Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
I heard him say that, but the way I heard it, he was being metaphorical, so ‘works’ was in inverted commas. You may have understood it differently, but for me he was drawing an analogy, not literally making a claim about the brain’s ‘clock speed’.If you listen to the video, Rob Watts actually says “the brain works at 250kHz”. I have no idea what that means. Certainly from what I remember when I studied some neuroscience, the nervous system works much slower than that - it’s to do with cell walls, myelin sheaths, refractory periods and the like. Here’s some lecture notes on the frequency of coding in the nervous system. 1000Hz would seem to be good going. This doesn’t of course mean that the nervous system can’t respond to much higher frequencies - obviously it responds to high frequency sounds and indeed light. But the brain does not “work at 250kHz”. Doesn’t stop Rob Watts designing good DACs though, but neither he nor his followers need to use bogus neuroscience to justify his designs.
Also, some on here seem to be using the term ‘objective’ when they seem to mean ‘technical’. It’s perhaps a small pedantry point, but if somebody makes a claim about ground planes, etc, that’s a technical claim; it only becomes objective if they allude to numbers or measurements. I’m sure all objectivists understand this, but if we desire precision in our discourse, let’s not let our standards slip, hey?