ralphpnj wrote: > My response is to ask you a question: why is it that only in the field > of digital audio are two digitally identical data streams, by which I > mean two data streams that contain the exact same digital data being > transmitted or sourced slightly differently, e.g. wifi versus Ethernet > or SD card versus hard drive, declared to be somehow different? NO ONE > ever says such things about ANY other type of digitally encoded data - > never for image files, text files, video files, etc. NEVER. It is only > the world of high end audio with its army of well trained clowns, oops I > meant golden eared professional reviewers, that this issue is ever > mentioned. > > Billions of times each day people upload and download all kinds of > digital data and NO ONE ever questions whether or not the downloaded > file is equal to the uploaded file - NEVER. But in high end audio > something happens to that damn digital data to make the files > different. > > As an example of the complete absurdity of this line of thinking take > the example of one of those "professional" audio reviewers listening to > a high resolution audio file downloaded from HDTracks. Why is that the > audio file can be downloaded via the internet during which time the > digital data passes through hundred of networks, miles of inexpensive > cable, countless switches, gets sliced and diced into hundreds of > packets, gets reassembled and who knows what else but it is only the USB > cable from the computer to the USB DAC that has an impact on the sound? > > Can someone, anyone please explain what it is about digital audio data > that gives it this totally unique property.
mlsstl wrote: > I've always been puzzled by statements like the one above which clearly > imply that, on those rare occasions when a subjectivist admits that > their perception might have been influenced by their own mind rather > than only outside technical factors, that said influence is limited only > to those situations where they have a clear expectation of change. > > Sure, expectation bias is an example of the power of our mind, but it is > only one example. Psychological studies are full of examples where > unexpected, hidden or subconscious factors played a significant role in > affecting human perception. > > There was a book released a few years ago called "A Mind of Its Own - > How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives" by Dr. Cordelia Fine. The book has > nothing to do with audio, but is an excellent read for those interested > in learning more about human perception. Unlike the apparent assumption > of some audiophiles, we do not cease behaving like humans when we listen > to a stereo. Based on my own post quoted above and your post, also quoted above, apparently there is something about audio playback that makes the human listener, particularly a professed audiophile and especially a "professional" high end audio reviewer, a super human listener. Photographers, videophiles and other humans who use computers and digitally encoded data do not appear to suffer (?) from this troubling "super human" condition. Perhaps this explains why HP's silly lists of truly bad music were called "Super Discs" since it takes to a super human to understand their sonic and musical virtues. And by the way without even having read Dr. Fine's book (she is related to Larry Fine?) I would venture a guess that she has a mass market home theater in a box system in her home :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ralphpnj's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10827 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=98249 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
