Audio nonsense

This thread is an excellent example of ALL 10 cognitive errors nicely listed here: https://aha.zone/10-cognitive-thinking-errors/

 There is no logical reason to argue somebody's private decision of purchasing audio solution, observing positive/negative results in THEIR system, and deciding to keep/sell them in spite of very expensive ticket prices, even if that improvement does not work in another system. To illustrate my point I would propose an equivalent question: Can you deny the existence of the placebo/nocebo effects because it never happened to you? Not to mention that even if you believe in them, you can never really claim it without a double-blind case study.

I didn't believe cabling impact on the audio path at first (a long time ago) and experience it everyday now, especially when some can be detected only on specific tracks. 

Let's please have some respect for other people. Arguing audio as it would be a political ideology completely disregarding rights to the individual rights/opinions is very 2022 but, simply, also very ignorant. 

I feel this bears mentioning;

Zavato, you are a total babe!

@jerryg123 ,

Say jerry, will you tell us what your last user name was before you got booted from the forum?

My "mechanical equalizer" is tuned to work and modify the room zone pressures level for some frequencies in relation with one another yes , but ALSO in relation to my own IMPERFECT hearing apparatus...Then my "curve" on the same graph as used by some here will not be so neutral...

Then my room is not neutral but the sound pressure levels related to some frequency bandwidth is ADAPTED also to my SPECIFIC tuning hearing/brain apparatus...

Then i need no microphone nor any electronic equalization...

I dont speak about that to boast about my devices, nor to boast about the alleged superiority of my method and device... THEY ARE NOT superior, they call for a dedicated room and much time to do the tuning...And they are not perfect but unlike an electronic equalizer which is a very limited tool for the global tuning of the room , my mechanical equalizer tune ALL the room at all the frequencies that matter for human hearing....

But that cost nothing , it is not only possible to do it, it is fun, and it is efficient: the sound quality is more than good for almost all people who listen music in my room and for me it is so good any upgrade appear preposterous...

Than measures are important yes, specially measure in acoustic for my ears in my case, and subjective correlated experience also is important...

The big egg objectivist, and the small egg subjectivist are two blind warring side whose existence make no sense for acoustic ....

But remember at last there is an order: any measure must be correlated to a subjectivity, not the opposite....

And in my process of tuning i at least learned the hard way that acoustic of small room is NOT the results ONLY of some waves coming from the walls ... It is a bit more complex thav this simplification for the benefit of acoustic panels sellers industry....This is the inconvenient truth....

😁😊

I have never understood why having a flat frequency response for speakers is a desirable attribute when the human ear hears almost every frequency differently, as described in the Fletcher Munson curves.

My ideal frequency response is equivalent of when the old but now shunned 'loudness' feature is turned on....