2. amps-preamps
  3. 1329351619

Please help me understand

There are two concepts I've never been able to reconcile. How is it possible for different amps to have similar distortion levels (inaudible), yet still have what audiophiles might describe as a "tonal signature". In other words, how is it possible for an amp to have a perceived "warm" or "bright" sound, if it's accurately reproducing the input signal? It seems to me that all high quality, properly functioning amps should sound the same. If they don't, them some of them aren't doing their job very well.
danoroo
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,428 posts
 
"Just food for thought, your family pet 'hears' more"

Man: 20Hz-20kHz
Dog: 40Hz-40kHz

Same number of octaves (10)
rok2id's avatar
rok2id
7,859 posts
 
Man: 20Hz-20kHz
Dog: 40Hz-40kHz

Same number of octaves (10)

Based on your data, you agree with me. Since Dogs don't listen to loud rock music or use headphones, or work around loud high pitched machinery, etc.... they can probably hear from 40-40k most of their lives. I doubt if anyone on a'gon can hear 20-20k flat.
Peace.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,336 posts
 
My dog loves to listen to my system even when cranked. He sits relaxed and his ears twitch as he soaks it all in. I take that as a good sign.

HE likes to chase animals. When animal noises are played, his ears really perk and he has to think about what he hears.

The dog barking and howling in "Seamus" by Pink Floyd sends him over the top every time. Also "Dogs" from PF's "Animals"

My dog may have some issues.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,428 posts
 
"Dogs don't listen to loud rock music"

Sure they do, they listen to owners loud music. They also bark - a very loud noise.

Everybody looses hearing with age - man or a dog. Prolonged loud noise can only make it worse.
unsound
7,329 posts
 
I think it's quite possible that some test equipment can be more accurate than the human ear in some specific regards. I think that on some level, it might be advantageous to be able to evaluate one set of senses with alternative ones. I think it's quite possible that the human ear might be on some level analyzing things that are either yet to be identified and labeled, or yet to have test equipment available to verify. I also think it's quite possible that some of that increased accuracy is beyond the scope of perception of the human experience and therefore superfluous on it's own. On the other hand it might be meaningful in other ways. I also think it's possible that we might not have all the test equipment yet to test all parameters that are relevant to it's intended audience. I think it's quite possible that we have yet to fully understanding as to how these different test result parameters interact for it's intended audience. I also think the intended audience, is varied and inconsistent. I think it's possible that we might be able to recognize through test equipment deficienceies in audio reproduction gear, and are challenged develop a fix. I think it's prudent to continue to use and develop new test equipment along with reference to it's intended audience; our hearing, at least for for the time being and the immediate future.
More to discover