awkwardbydesign
Officially Awesome
Believe? Isn't that what religions require?
How do the 'non-subjectivists' choose their hi-fi systems?
- Thread starter Pete L
- Start date
awkwardbydesign
Officially Awesome
She was American. I can only comment on what happened here, and as I personally remember it. The point is that people lost faith in "science" because of such episodes. And a dissenting voice doesn't change that.
An alternative explanation is that the objectivists do not feel the need to prove their interest in music to you. The reason is not hard to see: reproduction of music vs reproduction of sound is straight from the Linn marketing machine. Not a very good basis for rational discussion.
mansr
Objectionist
By device I mean anything with an input and an output. It could be an amplifier. Or a cable.
The transfer function is the mathematical relationship between the signal entering the input and what comes out the other end. It is an expression of everything the device does to the signal. It doesn't matter whether the signal is a sine wave, a frequency sweep, or a piece of music.
(Edited to not mention non-existing music.)
Joe P
Memory Alpha incarnate | mod; Shatner number = 2
I think most objectivists accept this without difficulty. It is on the subjective side where the eternal truths about audio are revealed by various self proclaimed gurus. Their message is also appealing, because of its essential populism.
Maybe he means number nine of Bach's three part inventions, which are also called sinfonias?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventions_and_Sinfonias_(Bach)
mansr
Objectionist
That it is, and that is what you get when you start writing something, change your mind, and don't edit properly.
I can't believe we're even having this argument!
What has the Laplace transform got to do with music?!
You can't express the rendition of a Beethoven composition as a mathematical function of time!
Jim Audiomisc
pfm Member
Caution! You are assuming a linear system or at least one with one-to-one nonlinearies.
Jim Audiomisc
pfm Member
That was a fun read. I have a headache now!
BTW, do you know if the 2805s still use a 5 Amp triac? And I must confess to an affection for HiFi News of that era; I still have, and sometimes use, the Ben Duncan active crossover design published in 1981.
I can't recall offhand. The diagrams on the UKHHSoc site may show. But my unreliable recollection is that the protection changed with later models or versions of the ESLs. So not as the earlier types.
mansr
Objectionist
Science isn't quite so volatile. Reading what you wrote, one gets the impression that scientific theories are like the spring collection of a fashion house, constantly and unpredictably changing with the whims of the designers. This is not the case. To replace a well-established theory, a new one must be supported by some very compelling evidence. Besides being consistent with old experimental results, it must better explain the results of multiple carefully conducted experiments where the established theory falls short. To say that electromagnetism is extremely well-studied is an understatement. The existence and correct functioning of billions of electronic devices would not be possible were our understanding of electricity not very close to the truth. Maybe there will be refinements in the future, but to think that we cannot model (and measure) an audio signal traversing a humble wire to a high degree of accuracy is simply ludicrous.
tuga
Legal Alien
Feed a signal to one end, measure the output. You can use Beethoven or a bunch of test signals.
Audio equipment is merely reproducing recorded sound, not producing music. For the latter we have instruments.
Tony L
Administrator
Logically, yes, but in practice it is so flawed in this aim right from the very start of the chain (e.g. selecting the mic in the recording studio and deciding where to place it) it becomes a matter of personal taste to the extent measurements are largely irrelevant to anyone not actually designing kit, which very few here are.
Jim Audiomisc
pfm Member
Not necessarily M'lud. Understanding some of the details of the engineering or science may help someone to preselect what is, or is not, more likely to give the results they'd prefer. The snag is having the relevant info available so you can assess it. As distinct from a reviewer say what *they* like in *their* room, etc.
How the hell do you "measure" Beethoven?!
Really, some people just don't know when to stop digging...
tuga
Legal Alien
You don't "measure" Beethoven but how accurately an equipment reproduces a particular recording of a particular piece by Beethoven played by a particular musician or group in a particular room. Or you compare the input to the output.
You can try it, it's called a null test:
mansr
Objectionist
Since a non-linear system can be literally anything, I'm assuming we're talking about reasonably well-behaved audio devices without unstable states or other crazy features. Also, we don't have to actually model the non-linearities as long as we can show that they are too small to be audible.