Fine Mahgister then I won’t respect yours either.
See how that works?
See how that works?
What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?
Douglas Self wrote a devastating article about audio anomalies back in 1988. With all the necessary knowledge and measuring tools, he did not detect any supposedly audible changes in the electrical signal. Self and his colleagues were sure that they had proved the absence of anomalies in audio, but over the past 30 years, audio anomalies have not disappeared anywhere, at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned. It's hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).
For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.
As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.
If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?
Regards.
For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.
As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.
If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?
Regards.
- ...
- 798 posts total
I respect arguments not opinions throwing against someone intention like the OP or about a book no one has ever read... See how it works? your threating remark against my arguments are the logical continuation of your bashing intervention.... I try and tried to be positive.... Trashing a thread without arguments and worst lendin to the OP intention are not positive participation... |
Ok i have nothing against you mapman... But contrary to you i am interested by the OP thread... Then perhaps i overreacted defending him.... But you cannot say that your intervention consisting in one word "gaslighting people" is an argument... Then i dont want to cause you discomfort but help me .... Gives us arguments... Anyway i apologize if i hurted you... I am too direct like you are yourself by the way..... Then put yourself in the OP shoes reading your posts.... |
I don't read far enough to respect or not. The lack of critical thought is shrouded in too many words turns me off. The author got his PhD from the Institute of Phonetics and Applied Linguistics, Sorbonne University, and his PhD was only recognized as a hypothesis, not a theory, though later he calls it that, which would be frowned upon academically. Sorbonne is obviously world renowned, but not in psychoacoustics which this author basically dismisses. I will stick with my initial analysis. Poorly supported conclusion based on false summaries of other works, that I suspect he does not even have the academic background in many cases to understand let alone comment on. I did get a kick out of this: https://ear.ac/about-ear/ |
- 798 posts total