Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
- - - - -

High Resolution Audio Comparison


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
203 replies to this topic

#201 of 204 OFFLINE   Steve_AS

Steve_AS

    Second Unit



  • 412 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002

Posted July 29 2003 - 01:19 PM

[quote] That's quite a bit of evidence to raise doubts about the statement "jitter is not audible in most cases". [quote]
Actually, it isn't. Wouldn't even make it past first review in most journals. *WHERE'S THE DATA?* There's nothing religious about that request.

#202 of 204 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer



  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted July 30 2003 - 12:52 AM

[quote] Audio engineers aren't psychoacousticians, nor are they designers of audio equipment [quote]

Actually in my experience, most audio engineers become audio equipment designers and many acousticians started as audio engineers.
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 


#203 of 204 OFFLINE   Steve_AS

Steve_AS

    Second Unit



  • 412 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002

Posted July 30 2003 - 05:00 AM

[quote] If you believe that, you need to learn more about blind tests.

Again, no evidence of tests for audibility


True, but Benchmark gives some fine theory on how it would be audible. [quote]
That's putting the cart before the horse. In general you FIRST establish that the phenomenon exists. Then you theorize how and why.

History (and now, the internet) is littered with intricate theories describing imaginary phenomena. Generally these are the work of crackpots or 'true believers'. Audiophilia gets a pass because it's so far behind the curve anyway, scientifically and in terms of component engineering.

#204 of 204 OFFLINE   Lee Scoggins

Lee Scoggins

    Producer



  • 6,396 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2001
  • Real Name:Lee

Posted July 30 2003 - 06:48 AM

[quote] That's putting the cart before the horse. In general you FIRST establish that the phenomenon exists. Then you theorize how and why. [quote]

No this is a fair test because the listener does not know which tracks have lower or higher jitter. They are blind to the right answer, yet many heard more stability and clarity in the low jitter image. Yet we did not change any other parameter: if you know how master clocks work then you know that only the timing distortion is changed, there are no other variables-everything else is kept the same.

I also disagree with the second line where you say that you theorize after the experiment. This is simply wrong on pure scientific terms-scientists often create a hypothesis before the experiment is devised. The critical thing is that the experiment should just test one parameter so we can be assured that other parameters did not impact the outcome.
Viewing: Sony KDSXBR150, Sony Bluray S570, ATT Uverse
Listening: Sony SCD777ES, Benchmark DAC1Pre, VPI/Modwright SWP9SE/Lyra Argo, Audio Research Ref3/VT100, Maggie 1.7s

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users