Interesting thread. I have enjoyed Bryon's postings elsewhere on the Gon. I'm actually surprised this one has gotten as acrimonious as it has, since I thought Bryon started with the proposition that some of these 'tweaks,' for lack of a better word, seem to work even if there is no clear explanation for them. Then, the whole give and take with the guy that makes Brilliant Pebbles sort of derailed this, which I think was unfortunate.
I remember walking into a London retailer years ago, and asking him about Peter Belt and what the view was there in the UK. He pulled a box of stuff from under the counter and said, 'Here, you can have it all for X.' [I can't remember how much it was, but it wasn't much]. I still have some of that stuff, including various shiny colored stickers in a plastic envelope that I keep as a novelty in my listening room, unopened. (Who knows, maybe they are doing something just sitting in the bag?)
I'm more from the subjective school, partly because I don't have the engineering or hard science knowledge that others do, but I believe that there are good, solid scientific explanations for some of these tweaks, and for others- who knows? ( I accept the possibility that science cannot explain everything). But, I like to start by sorting out the obvious, and readily explicable, issues with the system first. If there is a noise problem, or a problem with dynamics, I want to get to the bottom of that by looking at the fundmentals first. What's the story with the AC power? How is the system set-up? Are there equipment isolation issues? Do the contacts need to be cleaned or a tube replaced or an equipment stand damper replaced? I will tweak and can hear differences in cable, footers, and the like, down to changes in the ball bearings on which my equipment stands rest. Sometimes, rather than tweaking, I will change out a piece of equipment that- while well regarded, just didn't do it for me, even after much experimentation, tube rolling and adjustment (this happened most recently in connection with my phono stage and man, what a difference!)
I also believe in certain system synergies, which are a form of 'magic,' to the extent the sum is greater than the parts- I'm thinking here about components that just seem to work well together; perhaps there is an engineering explanation, but you'll find a lot of skeptics on things like 'wire' and I'm not one of them.
I remember reading Enid Lumley back in the day- a lot of what she wrote about seemed pretty far fetched at the time, including not only polarity issues, but hard surfaces under equipment making things sound harder, and vice-versa. It all seemed like lunatic fringe stuff then, but now, much of it (or at least some, I'd have to drag out all those old Absolute Sound issues and re-read them to be sure) are accepted, at least within the 'subjective' school of audio.
Tice- not sure if there was any real explanation for the 'clock,' other than that you can plug any number of electrical appliances into an outlet on the same branch as your system and it will have some electrical effect. (Isn't that what those 'noise harvesters' and the fancy stuff by Nordost do too, on a more sophisticated level?) But, he brought AC power to the attention of a lot of audiophiles through the 'Power Block' products, and power conditioners have been an accepted part of the mainstream high-end for quite some time.
So, while I haven't bought one of those fancy brass bowls that sit in the room and change the sound, I'm certainly receptive to the idea that a lot of strange and wonderful things can change our perception of how an audio system sounds. Often, not always, these things can lead to more refinement and understanding and acceptance.
To paraphrase a noted jurist (hey, you guys were quoting obscure philosophers and Einstein), 'it's nice to be on the cutting edge, so long as you are not the salami.'
Best,
Bill Hart |
08-05-12: Almarg
Did you implement the software installation to the new internal SSD by installing everything from scratch, or by using an imaging program to restore a recently generated image file containing the entire contents of the original HDD, or by using a cloning program? Hi Al - I cloned the old HDD to the new SSD using a cloning program. But in addition to the new hardware, the new SSD has an updated OS, which of course contains a variety of new software. Did the volume increase seem like it might perhaps have amounted to 6 db? Yes, that seems about right. A 6 db increase would correspond to the bits in each digital sample being shifted up by one bit location. In other words, if at some point in the data path through the computer a 32 or 64 bit word length were being used, and the audio data comprises 16 or 24 bits, if the 16 or 24 bits were shifted up by l bit location toward the most significant of the 32 or 64 bits, that would result in a 6 db volume increase, corresponding to twice the voltage at any given instant. Very interesting. That's a good theory. There's a fair amount of discussion of 32 vs 64 bit Mac's on the web, but I'm not sure how to make sense of it. My machine is an iMac 2011. I will do some reading and see if I can find anything that confirms your theory. As always, Al, you are a great detective! Bryon |
Bryon, he likes to bug people that are easily bugged. He's probably chuckling right now.
Some folks don't have much of a life, so having a high school type mentality seems funny to them. You can't help but feel sorry for the guy. |
08-05-12: Tbg
Audiophile rectal inserts, you need some. Wow. What a comment. Where do I start? How about... It seems like you're harboring some hostility toward me since our argument on the fuse thread. Maybe you should talk with someone about it. Help is available. Might I also suggest that you look around for someone else to pick on. The last two times you tried to bully me, you looked foolish, to put it politely. I gather that, at some level, you're aware of that, which is why you just came out swinging for no reason whatsoever. And "rectal inserts"? What the...? I don't even know what joke you're ATTEMPTING to make. It's not just unfunny, it's creepy. Bryon |
if you can't explain a phenomenon, is that a reason not to believe it ?
are there not some some instances where there is no scientific
explanation for an event ? yet such events are accepted as facts.
so too in audio, some treatment may be a catalyst for a change in the performance in the stereo system. if the treatment can be studied rigorously and through a rigorous experimental design results in statistical significance, it should be accepted, regardless of how outlandish it may seem. |
Hi Bryon,
Interesting update. I have very little familiarity with Mac's, but in connection with the volume increase, does it seem conceivable that it might somehow have been attributable to a difference in the software installation on the new internal SDD, compared to what was on the original internal HDD? Either in the operating system software, the application program, the codec that may be in use to decompress the files (if they are losslessly compressed), or settings or updates that may be applicable to any of those things.
Did you implement the software installation to the new internal SSD by installing everything from scratch, or by using an imaging program to restore a recently generated image file containing the entire contents of the original HDD, or by using a cloning program?
Did the volume increase seem like it might perhaps have amounted to 6 db (keeping in mind the rough rule of thumb that a 10 db increase is subjectively perceived as twice as loud)? A 6 db increase would correspond to the bits in each digital sample being shifted up by one bit location. In other words, if at some point in the data path through the computer a 32 or 64 bit word length were being used, and the audio data comprises 16 or 24 bits, if the 16 or 24 bits were shifted up by l bit location toward the most significant of the 32 or 64 bits, that would result in a 6 db volume increase, corresponding to twice the voltage at any given instant.
Just some (obviously very speculative) thoughts.
Best,
-- Al |
Have you tried a vacuum tubed hard drive? |
Audiophile rectal inserts, you need some. |
Like these? I just ordered some. bc |
Any or all, of the first three, can make your music seem louder(and vice versa). |
|
I had another difficult-to-explain experience. Whether it is Magic is an open question.
My system is computer based. I recently replaced the hard disk drive in my computer with a solid state drive. Formerly, I used HDD's both for the OS and for music storage (as aiff's). Now, I'm using the SSD for both.
It's definitely different. Here's what I heard...
1. More resolution
2. Better dynamics
3. Better PRaT
...and oddly...
4. It's louder.
#1 through #3 can probably be attributed to the reduction of jitter, or possibly the reduction of RFI. But #4 is a mystery.
I have an audiophile friend who also just swapped out his HDD with a SSD. Totally different system and guess what... He heard the exact same thing. Weird.
Bryon |
|
Captainkaitt to enterprise, "beam me up Scotty, mission not accomplished. The earthlings are too smart for me. Let's try Uranus".
Captain out. |
|
|
BC - I enjoyed the debates, perhaps there will more in the future. I'm a wee bit argumentative myself. Nevertheless I appreciate someone who can construct logical arguments, I even appreciate well constructed illogical ones, and someone who can research subjects on the fly.
Cheers, GK |
Csmgolf, Chad, and Learsfool - Thanks for your kind words. And thanks for contributing to the effort to "try to have a civilization." 04-22-12: Learsfool
I was quite surprised to therefore read that you don't actually enjoy argument. I assume you mean the combative aspect, and not the argument for argument's sake? Surely you must derive some pleasure from constructing such logical premises and conclusions as you have frequently on this site? Yes, Learsfool, it's the combative aspect of arguing that I don't enjoy much anymore, though I admit that sometimes my writing suggests otherwise. Since I'm in a strangely confessional mood, I will tell you that, as a younger man, I was a habitual arguer. When I disagreed with you, I was vocal about it, to put it politely. Six years in graduate school learning to analyze, criticize, and construct arguments from some of the world's most argumentative people was exactly what I DIDN'T need. I was turning into a real a**hole. So I decided to try to develop ways of relating to people that are more cooperative and prosocial. I've been lucky enough to have three good role models. One of them was my dissertation director, who in spite of being a very successful academic philosopher, was one of the most cooperative and prosocial people I've ever met. The second was my first psychotherapist (yes, there have been others), who helped me develop some empathy, both for myself and for others. And the third is my wife, who is a psychologist/psychotherapist herself. She's like the calm dog at the dog park who "corrects" aggressive dogs with nothing more than her body language. Needless to say, I am the aggressive dog. Some of my aggressive behavior can be seen on this thread. Obviously I'm talking about my argument with Geoff, which I regret for a variety of reasons. I still believe the substantive things I said to Geoff, but I wish I'd adopted a more civil tone at points. That continues to be a struggle for me, especially with certain types of personalities. And that brings me back to your question, Learsfool. Yes, I enjoy constructing arguments. It may sound odd, but the great majority of the time, I don't intend those arguments to be argumentative. Non-argumentative arguments are an effective way to explore an idea in depth, and I very much enjoy exploring ideas in depth, even when I turn out to be wrong. I'm aware that arguments, argumentative or not, put some people off, so I usually try to soften them with a dose of humility or humor. I haven't displayed a lot of that on this thread, so I will add that to the list of things I regret. The process of growing up never ends. Or at least it shouldn't. Bryon |
Very admirable posts, Bryon! I agree with Csmgolf that you are one of the clearest posters on these forums, and I envy this ability you have to do this. In fact, I was quite surprised to therefore read that you don't actually enjoy argument. I assume you mean the combative aspect, and not the argument for argument's sake? Surely you must derive some pleasure from constructing such logical premises and conclusions as you have frequently on this site? |
Bryon,
Count me in for the therapy group. There is a thread right there.
What would be in the therapy room? Obviously the wall would be padded with diffusion devices & bass traps. Soft music playing in the room,but from what system?
Surely it would be a quad ESL? There is something sane & honest about a quad.
P.s sorry for calling you Byron BTW. My typing as hopeless as some of these tweaks! |
Bryon and Chad, you are both spot on with how the written word can sometimes not really convey what ones true feelings and intentions are. Bryon, I particularly enjoy your posting style. Even though you often present many thoughts, they are each clear and concise. I wish I could put my thoughts and feelings into words that well. I am like you in that I usually end up regretting having arguments. It is not any fun. I feel like in several of them that the other person was much closer to my opinion than not and I just could not get my point across. Very frustrating. It is part of the reason I don't post that much.
As for the subject of the original post, yes I do believe in magic. I have tried several of the tweaks mentioned including ERS paper and Bybee products. I tried 3 different versions of Bybees wanting to really like them. I found that they changed the sound, but I personally did not care for the effect of either. I also believe that cables can and do make a difference. The technical reasons have been explained many times on this site by those that know far more about it than I do. It is one of those things that I don't care if I ever fully understand technically. I recently went through a cost cutting period and went on the search to find cables that approached the musicality of some of the more expensive cables in my rig. I was able to find interconnects and speaker cables that came close enough that I did not feel bad about having them in my system. But when it came to my power cords, I bought several budget cables that I wanted to like as much as the higher dollar ones. I didn't find any of them to come close enough to what I had to make me feel good about selling the more expensive ones. I still have the more expensive ones. The less expensive ones were the same gauge, length, etc. Do the more expensive cords have magic? Sure, they make my system sound more like music and not notes. |
04-21-12: Chadeffect
Sometimes speedily expressing ones self in these little boxes can lead to points that with a little closer inspection could have been worded better.
Much as I enjoy these online communities there is nothing like talking to someone in the flesh. I am sure all the above comments over a beer or tea would result in much less abrasion.
I agree, Chad, that a certain amount of conflict is attributable to unfortunate wording that leads to false impressions. Sometimes people who appear contrary, or even belligerent, don't really mean that much by what they say. As I mentioned in my last post, I believe that getting along with people is more about a person's intentions than it is their expressions. But inferring intentions from expressions isn't always easy, as this thread has illustrated several times. So I completely agree with you that written conversations sometimes CONCEAL people's real thoughts and feelings. Having said that, it's worth pointing out that written conversations can also REVEAL people's real thoughts and feelings. An obvious reason is that the safety provided by "virtual" conversations emboldens people to act in ways they might not otherwise. Virtual conversations are like drunk conversations... inhibitions are lowered and the truth comes out, and sometimes the truth is ugly. Another reason why written conversations can reveal people's real thoughts and feelings is that, unlike spoken conversations, there is a LATENCY and a RECORD. So when something doesn't feel quite right, you can take your time to really think about what a person has said, which is difficult to do in real time during a spoken conversation. My wife is a clinical psychologist. This conversation is reminding me of conversations with her (in a good way). Maybe in addition to Amps, Speakers, Tech Talk, etc., Audiogon should have a category for Group Therapy. We could all use it from time to time. bc |
04-20-12: Nonoise
The operative word seems to be 'share'. This is exactly right, IMO. Sharing, as simple as it sounds, is regrettably difficult for some people. It's something all children are taught but many adults forget. It's easy to mistake talking for sharing. They are not the same. With sharing, the intention is to GIVE. There are people on A'gon who give so selflessly it is just remarkable. They give information, advice, support, humor, etc.. Some of those people have participated in this thread. I don't regard myself as a paragon of giving, though I certainly make it a goal. That may strike some as dubious, since I've done more than my share of arguing on this thread, which is the antithesis of sharing. For six years in graduate school I was trained to argue, so I can easily lapse into it. But I seldom enjoy it and usually regret it. Having said all that, I believe that there are times when arguing is exactly what is appropriate. Two scenarios come to mind: to challenge utter nonsense and to stop bullying. But even arguing can be done with a certain amount of restraint, the value of which is that We're trying to have a civilization here. Bryon |
Point taken & understood Byron.
Sometimes speedily expressing ones self in these little boxes can lead to points that with a little closer inspection could have been worded better.
Much as I enjoy these online communities there is nothing like talking to someone in the flesh. I am sure all the above comments over a beer or tea would result in much less abrasion.
All that to say I can sense sonicbeauty's frustration. |
01-26-12: Sonicbeauty
"This whole discussion exemplifies everything I have come to understand about the truth AND destiny of this hobby: The MUSIC taking a backseat to the never-ending analysis of SOUND, and the countless hours wasting on getting that little one last drop of improvement."
I suspect it's actually quite common for the anti tweak segment of the hobby to believe, or at least employ the argument, that there's not much to be gained by attention to detail and trying to progress in this hobby. And that only a measly 3%, that one last drop, can be achieved. Boomboxes start to look like a real alternative to anti audiophile mossbacks, no offense to Sonicbeauty personally. |
Not to further derail this thread but in keeping with my past comment, this tactic of derailment is commonly used in all manner of conversation when nothing can be added to said conversation, or when opinions differ not due to the topic, but to a belief. Emotion then takes over and semantics are used to further that belief (unfounded as it is).
Admonishing someone to stay on point (which I've gotten used to doing in my daily life) can be really taxing but when someone knows I'm going to deploy that tactic, they tend to stay on topic or simply move on. In fact, those around me appreciate it all the more and use it themselves. It's a learning process.
Recognizing these and other types of derailment are necessary to follow a given conversation in an intelligent, informative and appreciative manner.
Depots have taken over whole countries with simply a microphone.
Politicians convince some people that the sun shines at midnight.
And some hobbyists refuse to fully appreciate the views of others when they simply don't believe a particular facet of the hobby that others share.
The operative word seems to be 'share'.
They do it with a practiced conviction that at first blush appears to have some sort of validity but upon cursory examination can be laid bare for what it is: a disparagement of sorts for no particular reason.
Sorry to go like this but Bryon made a mighty fine point that i just had to add to.
All the best,
Nonoise |
04-20-12: Chadeffect
...one has to understand & keep in mind the obsessive illness that does dominate this hobby...
It is easy to let the gear get in the way of the music. I agree with this, Chad. I suspect every audiophile has had the experience of having his thoughts about equipment interfere with his enjoyment of the music. When that is presented as a mere statement of fact, I have absolutely no objection. But IMO, Sonicbeauty isn't merely expressing a statement of fact. He is passing judgment on the content of this thread and its participants. That is what I object to. If his judgment wasn't obvious from his last post, it should be obvious from his FIRST post... 01-26-12: Sonicbeauty
This whole discussion exemplifies everything I have come to understand about the truth AND destiny of this hobby: The MUSIC taking a backseat to the never-ending analysis of SOUND, and the countless hours wasting on getting that little one last drop of improvement. Louis Armstrong, John Lennon, and Mozart must be laughing from Up There. And please, dont serve me the argument that in the long run, this will make us enjoy the artist more. It may, of course, but by the time this happens, another upgrade-tweak-inducing insatisfaction will surface and start this whole quest for ''finding the air around the instruments''(that's what it's all about right?) process again. This hobby is about GEAR and SOUND, not music, and this topic is proof of it! That should make it abundantly clear that SB's comments are not mere statements of fact but rather judgements, in spite of his subsequent disavowal. Anyone who spends time around here will recognize that judgments of this kind are a commonplace with some posters. Some people would rather denigrate a conversation than participate in it. I sometimes get the impression that these people believe that denigrating a conversation IS participating in it. That is sad. It derails what might otherwise be constructive conversation, and it isolates us from one another, which is contrary to the whole raison d'être of sites like these. Bryon |
Most eloquently put Byron.
But one has to understand & keep in mind the obsessive illness that does dominate this hobby. For some its a frustrating experience as they chase an unknown state. Slightly better is just around the corner.
It is easy to let the gear get in the way of the music. Hense at times it's about the music & at others it is about the gear. It's just about where you are on the audiophile journey. Maybe "humanbeauty" would be a better name? |
Well said Bryon.
Congrats. |
04-19-12: Sonicbeauty
Now someone, tell me again this hobby is about music enyoyment, musical artists and artisans, and not about gear, tweaking and ''sound''. Haven't we been through this Sonicbeauty? And on this very thread. Since you are repeating yourself, so will I... 01-26-12: Bryoncunningham
Sonicbeauty... Criticizing hobbyists for how they conduct themselves is odd. If a person flies kites as a hobby, is he subject to criticism? That seems to defeat one of the most significant joys of having a hobby, namely that it provides a place where you are FREE FROM criticism.
I will also dispute the validity of your assumption that audiophiles who are avidly interested in equipment cannot also be avidly interested in music. That is false. I am interested in music and I am interested in equipment, both audio equipment and technology more generally. I suspect there are a great number of people on this site for whom that is true. Interest in music and interest in technology are not mutually exclusive. They are different activities. They are different experiences. They employ different regions of the brain. The enjoyment of one says nothing about the enjoyment of the other.
Its also worth pointing out that our fascination with BOTH music and technology is ancient and transcultural. They both have their origins in human prehistory. They both exist in some form in every culture on earth. By the prevailing standards of evolutionary psychology and evolutionary anthropology, music and technology are both elements of WHAT IT MEANS to be human.
I would guess that at some level you already know all this, in light of the fact that you are a self-described music lover, yet you yourself have initiated a large number of threads here on Agon relating to sound quality and equipment design...
The absolute best and worst-sounding CD you own?
Will a transformer, 220 to 100v, ruin the sound?
Are tone controls worth a second look ?
Preamps/amps that look great and''feel' great?
Single speaker wire on bi-posts with jumpers...?
Your ''best kept secret'' speaker choice ?
Most improved last 10yrs: Speaker, amp, or pre?
Anyone went back to using bare wires on speakers?
Amazing ''Overachieving'' products...your pick?
Record weights 'n clamps: Audible improvements?
Your best ''outstanding'' products in last 5 yrs?
Amplifiers: A Keeper for Life. Do you know of one?
Evidently, you have an interest in equipment. If you also have an interest in music, then you are your own existence proof that the two can peacefully coexist. The criticism that "it's about the music, not the gear" contributes nothing substantive to the discussion. And it rings false when it's in the mouth of a person who has routinely initiated topics of discussion that are about gear and not music. Oh, and I can't help but notice that your name is Sonicbeauty, not Musicbeauty. Think about it... Bryon |
Wow, what a contribution! Typical. |
Or perhaps the fuse hadn't been teleportation tweaked? Or polished with brilliant pebbles? Or synchronized with clever clocks?
You just never know dear readers. |
Now someone, tell me again this hobby is about music enyoyment, musical artists and artisans, and not about gear, tweaking and ''sound''.
Reading this thread, I am torn between memories of reading Polular Science and the British Journal of Psychology.
Must admit this is all quite entertaining all the same, while being SO serious at the same time. Think about it... |
"Maybe the old fuse was dirty. Or defective. Or maybe these things actually work."
Or perhaps the old fuse was installed in the wrong direction. What are the odds, 50%?
G |
04-17-12: Almarg
...I would suggest that you make a point of separately assessing the results with music having narrow dynamic range and modest peak volume levels, that presumably would not cause your amp to leave Class A, and, for example, symphonic music having wide dynamic range and brief peaks that reach very high volume levels.
My expectation is that the fuses would be most likely to make a difference when the amount of current flowing through them fluctuates widely and rapidly with the music... Your expectation was borne out by my experience. It went like this: I installed a Hifi Tuning fuse in my Meridian preamp. Sat down, listened... Hmm, not sure. Is it a little better? I think it's a little better. Maybe I'm imagining it. I can't tell. I better order one for the amp to make sure. That's an exact transcript from my brain, which I am sorry to say, reflects very poorly on my judgment as a consumer. I buy a frivolous item for $35, and when I'm not sure whether it does anything, I buy another one for $50. Good thing my wife controls the money around here. But that's not the point. The point is: I bought another fuse for the amp. Installed it, sat down, listened... Well, that's definitely something. A little less grunge. A little more relaxed. Neat. Let's enjoy some music. And I did. Here's the important part: When I went from John Lee Hooker's acoustic blues to this recording of L'Estate 2 from Vivaldi's Four Seasons... What the [expletive deleted]!! The headroom had increased by, say, 30%. I was stunned. I scratched my head... Maybe the old fuse was dirty. Or defective. Or maybe these things actually work. My money is on #3. All $85 of it. Plus shipping. And btw, Al, all of this happened BEFORE you posted your comment about trying music with a wide dynamic range. So my experiences aren't so easy to dismiss as a product of my overactive imagination (I'm looking at you, MrT). Bryon |
the original subject of this thread "magic", may be irrelevant, as one's perception of sound is influenced by unconscious bias or expectations. its a form of the placebo affect.
what i am saying is that explantions as to why one hears something may be inaccurate, as they discount our unconscious expectations of what we expect to hear. |
Hi Bryon,
Thanks for the update. My one comment is that in assessing the effects of the upgraded fuses on the power amp I would suggest that you make a point of separately assessing the results with music having narrow dynamic range and modest peak volume levels, that presumably would not cause your amp to leave Class A, and, for example, symphonic music having wide dynamic range and brief peaks that reach very high volume levels.
My expectation is that the fuses would be most likely to make a difference when the amount of current flowing through them fluctuates widely and rapidly with the music, which it will not do in the case of analog components that are operating in Class A.
Best regards,
-- Al |
Update... I have not forgotten about my promise to A/B (and preferably, blind A/B) the grounding pigtails that I thought were effective. There was a little snag... As I mentioned, since my crossovers are sealed in a cabinet in the wall, I was going to A/B the grounding pigtails on a friend's system that I am familiar with. As fate would have it, his system is temporarily down, due to the fact that, during some crossover modding, he blew a tweeter half way across his room. And btw, the first dealer quoted him a $1300 replacement cost for the tweeter. The second dealer gave him a "great deal" at $800. That is just greedy, IMO. I don't know if it's the dealer or the manufacturer or both. I won't mention any names, but the tweeter is made in France from beryllium. It's Focal. Anyhoo, I will make good on my promise to A/B the grounding pigtails when his system is up and running again. For that purpose, I have purchased EVS Ground Enhancers, which are made from Litz wire, like Audio Prism's Ground Control. But the EVS version is 1/6 the price of Audio Prism's. So not everyone is greedy. In the meantime, I've been experimenting with other forms of Magic. At the moment, it's Hifi Tuning fuses, which do indeed seem to make an audible difference. I should probably blind A/B these when I blind A/B the Ground Enhancers, though that gives me two chances to look like a fool. Bryon |
"If one listens to live music every day then his or her perception of recorded sound isan educated onethough experience.
My perception is just that my perception, Right or wrong it is right for me. Everything sounds different to everyone so is it not the "perception" of the live sound how we evaluate sound?"
Promoting live sound as some sort of benchmark or ultimate criterion might not be such a good idea when one considers that there isn't any real consistency to the sound for various live venues any more than there is in home systems. Obviously we woudn't wish to consider bad sounding or mediocre sounding venues as ideal. What then is the ideal for live sound? And who will determine which venue produces fhe perfect sound that all audio systems should be measured against? One is faced with the same problem in evaluating live sound that one faces when evaluating sound in home audio systems. Where is the absolute sound, who has heard it? |
wwhile not disagreeing with the basic definition, i think that as human beings we experience phenomena for ehich we have no explanation, or perhaps an erroneous one.
i think there are many examples of magic in that our store of information is limited and our experiences are so varied that we may encounter a phenomena that is beyond our comprehension. |
Our educated perception is based on our knowledge and personal exoeriences. Without those yes it is a guess.
If one listens to live music every day then his or her perception of recorded sound isan educated onethough experience.
My perception is just that my perception, Right or wrong it is right for me. Everything sounds different to everyone so is it not the "perception" of the live sound how we evaluate sound ?
At the end of the day yes it is our unreliable perception that makes the call. works for me. |
Byron,
Very well put. Hyakawa would have smiled.
You succinctly made it clear, to everyone here, what you meant by your use of the word. Personal agendas can give rise to tendencies to wander off the path.
All the best,
Nonoise |
Magic is the word Ive been using to refer to something with a known effect but an unknown explanation. I chose the word magic because, when you encounter something with a known effect but an unknown explanation, the experience can be similar to seeing magic tricks performed. I assume that is obvious from the discussion so far. But I also chose the word magic because it expresses a universal human tendency. Every child lives in a world of magical events. Every adult occasionally succumbs to Magical Thinking. And every culture has some form of magical beliefs. Both Ancient and Enlightenment philosophers believed that the hallmark of being human is to think rationally. From what I can tell, the hallmark of being human is to think magically. There are of course exceptions. What one person experiences as Magic, a more rational or informed person may experience as Mechanism. But no matter how rational or informed you are, the pace at which we as individuals acquire explanations is far outmatched by the pace of science and technology. So there will always be things with known effects but unknown explanations. Sure, everyone knows how to explain this. But only some people know how to explain this. And very few people know how to explain this. And no one knows how to explain this. In other words, Magic is here to stay. IMO. Bryon |
I wonder what Hayakawa would say about all of this if he were still alive.
It would probably go something like this:
The symbol is NOT the thing symbolized.
The map is NOT the territory.
The word is NOT the thing.
Classification, symbols, truth, context, inferences, judgement, etc. They all mean something different to each of us and they shouldn't. |
whiole perception maybe our only way of evaluating sound, it is unreliable and is not knowledge.
hence one is dealing with probability of accurate sense perceptionss.
there is no certainty, no truth, only conjecture. |
Hmmmm may be so however our perception is our only tool. What I perceive to be so is so. Ya know Mr Tennis just like a say all 6H30 applications suck. Not to my ears but maybe to yours. |
Perception is a poor choice of words. We know what we hear. We do not perceive what we hear.
Granted there are many factors that have an influence on what we hear. Mood being the most critical.
I believe an ABA test is the true test. Most are very familiar with the sonics of their system. Any change should be evident in opnes system. The term "Magic" may be just the wrong word to use. There is something going on. If it cannot be measured with the conventional means we have today then what is happening ? Only our own ears with our own system can we make any kind of judgement of such.
It is a personal thing. One size does not fit all. How can one say another is wrong ? It is their perception and frankly that is all that matters. If I believe such is happening then by golly it is. How we arrive at that conclusion is what is moot. Perception is in the eye of the beholder. Chew on that. |
You finished my thoughts quite well, actually. IMO it can be rather difficult getting to the nitty gritty truth of these rather bizarre tweaks and glad to see someone is trying to do so. |
Geoff -- Yes, I would say that my friend's system is at least as resolving as mine is currently, and possibly more so. If I cannot discriminate the presence/absence of the grounding pigtails in his system, I will conclude that Al may have been right when he suggested that what I heard the day I put in the pigtails might be attributable to some other variable.
From your use of "pray tell," I gather that you are going to say that I cannot conclude anything of the sort, because the pigtails may have some effect in my system but not in his, due to differences in equipment, ac power, acoustics, barometric pressure, solar flares, the state of my electrolytes, etc. etc.
Maybe you were implying something else. It's hard to know when you don't finish your thoughts.
bc |
"So I plan on doing the A/B'ing in a friend's system, which should be sufficiently resolving to either confirm or disconfirm what I experienced in my system. I will also ask him to help me blind A/B. I will report back with the results."
B C. - would you say your friend's system is as resolving as your system when you first tried the ERS paper? Or perhaps as resolving as your system after you got your system to the point where you heard the ERS paper hurt the sound. And if the blind test is negative what will your conclusion be, pray tell? |
