Phil Leigh;693391 Wrote: > some (much) of that stuff is WAY, WAY more demanding than audio. Some people believe audio(fool) equipment to be the pinnacle of human achievement. I don't understand where they got the idea. Looking at polished speaker cabinets in glossy magazines, and believing everything they read? What horizon do these people have? The ALU in their cheapo cell phone is probably more complex than their entire sound system, and built to a precision orders of magnitude better than their $25.000 preamp.
Phil Leigh;693391 Wrote: > I'm sick and tired of being told that there's stuff about the way > computers and networks work that we don't understand... really this is > the height of stupidity. Absolutely agree. There is quantum stuff (i.e. about subatomic particles) that we don't understand. Same with the biological process of life, the origin of the universe, and for those of us with only one X chromosome; women. Computers? If "we" (as in humanity) didn't fully understand them, we wouldn't be able to build them. No, really! It's actually not done primarily by trial and error. That may be how some people place their speakers, but let's face it: Moving your speakers around on the floor isn't rocket science. No, really! It isn't! If "you" (as an individual) don't understand computers, "you" are free to pick up a book about them. But if you claim that they are not understood, it only shows that you're unable to grasp the fact that you don't understand everything. The attitude of "I don't understand it, therefore it's not understandable" is not only arrogant, it's stupidly so. Keyword: Dunning-Kruger effect. Phil Leigh;693391 Wrote: > Everything else I can think of manages to completely separate the > aesthetic quality of the output/results from the technical qualities of > the equipment. Audio is the only field I can think of where "better > engineered" and "personally preferred" or "more enjoyable" are > terminally confused. > > For example, I'd love a Ferrari GTO but it's not "better engineered" > than a modern Ford. By almost any measure - and there are hundreds - > the Ferrari is rubbish by moderns standards. It is however a thing of > beauty and great fun to drive. Very true. This had me wondering: If the properties of a car were as difficult to measure -and visualize in an intuitive way- as the properties of an audio system, maybe some car people would be as crazy as audiofools? It's easy to see/measure that a GTO has more breakdowns per kilometer than a Toyota Camry, uses more fuel, pollutes more, etc. Yes, it's faster, but not everybody lives close to the Autobahn. PRAT, on the other hand, is by definition unmeasurable (a.k.a. supernatural?). Phil Leigh;693391 Wrote: > It's about time we started applying the "CERN faster than light > neutrino" test here... if 2 things sound different when logically they > shouldn't, they probably don't actually sound different and the truth > lies in the mind of the listener. Only a properly conducted blind test > will reveal this truth. The very thought seems to scare the living daylights out of some people. Why have they invested so much emotion in the notion of being able to hear the difference between different pieces of silicone? -- Soulkeeper 'Bug 17797: Updating wiki.slimdevices.com' (http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=17797) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Soulkeeper's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35297 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=93549 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
