiophool to have an aggressive demeanor.

If you have your arguments right, you can be blunt, but there's no reason to resort to unnecessary aggressive, passive or otherwise.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 07 December, 2017, 01:24:50 PM
This is the only agreement we have—we don’t agree. :)
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the importance of listening tests.
You disagree with science and the site TOS regarding the audibility of THD
You disagree with science and common sense regarding the "accuracy" of your loudspeakers.
Etc, etc, etc.
Those are your disagreements, not with "me". Several others have pointed this out in these threads.
Start here (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115054.0.html), read all responses slowly, including links

I admire your chutzpah. For someone who apparently never made a sustained effort to study science in depth, you are surprisingly confident in your judgment of scientific validity.

Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir? Hoisted by your own petard?

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 07 December, 2017, 01:35:01 PM
FWIW, AJ and mmrkaic appear to me to mostly be in violent agreement...neither being anywhere near an 'audiophool'.   

Ah well, whether they are agreeing or disagreeing violently is kinda meh' either way. It doesn't take an audiophool to have an aggressive demeanor.

If you have your arguments right, you can be blunt, but there's no reason to resort to unnecessary aggressive, passive or otherwise.

Allow me to answer a direct question—how should we interact with people who wage the war on science?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 07 December, 2017, 01:42:13 PM
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 07 December, 2017, 03:08:26 PM
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.

How droll.

Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked, you never bothered to make an effort to gain deeper understanding of electrical engineering, physics and statistics, and yet, totally oblivious of these limitations, you confidently spew a lot of nonsense on this forum. So, would you say that you are a DK case?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 07 December, 2017, 05:08:40 PM
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.
Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
Yes, obviously.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 07 December, 2017, 07:20:28 PM
Dunning-Kruger, dear Sir?
A distinct possibility given your inability to comprehend TOS, the importance of listening tests, perception, scientific research links, etc, etc. etc and being total non-cognizant of your ignorance.
All the signs are there.
Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
Yes, obviously.


Wow, such decisive proof — of your functional illiteracy, that is. You did not get it when I explained the Benchmark paper, 0.03% THD and the guarantee of absolute inaudible distortion to you. And despite such glaring inadequacy, you see yourself as a great thinker, who, for example rubbished the Benchmark paper, without understanding the simple math in it.

But the really funny thing is that I feel sorry for you, since you are trying so hard and yet, your debating performance is so weak, that I keep defeating you with tedious regularity.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 07 December, 2017, 08:28:17 PM

Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.
you don't need a listening test
The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
functional illiteracy, that is.

Yes, obviously.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 07 December, 2017, 10:08:40 PM

Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.
you don't need a listening test
The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.

THD of less than 0.03% not good enough for you?

What is your evidence that 0.03% THD is audible?

Quote
8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.

So, would you say that I am a DK case?
functional illiteracy, that is.

Yes, obviously.


I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: pdq on 08 December, 2017, 08:09:22 AM

I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
And yet, oddly enough, I don't see anyone else taking your side.

Your response to my question (evidence that 0.03% THD is audible) was totally inadequate.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 08 December, 2017, 08:19:20 AM
Let's see -- you don't seem to understand the rather simple math in the paper by Benchmark Media that I linked
0.03% is 70dB below signal. It could not be enough in some cases.
you don't need a listening test
The human ear is just no precise enough for analyzing electronic equipment.

More luck to you
You're going to need a lot more than luck around here, with the D/K stuff above - all your words.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 08 December, 2017, 09:28:30 AM

I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
And yet, oddly enough, I don't see anyone else taking your side.

Your response to my question (evidence that 0.03% THD is audible) was totally inadequate.

you suck at logic too. Argument ad populum, my dear buddy, that is what you managed to come up with.

Speaking of THD, do you even know what it is, given that you know very little mathematics?
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: probedb on 08 December, 2017, 10:03:09 AM
Pretty sure this was a discussion forum, this is not a discussion any more, it's petty bickering.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: polemon on 08 December, 2017, 10:21:36 AM
Pretty sure this was a discussion forum, this is not a discussion any more, it's petty bickering.
Yes, I'm annoyed at this to no end.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: pdq on 08 December, 2017, 10:49:55 AM

I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
And yet, oddly enough, I don't see anyone else taking your side.

Your response to my question (evidence that 0.03% THD is audible) was totally inadequate.

you suck at logic too. Argument ad populum, my dear buddy, that is what you managed to come up with.

Speaking of THD, do you even know what it is, given that you know very little mathematics?
I was working in electronics when the transistor was just becoming available, but you probably discount years of experience too. You probably also don't care about my multiple degrees.

None of this has anything to do with a simple request for you to back up a statement that you made (and no, the article that you linked to doesn't help make your case).
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: includemeout on 08 December, 2017, 01:05:04 PM
This guy's is hopeless!

He babbles to the point of sounding like voices in his head keep telling him to always have the last word - regardless of how you challenge his wild goose chases.

Not being a fraction as technical as other members, my pickle with him was his desperate attempt of distorting what HA is all about. as a vehicle for waging this imaginary "war on audiophiles" he thinks there is. I simply gave up (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115054.msg948925.html#msg948925)!

Just wait and see, his next "gems" for replies, and you'll see what I mean.

As a reminder, he started here by kissing everyone's behinds (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,114847.msg946787.html#msg946787), but suddenly turned to showing his true colours.
 (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,114847.msg946787.html#msg946787)
Shutting him up is simply a job like that o Sisyphus's. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus)


Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 08 December, 2017, 01:26:42 PM

I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
And yet, oddly enough, I don't see anyone else taking your side.

Your response to my question (evidence that 0.03% THD is audible) was totally inadequate.

you suck at logic too. Argument ad populum, my dear buddy, that is what you managed to come up with.

Speaking of THD, do you even know what it is, given that you know very little mathematics?
I was working in electronics when the transistor was just becoming available, but you probably discount years of experience too. You probably also don't care about my multiple degrees.

None of this has anything to do with a simple request for you to back up a statement that you made (and no, the article that you linked to doesn't help make your case).


My mistake, I thought that the author of the comment was someone else. I apologize for that. You obviously know what THD is.

That, said, your argument about nobody taking my side is still a logical fallacy.

You did not understand my statement about (in)audibility of 0.03% THD. I did not claim that 0.03% THD was audible. I said that 0.03% does NOT GUARANTEE that the distortion is absolutely(!) inaudible in all cases. It is a question of a "safety margin" if you will. The Benchmark paper goes through some numerical examples that should be very easy for you to digest. They are very precise in their definitions and I find their paper persuasive.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 08 December, 2017, 01:28:17 PM
Pretty sure this was a discussion forum, this is not a discussion any more, it's petty bickering.
Yes, I'm annoyed at this to no end.

Then don't read this thread or ignore my posts.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 08 December, 2017, 01:50:21 PM

I know you are trying as hard as you can, but your debating results are, well, to put it politely, in the lowest 20 percent.

More luck to you in the next debate I open on this forum. So far, your score is dismal -- and you know it.
And yet, oddly enough, I don't see anyone else taking your side.

Your response to my question (evidence that 0.03% THD is audible) was totally inadequate.

you suck at logic too. Argument ad populum, my dear buddy, that is what you managed to come up with.

Speaking of THD, do you even know what it is, given that you know very little mathematics?
I was working in electronics when the transistor was just becoming available, but you probably discount years of experience too. You probably also don't care about my multiple degrees.

None of this has anything to do with a simple request for you to back up a statement that you made (and no, the article that you linked to doesn't help make your case).

OK,
This guy's is hopeless!

He babbles to the point of sounding like voices in his head keep telling him to always have the last word - regardless of how you challenge his wild goose chases.

Not being a fraction as technical as other members, my pickle with him was his desperate attempt of distorting what HA is all about. as a vehicle for waging this imaginary "war on audiophiles" he thinks there is. I simply gave up (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,115054.msg948925.html#msg948925)!

Just wait and see, his next "gems" for replies, and you'll see what I mean.

As a reminder, he started here by kissing everyone's behinds (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,114847.msg946787.html#msg946787), but suddenly turned to showing his true colours.
 (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,114847.msg946787.html#msg946787)
Shutting him up is simply a job like that o Sisyphus's. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus)




So you are in the business of shutting people up?

About me always having the last word, I will prove you wrong. I will not post any further responses to this thread.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 08 December, 2017, 02:10:09 PM
I did not claim that 0.03% THD was audible. I said that 0.03% does NOT GUARANTEE that the distortion is absolutely(!) inaudible in all cases.
LOL
Ok, show one case of audible 0.03% THD

TOS 8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.


Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: pdq on 08 December, 2017, 03:52:28 PM
Why not just say that you know of no cases where 0.03% THD is audible, so it is entirely possible that such cases do not exist.

Then say that having 0.003% THD gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling.

I don't think that anyone here would have a problem with that.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 08 December, 2017, 04:13:12 PM
I did not claim that 0.03% THD was audible. I said that 0.03% does NOT GUARANTEE that the distortion is absolutely(!) inaudible in all cases.
LOL
Ok, show one case of audible 0.03% THD

TOS 8. All members that put forth a statement concerning subjective sound quality, must -- to the best of their ability -- provide objective support for their claims.  Acceptable means of support are double blind listening tests (ABX or ABC/HR) demonstrating that the member can discern a difference perceptually, together with a test sample to allow others to reproduce their findings.  Graphs, non-blind listening tests, waveform difference comparisons, and so on, are not acceptable means of providing support.




See above.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 08 December, 2017, 04:22:24 PM
Why not just say that you know of no cases where 0.03% THD is audible, so it is entirely possible that such cases do not exist.

Then say that having 0.003% THD gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling.

I don't think that anyone here would have a problem with that.

See above.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 08 December, 2017, 04:41:13 PM
(https://hydrogenaud.io/imgcache.php?id=b6c41dde733b9b5a9d6b745cae1d0685" rel="cached" data-warn="External image, click to view at original size" data-url="http://travelupdate.boardingarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/internet_troll.png)

See above.
Yeah we know
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: splice on 08 December, 2017, 06:13:30 PM
... About me always having the last word, I will prove you wrong. I will not post any further responses to this thread.

That statement has proved to be as correct as everything else you've posted in this thread.


Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: bennetng on 10 December, 2017, 01:50:08 AM
In the whole thread I still don't know what level of THD in which case is audible and that's exactly a waste of time, why not just say 0% is inaudible?

https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,110146.0.html

On the contrary by taking two different listening tests I know my ability to hear tiny differences in frequency variation under a specific condition. The thread ended peacefully and quickly and solved the disputes in some published studies.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: mmrkaic on 10 December, 2017, 09:26:40 AM
The Benchmark link is nonsense. There are no listening tests involved, just numbers thrown out and assumptions.
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: ajinfla on 10 December, 2017, 09:44:10 AM
I said that 0.03% does NOT GUARANTEE that the distortion is absolutely(!) inaudible in all cases.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/26BRNoQJ5bRcZS8Hm/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: Arnold B. Krueger on 10 December, 2017, 10:20:53 PM
I did not claim that 0.03% THD was audible. I said that 0.03% does NOT GUARANTEE that the distortion is absolutely(!) inaudible in all cases.
LOL
Ok, show one case of audible 0.03% THD

0.1% THD is the usual limit. Even that requires somewhat atypical conditions.

Two approaches to possibly making 0.03% THD audible are:

(1) Very high order nonlinear distortion

(2) Crossover distortion.

Both are very uncommon in good modern gear, and come pretty close to being excluded middle arguments.  The second approach might be more fruitful.

Title: Re: Vinyl aficionados and their perception of audio quality
Post by: noiselab on 11 December, 2017, 07:18:31 AM
0.1% THD is the usual limit. Even that requires somewhat atypical conditions.

Two approaches to possibly making 0.03% THD audible are:

(1) Very high order nonlinear distortion

(2) Crossover distortion.

Both are very uncommon in good modern gear, and come pretty close to being excluded middle arguments.  The second approach might be more fruitful.
Thanks! This is the answer I've been looking for, and curious about after reading through this messy thread lol