Neutral electronics are a farce...


Unless you're a rich recording engineer who record and listen to your own stuff on high end equipment, I doubt anyone can claim their stuff is neutral.  I get the feeling, if I were this guy, I'd be disappointed in the result. May be I'm wrong.
dracule1
Back to the question I am now asking for the third (count ’em) time. The real question is is (two is’s in a row) George’s database correct or not? In other words do you have any evidence or even proof that he’s wrong? Forget about analog.

By the way, if you read George’s page more carefully you’ll find some (I think) logic reasoning there that might substantiate the idea that analog (vinyl) and perhaps cassettes as well don’t suffer the inverting polarity nearly to the extent that digital does. In any ace he is arguing that the vinyl counterpart can often be non-inverting whereas the CD version is R. And, he goes on, this difference in polarity between digital and vinyl generally speaking, is a big reason my words why audiophiles frequently prefer analog. Makes sense, no? So here is the relevant paragraph from George’s page:

"It almost goes without saying that the inverted playback of CDs greatly disadvantages them musically when compared to the non-inverted playback of their vinyl record counterparts. It should be noted that the polarity integrity of each element in the chain of a vinyl record’s recording through its playback can be determined without ever listening to it in a manner similar to that described below for digital media, but is much easier to accomplish for vinyl records than for CDs, because a record’s musical content is laid down continuously in its groove, which is fundamentally different from the discontinuous way the digital representation of a CD’s musical content is laid down in its track. Could this be a major reason why many listeners prefer analog to digital?** Sometimes there are additional reasons, that although substantially less significant, might influence some listener’s preference of vinyl records over digital media that you may read about below.*

So, even if you don’t buy into the problem of polarity being as big as George claims, say you think it’s 50% or whatever and perhaps you also don’t particularly care to check the polarity of every single CD and mark it Out Of Polarity like some people I know. Nevertheless, and as unfortunate as this may be, since absolute polarity is also an issue with (some) digital playback electronics, and I know that’s true because I had a CD player that was polarity inverting, unless the True Audiophile has some means to determine if in fact his system is in the correct absolute polarity, then at least 50% of the time he will be hearing the music in Reverse Polarity, no? Furthermore, even if one were to be really stubborn or in denial or whatever and say, Geez, I don’t think any CDs are Reverse Polarity, guess what? In that case ALL CDs will be heard as R since the system with an inverting component in it reverses polarity, so you wind up with the music out of polarity.

An ordinary man has no means of deliverance.

cheerios,

geoff kait
Could this be a major reason why many listeners prefer analog to digital?**
Such a Red Herring! We don't even know that such is even true... sheesh. Anyway, we let George hear the CD (so this was not an analog/digital thing at all) but he couldn't make the call on that one, despite telling us initially that the room sounded fine other than being the wrong polarity. Can you see the problem?

I'm sure that is why he left so quickly- it must have been as obvious to him as it was to us.


Atmasphere wrote,

"Such a Red Herring! We don’t even know that such is even true... sheesh."

what you mean "we", Kemo Sabe?

Atmasphere also wrote,

"Anyway, we let George hear the CD (so this was not an analog/digital thing at all) but he couldn’t make the call on that one, despite telling us initially that the room sounded fine other than being the wrong polarity. Can you see the problem?"

I already explained all that.

No answer to my question yet, I duly note.

geoff kait
machina dramatica



almarg,

I agree with Ralph’s comments in that thread to the effect that the claim of "velocity countermeasures" ("countermeasures" meaning "corrections," as I understand it) in the area of 700 or 800 db seems nonsensical.
What do you suppose is the percentage of errors in an actual living ear-brain connection? Parts per million, billion, trillion?

Every single time I added another 100 db to the velocity detectors what do you think happened?

A) didn’t notice any difference.
B) far superior projection.

Most designers can’t even contain that much raw gain in one place without it going up in smoke.

It is used exclusively for the detection and preservation of velocity.

I use custom devices (built at my factory) that you won’t find on the shelves at Digi-key or Mouser because nobody makes them. I had to design a special circuit board to handle the auto-focus system housed in a Faraday cage and buried in pure copper.

You are welcome to your own opinions but don’t tell me it can’t be done.
Its already been done.
The results are self evident.

The answer is B.

Roger

Roger, I of course don’t question the innovative nature of your design, or the quality of the results. But to provide some perspective on the numbers that have been cited:

A million is of course a 1 followed by 6 zeros.
A billion is a 1 followed by 9 zeros.
A trillion is a 1 followed by 12 zeros.

The human brain contains approximately 100 billion cells (a 1 followed by 11 zeros), according to various references on the web.

800 db, as used to represent the ratio between two quantities of voltage or current or sound pressure level or various other variables, corresponds to 1 part in (1 followed by 40 zeros). ("Other variables" does not include power, for which 800 db corresponds to 1 part in (1 followed by 80 zeros)).

As cited in various references on the web, the number of atoms in the planet Earth is roughly in the vicinity of (1 followed by 50 zeros).
1000 db, expressed as a ratio, corresponds to 1 part in (1 followed by 50 zeros), and therefore corresponds to the ratio between the number of atoms in the planet Earth and a single atom.

As cited in various references on the web, the number of atoms in the known universe, extending about 13.8 billion light years in all directions, is roughly in the vicinity of (1 followed by 80 zeros).
1600 db, expressed as a ratio, corresponds to 1 part in (1 followed by 80 zeros), and therefore corresponds to the ratio between the number of atoms in the known universe and a single atom.

(1000 db and 1600 db have of course not been previously cited in this discussion, but I include those figures to provide additional perspective on your 800 db figure).

Regards,
-- Al