For Your Edification and Enjoyment re "Burn In", etc.

How would you possibly know what I spend on audio and obviously you do care...alot. This much is obvious and it is really confusing. Just the fact that you state we are wasting our money really doesnt help your position not knowing what we own. Scientific facts achieved through psychic abilities I guess. So what do I own? I am thinking about it right at this moment.

I defer to all as providers of information and then I wade through what mirrors my experience. My silly stuff has nothing to do with science but I never ever bloviate. With your permission I will contact the moderators to make this a bloviate free zone. 

Near tears. When we interact I feel like I just had the underwear in high school dream. You may not be making this stuff up but I think you are confused in when and how to apply. Science is not static nor is it as pure as some would like. Science is also full of scientists that create a methodology which at its very core is intended to do nothing more than prove their initial hypotheses correct.

So you decided on getting this current gig after designing the Hadron Collider? You did say about contributing to science so this is the scale which I thought was in keeping with the bloviating in paragraph 2.

And yes I am trying to have a bit of fun and to take a bit of starch out of your britches. 

 

My findings in regard to the tweaks and methods I assessed are applicable to all systems,  and cost of system is irrelevant.  So, there is no point in a debate on that subject.  

Give me any relative good system at low price i will make it reach the stars...Even if am an average guy i love audio tough.....

I am not arrogant like audio2design with my alleged "superior knowledge" it is only elementary acoustic science directly coming from Helmholtz...I called that simple listenings experiments...

When you dont even know that "timbre" is an acoustical concept and an experience impossible to recreate without acoustical room control , when you think that "imaging" comes from the electronic design of speakers mainly.... What do you know in audio? Way less than Helmholtz for sure...

I read the thread about "imaging" and i deduced that most people dont know how to create it with 2 speakers in a room... Precise location or angle between speakers, volume, synchronisation of drivers, etc are not enough sorry...

I discovered 2 days ago the solution in a japanese research article in acoustical physics written in 2008... Understanding what imaging is finally, at least for me the beginning of an understanding, the same night i devised immediately an experiment, very simple one that recreate an imaging better than the one i already have , filling all my room ....

No it is not related to the drivers, intensity, phase, volume, orientations of the speakers mainly...they play a role for sure but NOT the main role....

You know why?

Because "imaging" is not FIRST a physical concept in engineering, it is an acoustical concept and a phenomenon in the neurophysiology of perception.... Then how to recreate a perfect imaging? It takes 2 facts put together here, one in Helmholtz acoustical physical science and the other is a law in neurophysiology of acoustic perception... You add the 2 and you have "imaging" and the way to create it in any room with any speakers...




I ask audio2design to read the article, he never reply....He bashed "audiophiles like if they all are the same idiot", he does not take anything seriously because he think he knows everything...He dont understand "timbre " i prove and verify it with a musician here and he react by accusing the musician to be a liar, the same for "imaging" and he does not even know that he dont understand these concepts ,all his arguing with another engineer whom he bashed to be an ignorant about speakers drivers illustrated this perfectly...

Anyway It takes me a few hours to translate the japanese research in an experiment which by the way was a complete immediate success...

i know how to create "imaging" with any speakers now, not by virtue of my unborn knowledge or superiority above others but ONLY because i stumble on the right paper explaining clearly what is this phenomenon exactly....And my knowledge, even if elementary of Helmholtz acoustic, helped me a lot... one +one+ two...

I will not wait for audio2design impression of the article, i am too "limited audiophile " for him to adress that with me...

Anyway i wll comment this article and my experiment on the week to come in my thread about "miracles in audio".... This experiment make me able to create my last acoustical embedding control device...

I sell nothing save creativity... Hi-fi experience cost peanuts when you know what to do....All the rest is consumerism...And boasting about pricey electronics....Hi-Fi experience is mainly working ACOUSTIC ,nothing else....

Doug this was directed at audio2design.

My point is that when doing evaluations regarding tweaks and the like  quality of the equipment is critical. You may hear it on a budget system but not to the same degree or at least not in my experience. 

Awkwardly written and more than a little deterministic in your argument.  Agreed that most tweaks are not beneficial, but alterations to the sound invariably occur, however slight they may be.  Degrees of difference do take time to experience.  As for any component changes within a system, and or two different systems used for evaluation, if at any point you can not hear a difference, stop writing and keep such inconsequential musings to yourself.