2. misc-audio
  3. 152899-117374

Has to be said

Hi,
i been reading most sites and the little arguments about this and that about making audio in this case be more pleasent ot better to any individual. and have to say upfront that if "you" believe its better to you than it is in fact true to you and you only. we are just reletive respondants to each other and therefore nature and the universe.
many of the subjects that come up as to improving ones audio system tend to go into little details that may or may not have "real" affects on most of us. and also be provable with phsics,math,medical studies etc.many musicians and many humans can distinguish alot of these aspects. and they are ALL quantifiable and measureable very easilly. from 1800 till today FFT and resonance,sound perfiliration has been well adjustable from the totally acoustic pipe organs to the music halls 100s of years ago with out electronic fixes, and all these new snake oil gagets on the market. many are always big commenters here on this site.
Its totally true you can "fix" and sound wave with free rocks,walls,chambers, etc. so go for it at a cost of zero dollars. and adbandon all these marketing hacks.
Ive been well into sound,RF,Radioation, Electron manulipation, Audio,phsics etc all my life and all my relatives aslso . I dont need to justify my opinions yet am dignified by holding 8 international patents,2 doctrets and my dad with similar fields.
one crazy obvious thing no one even bothers to mention is the way off standard of 440hz shifted 8hz the earths standard resonance. while all the 1000s of years 432hz was based on real natural happenings before electronics. dont you all care everything you listen to is 8hz off tune and therefore wrong, but you will bicker about a few microvolts noise from an ocslittating wire with parallell wire  hanging off a standoff. itf too funny to me.
yes all digital except one source tunes their DAC math to 435hz to be more correct to Verdi and other great composers.
ive got tuning forks over the audio and above spectrum and tune my panios violins etc to them 432 hz
and need to say again. yes please do everything Analoge
to correct your sound system, its been done in churches,music halls,the great pyrmids, with instruments themselves.
but do not chase the rabbit down the money hole to fix apparent physhoacoustics in your listening area.

ps the spelling and writing is horrid cause ive got a brain injury2 years ago and under go EEG,ehthesographs and neuro studies constantly. where various frequency sweeps are put thru me and studied by the medical and commercial fields.
Im off for now to play my bass thru 50000watts total. and resonate the neighborhood at 8.2 HZ....

128x128hemigreg
atdavid
736 posts
 
  • Obfuscation and Deflection: -- I -- never said only high end CD players correct errors. ALL CD players, even $10 ones correct errors, even really bad errors.   I said that high end players, will reclock the output data to remove all jitter. That does not mean Your product improves jitter at all. If it did, you could test it and show it does.
  • -- YOU claimed --- that the color black does not absorb IR. YOU were shown to be wrong. Typical black pigmentation is very good at absorbing the near infrared of an IR laser. I posted links before. Your claim about no "color" absorbing IR is again obfuscation and deflection because "color" has no meaning in IR. By far the most common black pigment for plastics is Carbon Black, which absorbs as well at 780nm as in the visible range.
  • -- I -- never said that the insides of CD players are non reflective. -- I -- said the inside of the photo-detector assembly is non reflective to reject non-incident light. The photo detector also does have an IR pass filter. It is cheap because of the exceptionally high volume, but it is designed properly.
  • As above, the plastics are black, and use carbon black, which absorbs 780nm just fine. Your comment about 3 * 10^15 photons is just obfuscation and deflection. It is a meaningless number meant to confuse people.
  • You made a claim that error correction is not able to deal with scattered light. If you had any proof of this, you would show changes in data errors. You have not. WHY?. The reason for them is meaningless, whether scattered light, vibration,etc. The pits are 500nm * 1um. This is not considered "nano" scale, which typically is <100nm. These on area are 50 times bigger than "nanoscale". Given $10-20 CD rom readers are able to read at 16-52x data rates with relatively low errors, I would say a CD player handles "vibration" just fine. Those were in laptops with someone banging away at the keys, and they still managed to extract data, audio, and movies. BUT ... you could always support your claim with easy to generate data. Where is your data GK?

    • geoffkait's avatar
    geoffkait
    23,365 posts
     
    I give you due credit atdavid for throwing everything but the kitchen sink at my theory. Unfortunately, in spite of all your quibbling and argumentativeness (if that is even a word) the scattered light problems persist in most if not all CD players - most likely because - like you - the designers are unaware of the problem or else swept it under the rug. 🧹

    ”Where is the data?”  That’s funny. Where is the experiment?
    atdavid
    736 posts
     
    Your ignorance is showing GK. Please pull up your pants. No one wants to see that.
    rodman99999
    6,021 posts
     
    Responses = 147       Resolutions = 0       Wasted keystrokes = countless                                    Theory Envy = off the charts(my theory’s longer than your theory....nah, nahnah, nah, nah)
    geoffkait's avatar
    geoffkait
    23,365 posts
     
    atdavid
    Your ignorance is showing GK. Please pull up your pants. No one wants to see that.

    >>>>Actually I think you probably do. 👀 Can I suggest cooling off in a nice long cold shower?
    More to discover