I too am an engineer who likes to "see the data" but in audio, there is more than one way to take data. I get real tired of people who scoff at the idea that the ear can be a meaningful measurement tool and insist that it be backed up with electrical data before pronouncing the effect real.
The ear/brain combination is a GREAT measuring tool for judging relative differences. For example, if I were to play a sinewave below 100HZ to somebody and then a 1KHZ signal, and while no audiophile may tell me exactly what frequencies I played, I'll bet every audiophile on this planet could hear a DIFFERENCE between the two signals.
What we were talking about here were the DIFFERENCES that burning in makes in the SOUND, not the measured electrical differences.
You don't need electrical measurements to hear an effect.
By the way, when I typed Sean in my previous post, I meant to respond to Seandtaylor.
The ear/brain combination is a GREAT measuring tool for judging relative differences. For example, if I were to play a sinewave below 100HZ to somebody and then a 1KHZ signal, and while no audiophile may tell me exactly what frequencies I played, I'll bet every audiophile on this planet could hear a DIFFERENCE between the two signals.
What we were talking about here were the DIFFERENCES that burning in makes in the SOUND, not the measured electrical differences.
You don't need electrical measurements to hear an effect.
By the way, when I typed Sean in my previous post, I meant to respond to Seandtaylor.