Is there any science to back up these little feet

[torstoi]

Torstoi, so where do you stand on things like that Shakti halographic soundifeld organizer, acrylic cable lifters, or those little steel bowls big enough to be a mouse sink? Is there a point at which your incredulity is so large that you have to say 'enough!'.

Some people just have a lower tolerance for nonsensical bullshit and gross inaccuracies in marketing, that's all.

..yes Simon, sure I can tell you how I feel about that.
I think my ears are not good enough to make out the phantastic difference those things make, so..probably the are good for others, but not for me..

Or in other words, I sure have my thoughts about such, but I don't see myself's task in a censorship or personal fight of such things.
That would mean fighting windmills.
And my hobby is HiFi...apart from that I am a horrible rider..

I think we share a fair bit of consensus on the matter, just our temper is a bit different perhaps.

 

[radamel]

I can barely think of a more engineering/measurement lead brand. Their products blend exemplary audio quality with outstanding technical measurement. And in 7 years of following them I can't think of a single occasion where Daniel has made a far fetched claim. They are like Ayre and Passlabs there's no nonsense at all.

Don't know about Daniel's views on measurements.

Nelson Pass summarized measurements' limitations beautifully in this phrase IMO:

"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment."

 

[radamel]

Weiss are superbly engineered products, they are the anthisis of 'foo'
Keith.

And what does this superb engineering translate to in terms of SQ?

More specifically how does a 16k DAC do vs a merely well engineered albeit much cheaper DAC in a blind test?

 

[whatsnext]

......

Didn't you suggest in another post the sound had improved quite a bit also? now it's to prevent slippage.
......

I usually do not respond to your posts these days. I vaguely recall saying that the sound may have altered, sort of a subjectivist parody. The sound may be slightly different but with other changes (i.e. speaker toe in) that is not particularly significant.

The speakers not slipping about is a definite fact. Sound Quality is an opinion. The fact does not replace the opinion.

Both can be true and neither excludes the other. Your seeing them as being exclusive is why you are puzzled, your thinking processes are causing your confusion.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Nelson Pass summarized measurements' limitations beautifully in this phrase IMO:

"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we would let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment."

Nice. I like that.

Measurement is a tool, we should not let it become the master.

 

[radamel]

Nice. I like that.

Measurement is a tool, we should not let it become the master.

Yes, he has the rare ability of expressing a complex idea in a simple manner as only someone with truly deep knowledge in a certain field can.

I also especially like this one:

"Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not."

 

[h.g.]

I can barely think of a more engineering/measurement lead brand. Their products blend exemplary audio quality with outstanding technical measurement. And in 7 years of following them I can't think of a single occasion where Daniel has made a far fetched claim. They are like Ayre and Passlabs there's no nonsense at all.

A bit like beauty I think nonsense may reside to a fair extent in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I sometimes think of Asimov's dictum, that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. It helps me retain a sense of equilibrium when something happens in my system which defies explanation.

 

[sq225917]

I hear you boys, but there's two different things at play here. I no more expect a measurement to be able to tell me what sounds I like than I expect hotgirlfrienddotcom to find my perfect life partner from five simple metrics.

But that's not the same as audio measurements saying no measurable differences exists between two items of equipment. No measurement can tell me what I like, but I'm prepared to accept that they can tell me when two things sound identical even if i might think them different under sighted conditions.

That's the point. No one is trying to tell you not to like what you like. We're just saying what you think you like might not exist...;-)

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I hear you boys, but there's two different things at play here. I no more expect a measurement to be able to tell me what sounds I like than I expect hotgirlfrienddotcom to find my perfect life partner from five simple metrics.

But that's not the same as audio measurements saying no measurable differences exists between two items of equipment. No measurement can tell me what I like, but I'm prepared to accept that they can tell me when two things sound identical even if i might think them different under sighted conditions.

I might accept this if the measurements took place under real world usage conditions. Pink noise is not an exact substitute for a dynamic and rapidly changing musical signal, for instance. Do any measurements state that a music signal has been used, because if they do, I've never noticed. Similarly, a dummy load is not a substitute for a reactive and sometimes wildly varying loudspeaker impedance.

 

[avole]

Can we edit the thread title to the much more relevant 'Is there any science to back up Little Feat' ?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Or how about 'feet up the backside of science...'

 

[h.g.]

Pink noise is not an exact substitute for a dynamic and rapidly changing musical signal, for instance.

In what way does it fail to represent a musical signal?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Well, no sudden and emphatic dynamic shifts; no specific frequencies picked out like a melody might be; no tonal complexity; no rhythmic sense; no inflection, countermelodies, contrasting tonal voices, blending tonal voices....


Or am I mistaken?

 

[Hipper]

No one is trying to tell you not to like what you like. We're just saying what you think you like might not exist...;-)

If only that were true this would be a better place.

 

[Hipper]

Can we edit the thread title to the much more relevant 'Is there any science to back up Little Feat' ?

Deleted. Sorry, I don't know what I'm talking about!

 

[Purité Audio]

And what does this superb engineering translate to in terms of SQ?

More specifically how does a 16k DAC do vs a merely well engineered albeit much cheaper DAC in a blind test?

Superb engineering means never wondering, whether the computer is imparting 'noise' to the dac ,never wondering whether the optical input is the same quality as USB, FireWire ,AES or s/pdif ,knowing that the unit is completely immune to power supply .
Intelligent design incorporating a variable analogue output ,with a properly dithered digital attenuator, knowing that Weiss' modular design means that the product will never be outdated.
Knowing that you have the finest measuring products available, it's all rather reassuring.
Keith.

 

[h.g.]

Well, no sudden and emphatic dynamic shifts; no specific frequencies picked out like a melody might be; no tonal complexity; no rhythmic sense; no inflection, countermelodies, contrasting tonal voices, blending tonal voices....


Or am I mistaken?

You are largely correct if you want to listen to pink noise for musical pleasure but the context of your statements was measurements. What do you think is in music as a signal for measurements that is not in pink noise? Or did you address this in your answer?

 

[Markus S]

Well, there's certainly an argument to combine pink noise (crest factor 6 dB) with transient signal testing.

 

[radamel]

Superb engineering means never wondering, whether the computer is imparting 'noise' to the dac ,never wondering whether the optical input is the same quality as USB, FireWire ,AES or s/pdif ,knowing that the unit is completely immune to power supply .
Intelligent design incorporating a variable analogue output ,with a properly dithered digital attenuator, knowing that Weiss' modular design means that the product will never be outdated.
Knowing that you have the finest measuring products available, it's all rather reassuring.
Keith.

I'd agree all that can reassure some people.

But you haven't answered my question...have you been able to tell the difference between this 16k DAC and another much cheaper one you also sell in a blind test?