If you know that a user is a dealer and they fail to disclose and attacks other users because they make a point against their interest, do you expose the user?
I know of a gentleman here that continuously posts and goes after people and does not disclose who he is.
It is not objective or subjective....objective can give you a guideline for what you subjectively should be hearing/appreciating. Only listening without understanding the specs is ridiculous, as is not listening and only going by specs.
This is a ridiculous argument. It reminds me of Monty Python to tell you the truth.
Enjoy one of the funniest sketches of all time. everyone needs to lighten up.
Thanks for the sketch and for saying it better than me ...
It is not objective or subjective....objective can give you a guideline for what you subjectively should be hearing/appreciating. Only listening without understanding the specs is ridiculous, as is not listening and only going by specs.
This is a ridiculous argument. It reminds me of Monty Python to tell you the truth.
Enjoy one of the funniest sketches of all time. everyone needs to lighten up.
High End audio is all about the subjective enjoyment of our systems, that’s what this hobbies is about for most of us.
That is certainly true, @ted_denney. It's only odd that it needs to be periodically stated.
But for the objectivist mob, High End Audio is about mocking and ridiculing real audiophiles ...
I'm going to quibble with this because the self-described "objectivists" here are often anything but. I think it is more accurate to call them measurementalists. They pretend to know how things sound without ever actually listening to them, will insist that they know what you can or cannot hear in your own room, and cling to their beliefs with a fundamentalist's religious fanaticism.
As for the lies about me taking down my threads, this is false as I have proven with the links above.
so you leaned on the mods just like I alleged - same outcome, makes no difference Ted.
YOU REMOVED THE POSTS, using a third party instead of an iPhone.
And we all know why.
At no time was I pushing my products, but rather, making it obvious the fallacies inherent in the objectivist approach.
This is total BS, and the advertorial platforms disguised as threads you removed contained evidence of you doing exactly that, hence. you scurrying to the mods to get them nuked once this thread started gaining momentum,
Pathetic Ted, pathetic. It’s people like you who give subjectivists a really bad rap and make us an easy target for objectivist propaganda. We don’t need people like you out there putting profit before ethics. Get you cash machine off our bandwagon..
You would be better off educating the folks here by explaining how you developed the products you sell and how they can help improve the sound of the reader’s systems.
not really - on his website all he does is demonstrate that he hasn’t got a friggin’ clue what ‘quantum tunnelling’ actually is, but that magic Q word sells stuff..
associating bad pseudo-science with subjectivism only weakens its stance. If your cables sound good, they sound good, no need for fairy tales..
Do you really sweep all objective thinking members here into your facile little box with “ They pretend to know how things sound without ever actually listening to them”
Are you seriously suggesting that these folk don’t actually listen to their systems on an organic, corporeal level … Utterly Pathetic
There no proof this guy ted delete thread. It could have been complain from angry guy on this thread. There way too much anger in thread lead me believe there addict here ready come clean and free energy be positive go forward. I hear and we lead exorcism drag angry devil from soul one and for all. I no defend Ted guy he seem maybe little rude people too maybe he come clean too.
- Well I pick no bones about having an objectivist approach to some things in my system, things I understand (or like to think I understand). I’m not merely stating this to be contentious, I’m sharing a difference of opinion.
Measurements for me and many here, are important metrics, tools if you will, to understand the system (which includes the room). There are some of us here who have taken measurements in order to better understand nodes in their rooms, for example. When narrowing down choices I often inspect the specifications of potential devices and technologies in order to find more suitable solutions.
I’m still learning about room acoustic treatment techniques myself, I’m certainly not discounting the merit of measurement to make informed decisions on how to proceed.
I’m also not excluding the facts that misinformation can be used to sell, using metrics that are isolated from others, to the unsuspecting. For example, a speaker that has it’s crossover designed to cover up resonant frequency nodes in the enclosure, when you sum it’s measurable output, is quite linear, but sounds awful (there is always reasons one metric looks great and yet the synergy fails). Or the handover of frequencies between two drivers, and instead of excluding driver breakup in the frequencies of energies it’s fed, simply mask the issue with the other drivers. Distortion also presents SPL and if that’s summed in as output, another reason to sound awful. A Rubik’s cube is not solved when one, two or three sides appear to be correct and so refining a highly resolving system requires more than good luck.
Clearly understanding an order and hierarchy of measurements as a whole can help to fine tune and correctly re-create optimal outcomes. Trial and error is convenient, understanding the mechanics of how it works synergistically is powerful information, when put to work can yield better performance both in metrics and subjectively, IMO.
@sokogearmy brothers and I tried to excel at emulation of the Minister for funny walking, and tried to create new funny walks of our own. The Python boys were bloody marvelous - Bruce!
Do you really sweep all objective thinking members here into your facile little box with “ They pretend to know how things sound without ever actually listening to them”
Certainly not! I never suggested any such thing. Here’s what I wrote:
... the self-described "objectivists" here are often anything but ...
Live example of "agenda" is a thread that is updated on a daily basis of a certain obscure brand of DAC. (I think they try to keep it alive, with the same 3-4 people). The moment someone posts facts about the manufacturer or dealers, 2 posters immediately jump in with response to protect. This has happened multiple times. I have not seen users protect brands and threads so seriously.
"They pretend to know how things sound without ever actually listening to them, will insist that they know what you can or cannot hear in your own room, and cling to their beliefs with a fundamentalist’s religious fanaticism."
No, that is not an opinion, that is a statement purporting to be a fact. I think that its abundantly clear that it is information of a misleading nature. (how's that for a euphemism?)
Not sure who you are directing your comment to, but if me and a little Joe Besser/Lou Costello humor is too much for you oh well.And, if you are directing it to me please direct me to what other thread I allegedly hosed.
@tomic601- thanks, I think?? Ha. I know I’m opinionated, I am here also to learn from this forum. And so, I thank you all (even the ones who may not like what I write) if there’s something I have or can learn from you, when I am ready to receive new/better knowledge.
I was introduced to an excellent test of speaker cabinets from my old boss and friend, he played a frequency sweep through a pair of reasonably well regarded mid priced speakers and you could hear the multiple node breakouts the enclosures made throughout the sweep. Astonishing to discover exactly where (frequencies) the cabinets exhibited distortion in playback.
Thanks for this free interesting tool test for speakers...
It prove that my speakers were not bad at all...
One day it would be interesting to test my speakers before my damping anti resonant double set of dyssimetrically compressed springs use and after...
@tomic601 - thanks, I think?? Ha. I know I’m opinionated, I am here also to learn from this forum. And so, I thank you all (even the ones who may not like what I write) if there’s something I have or can learn from you, when I am ready to receive new/better knowledge.
I was introduced to an excellent test of speaker cabinets from my old boss and friend, he played a frequency sweep through a pair of reasonably well regarded mid priced speakers and you could hear the multiple node breakouts the enclosures made throughout the sweep. Astonishing to discover exactly where (frequencies) the cabinets exhibited distortion in playback.
@mahgister- if you ever use the sweep and play with the mass on top of your speakers to tune the load, I’d love to read your findings?
And of course, as you share, always welcome that I can share something of benefit to you sir.
I plan to do it ONLY if i must sell my actual house when the mother of my wife will die... I hope it will take years...
My speakers are heavily modified like my room is...
The S.Q. is very good for me...
But i dont want to do the work of reloading them and fine tuned them again with the springs and all the devices i used on them if i am not in the obligation to do it...
I will be in this situation when i would go in another house anytime soon or not, i dont know when ...
But i planned to reload and retune them with this tool at this time to better fine tune my 2 sets of springs which are compressed with different load above and on top... In my experience even under 100 grams of load of the near 80 pounds of concrete make an audible difference... It takes me few days to tune them..
For now the speakers seems very good on this count...not perfect but good...
All speakers had resonance...
@mahgister - if you ever use the sweep and play with the mass on top of your speakers to tune the load, I’d love to read your findings?
And of course, as you share, always welcome that I can share something of benefit to you sir.
I'm going to quibble with this because the self-described "objectivists" here are often anything but. I think it is more accurate to call them measurementalists. They pretend to know how things sound without ever actually listening to them, will insist that they know what you can or cannot hear in your own room, and cling to their beliefs with a fundamentalist's religious fanaticism.
Isn’t that the truth, there’s no escaping it, the best that can be expected is to use engineering control measure to lesson it as much as possible.
One way, the way I was shown, is to divide the larger surface areas into smaller nodes, this attenuation to specific nodes hopefully lessens the amplitude of the energies and divides the panels into smaller zones. The differential bracing should never be evenly spaced, creating multiple nodes not relatively close to the same frequency of another.
Just as using the same drivers to accomplish more SPL for the same frequencies, these cabinet nodes will sum to produce more cabinet resonances. Divide and conquer isn’t a joke when bracing an enclosure.
mahgister I’m glad you tried loaded mass speaker isolation, I’m guessing you’re glad also??!!
My system has come leaps and bounds since I’ve been learning from forum members here. The importance of all sorts of things I’d never really considered important have become the most transformative things I hear working, by taking out the sonic trash so to speak.
Before all my tuning of the speakers, so good they are well spoken of in all reviews with no negative criticism at all, they not impress me in my nude non controlled room and with no mechanical or electrical noise floor control 5 years ago... After my Tannoy especially, which were on another design quality level...
But with all my work they sound very well better than anything i listen to even magneplanar in a non tretated and non controlled room and even my past Tannoy..
Upgrading seems foolishness to me... They are not the best speaskers at all for sure but the piano is there in my room...It is enough...
Mechanical and electrical control is great improvement, but acoustic is the only key to audio in small room..Not thebranded name of the speaker... I dont trust anyone vouching for a brand in audio... Guess why?
Too many good brand anyway for all many tastes ans needs...
People dream about 100,000 amplifier price tag without even knowing how to create a room for them... Think about that.... 😁😊
If i judge the results with youtube limittations for sure no costly gear is for me not even necessary at all...
Acoustic rule....
But suppose i am right and that all consumers know that truth ?
It will be the downfall of electronic engineering market evolution ... I dont want this fall, electronical design improvement is a good thing and small business need this profit margin to do their research... And most people are unable to do their time consuming acoustic homework anyway.... Most people really think that they listen to their gear not to the room...
But i will tell you a secret, Acoustic alone is the key... Dont repeat it....
mahgister I’m glad you tried loaded mass speaker isolation, I’m guessing you’re glad also??!!
General proclaiming dogma means nothing, what is better theoretically like a magneplanar speaker compared to many box speakers indeed , can be worst than a box speaker... The reason why is called acoustic science...
Guess why ? Because it seems you are born with innate knowledge....
Acoustic dont change the merit of speakers types nor their intrinsic limitations for sure but help a lot ...
Then claiming that all box speakers are equals in all room and all piece of shit
means only shit claim...And total ignorance of acoustic principle that are able to help even some basic box speakers that are acceptable design to be more than acceptable...
The only good box speaker is no box speaker.
life is not simple and not the consequence of a magic formula save by God...
Acoustic science is more complex to study than review about some speakers branded name type ...
And there is too much good box speakers to trash all of them ...
A lot of what engineers have labeled as "distortion" is actually rich, full sound.
@jmkrajnik They are usually correct on that matter- ’full, rich sound’ is often caused by a 2nd harmonic, and that is the tonality that the ear assigns to it.
Most amps made today are not high end amps so that number is probably pretty close!
The distortion signature is the ’sonic signature’ of any amplifier. If the amp sounds ’thin and dry’, its likely because the 2nd and 3rd harmonics are suppressed, allowing the higher ordered harmonics to be unmasked, IOW audible to the ear; this despite an otherwise very low THD.
Distortion is inescapable. Whether the designer recognizes the significance of that fact is a different matter. The ear uses the higher ordered harmonic to sense sound pressure, and so its keenly sensitive to them as well- and this is also inescapable and also often ignored- witness the last 60 years of bright and harsh solid state amps.
Since distortion is a fact of life, the pragmatic designer will design a circuit which makes the least objectionable distortions- and that will be the 2nd and 3rd harmonics, which is why tube amps often sound smoother and more detailed (in a way that I don’t yet understand, somehow the 2nd and 3rd harmonics assist the ear in winnowing out detail, quite unlike the higher orders) than 99% of all amps out there.
The obvious implication is, if you want a solid state amp or if you want an amp that is significantly lower distortion but is still musically involving, the amp will have to have a distortion signature similar to a tube amplifier while at the same time being considerable lower overall. This means that the lower ordered harmonics will still have to predominate, allowing the higher ordered harmonics to be masked.
IF the amp has a distortion signature of this type it won’t matter if its tube or solid state. This stuff does show up in measurements and you can be completely objective about it- if you cause your hand to move to take the measurements in the first place and you have the test equipment to do so. This sort of stuff rarely shows on the spec sheets!
Alternatively if the test equipment is lacking (for example you can measure the THD but you can’t show the various harmonics) the listening is a less accurate method of ascertaining if the design is working.
Here are two things a successful design will need to sound musical:
1) the distortion signature will be consistent from 20Hz to at least 15KHz. If there is insufficient gain bandwidth product to support the needed feedback to conform to this requirement, then no feedback will be used.
To be clear there is nothing wrong with feedback provided enough of it is present (>35dB at all frequencies). The problem with feedback is you need a lot of it and that means you have to have a lot of gain bandwidth product to support it. Most amp designs in the last 60 years simply don’t have enough of either so they sound bright and harsh.
Put another way, in the bass region most solid state amps have plenty of feedback and so play bass rather well. But when you get to 7-10KHz things are different- the feedback is vastly reduced since the gain bandwidth product won’t support it- and so distortion goes up. You can verify this by graphing distortion vs frequency and its plain to see. Most amp manufacturers avoid publishing this sort of thing...
Feedback will by its very nature bifurcate (double) frequencies due to non-linearities at the feedback node. Thus an amp with feedback will have harmonic and inharmonic information (also due to IMD caused by the feedback node) as its noise floor (this is not new information; Norman Crowhurst was writing about this 60 years ago). IF you can apply enough feedback to the design without introducing stability issues (oscillation) then the design can clean up this bit in the process and its all good.
2) the distortion signature will be benign as I’ve already described.
To be sure there are no successful amps out there for which there was no objective testing. They simply don’t exist. There are successful amps out there for which the testing was quite minimal. But there is always some bench testing.
You can see from my comments above that this is all knowable. Whether one has the intention to know it is a vastly different matter! Since 99% of amps are built to make money it follows that the extra attempt to make the amp sound like music (per the distortion characteristics I outlined) will not be taken.
If that intention is there, cost will not be much of a variable. Intention is what drives high end- not cost. So instead of being built to make money, an amp can also be built to sound like music.
Astroturf, I noticed you don’t have a picture of your stereo, why am I not surprised? And your 25 years as an electrical engineer, does not disapprove the fact it’s clear as day to hear the effect of digital cables, and other things you fail to grasp. High End audio is subjective at the end of the day
Why do you keep attacking and criticizing Mr. Denney is there something about him that causes you pain, discomfort or fear he has not attacked anyone here as best as I can see, assess, and determine.
Personally I find that having posts deleted for no reason makes it hard to trust in the integrity of the whole site.
It is either puppet strings being pulled, or something else… but it is an unattractive thing to have a “forum”, that then becomes a “forum -10%” overnight.
The two people mentioned seemed to have the power to get that done often, either themselves, or with help.
audiogon = post-gone = thread-gone… more often than not.
if you choose to ignore the allegations of the OP and condone the conduct of Mr Denney, which he has attempted to obliterate from history, so be it.
There is a lot about Mr Denney’s conduct that gives subjectivism a very bad rap and makes it an an easy target for critique: deceit dishonesty and lies do not provide for a sound philosophical foundation and make it very difficult for others who may have a subjectivist viewpoint to gain credibility.
The post by @atmasphereis most informative, and in my opinion was far too valuable to leave locked away.
The second post merely confirms what Denney denies in this thread - that he got personal with the OP.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
