Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

I had no idea "true-believer" Audiophiles were so thin-skinned.

"https://www.temporalcoherence.nl/cms/images/docs/FourierConditions.pdf

«The effects in time domain of non-linear behaviour in combination with memory effects could explain why e.g. amplifiers with similar properties regarding frequency response and distortion
levels, sound different. It is to be expected that ten (10) different designs will produce ten different responses to music signals and thus receive a different perceptual qualification.»

This physicist seems to know better than Amir ... 😊"

I read through it.  There is little there to comment about.  Your audio gear does NOT have memory in it.  He creates a simple circuit that does and shows trivial scope simulations of it.  Enough to fool a layman into thinking there is some measuring going on.

He also makes other dubious comments:

". Another well-known example is the upper frequency hearing limit: as humans cannot hear above 20 kHz, the reasoning is that there is no use in reproducing higher frequencies, as these will not contribute to the signal, reaching the brain. This argument has often been brought to the table to disqualify high-resolution audio. However, many high-end enthusiasts claim they can clearly hear the difference and even seniors, with an upper frequency upper limit of 10 kHz (like the author) can distinguish the difference."

First, this has nothing to do with fourier transform.  Second, I post ABX tests of high res that I did pass.  But I am confident none of you can, including the author or said paper.  You never throw such random claims in a proper paper.  If what he says is true, you need to show it in controlled listening tests which he has none.

Really, none of what you post has anything to do with ASR and value of what we are doing.

@somethingsomethingaudio - I have read with great interest this entire thread. I find it very hard to understand how Amir is being so consistently attacked when he appears to be offering a perspective with very clearly marked boundaries. Many accusations here are without any merit or grace.

I have no personal connection with Amir. We emailed once over a year ago with regard to a Phono pre-amp he reviewed. I suggested he re-examine it using the fully balanced signal path offered, not the single ended in and balanced out which was the method used in the review. Our discussion was respectful and informative. Which is precisely my opinion of his responses here.

He is clearly touching a nerve with some. But he does not deserve some of the pig-headed badgering here. It’s undignified.

Amir dont answer to true scientific question...It seems...

I will repeat :

Amir information about gear is USEFUL....

 But Amir claims trashing all listening experience if not based on his measurements is MEANINGLESS by psycho-acoustic science...

I cite 4 physicists saying the same thing on different perspective... He never answer them nor the question ... Save for one which is supposed to be ignorant in cables protocols and measurement...😊 Ok then answer the OTHERS...

The crux of the matter is not CABLES here, it is the relation between hearing which work in the non symmetrical time domain and non lienarly, then Fourir methods are not enough to describe human hearings... Then the allegation to related gear measurements to be the main factor for predicting qualitative audio perception is FALSE...

"I am interested in fundamentals about human hearing, and this fundamentals demolish your claim to equate measurements of gear and qualitative hearing perception..."

Then you better hang around ASR, watch the videos I post, etc. and really learn the topic.  Don't go hanging your hat on stuff you don't understand and put them forward as proof of anything.  These papers such as Kunchur's have been discussed extensively and he has been shown to have no relevant knowledge of audio.   Join us, ask questions and we are happy to explain and discuss.  Otherwise you are not really interested I am afraid.