Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

exactly what you did...

You treat me as an "idiot audiophiles" as some around you called them you are pathetic...

Instead of answering my REAL QUESTION IN PSYCHO-ACOUSTIC...

What was the impact of photons on my metabolism excretion ?😊 For sure there is one because of the photonic communication between cells but no doctor use this to explain metabolism basic... Do you catch ?

I dont sell cables with quantum properties...

Go ask one seller...

And for time paradox not elementary relativity i refer you to two interesting scientists..

You used this tactic to drawn the fish with me all the time during our discussion... I concluded about your bad faith or ignorance i cannot know ... Your last question illustrate it well..

The ears/brain mechanism is not a quantum physics matter , to understand it at basic level in psycho-acoustic we dont need quantum mechanics for that nor to explain basic cables working too... I am not specialized in cable physical studies either...

ANSWER Magnasco and Oppenheim experiment CONCLUSIONS and explain to me why they are wrong...Why not thinking ? instead of turning around the quantum mechanics pot or around your measures schematics about gear ..

 i thank you for your useful gear  measures, thank me for helping you to separate yourself from the techno babbling zealots around you with psycho-acoustic fundamentals in hearing theories..

Time dilation does not present a paradox. If you get on a spaceship and travel near speed of light for a month, you could arrive back on earth potentially hundreds of years later. Not only will any clock you carry with you verify this, but every fabric of your being will as well! This is a consequence of Einstein’s special theory of relativity where no experiment has managed to disprove it.

Therefore, a photon is simultaneously generated at big bang 13.8 billion years ago and dissipated now in your eye at the same time. This is what the laws of universe predict and isn’t subject to opinion calling it a paradox.

None of this was my question. My question which you did not answer, was what is the impact of this on fidelity of audio devices we use?

 

@ossicle2brain 

I heard that Amir had a chart that compared the relative value of measurements based on type of audio product.   So that things like cables and DACS could be 100% judged by measurements and with things like speakers that % was less.

This is selling us way too short.  No device is strictly evaluated based on measurements alone.  We always start with the underpinning science and engineering. 

There is a company that sells you a box filled with dirt and a wire that you connect to the chassis of your audio gear and claims it improves the sound (and has real testimonials from people claiming the same).  We know, a priori that what he claims is impossible.  What earth, the real one does, cannot be emulated using a small box with dirt in it.  The guy who built it was a farmer which kind of makes sense why his went where it did.  But simple engineering says he is dead wrong.

Now, classic objectivists will stop here.  Here is an example of the most well known engineering talent online, Dave Jones on matters of audiophiles and their ideas:

https://youtu.be/m7ERMu825m4

So we could just stop there and call it done.  But such engineering explanation is not going to make sense to audiophiles as they are not technical and so will dismiss it out of hand.  Indeed, this is why objectivists failed to make headway for literally decades.

What we at ASR do is go above and beyond.  We measure.  We measure the signal coming out of your gear and see if using a different cable changes this.  Usually we find not a hair has changed in the output of the audio device.  In some cases we actually find things have gotten worse with the fancier items such as a cable!  Or Power "regenerator" (which didn't really regenerate).  

When still doubted, we play music and capture that with generic and fancy cable.  We then show the difference electronically and even offer the files for people to listen to:

Now the case gets incredibly convincing.  Now the person will understand and accept the electronic explanation of why said cable couldn't have made the difference in the first place.  The measurements and null test then are the icing on the cake and proof points for the non-technical.

In that sense, you are providing an extreme disservice to your fellow audiophiles to keep talking about us just measuring.  Your fellow audiophiles are not dumb as that implies.  They are learning the story end to end.  I know because I watch them explain it to others.

Back to cables, they are the most innocent things in your audio system.  They have higher fidelity than any piece of electronics and by a mile.  That audiphiles based on lay intuition and incorrect listening tests have arrived at a different point of view is again, easily proven using electronics circuit theory.  

So yes, once we measure something like a cable, then the story is told.  We have theory, engineering knowledge and now concrete, objective data to prove the same.  And we even offer listening tests with real music.  But the latter is not really necessary.  I just provide it to get past the objection of "well, you didn't test wiht music."  OK, we did and the outcome was precisely as we said it would be.

So reduces us to just measuring at your own peril.  We are about knowledge and true understanding of what makes your audio devices tick, and what doesn't.  If that is scary and uncomfortable to know, I get it. You don't have to come to ASR.  But please don't keep repeating the same fallacious tag line as if I am not here to correct you.  That my friend, makes no logical sense.

Hey @amir_asr are you going to reply to soundfield? Pretty amazing how you switch your entire ethos. 

@mahgister 

You treat me as an "idiot audiophiles" as some around you called them you are pathetic...

You keep complaining but not answering my simple and brief question.  What is the impact of a photon of light not experiencing time has on performance of our audio system?  Does this have an answer or not?

@soundfield

That serves only as a misdirection. You are claiming/showing a purported successful test. By you.

Nope.  You lost the plot there.  Dear member @kevn made this comment I was responding to:

Fifth, he is unable to tell apart music files of low and high resolution, and based on this lack of ability, determines that measurements in performance testing is all that is needed to determine what is heard, and what is not.

He says I am unable to tell such files apart and by implication, he can.  Can he AJ?  Are his claims correct that he can hear such differences and if you can't, that will be a sign of resentment on your part?

You wanted in this conversation.  There you are.  What is the answer or must we ask it 10 times and only get non-answers?