2. misc-audio
  3. 185168-1635

Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?

It’s easy to make snide remarks like “yes- I do the opposite of what he says.”  And in some respects I agree, but if you do that, this is just going to be taken down. So I’m asking a serious question. Has ASR actually changed your opinion on anything?  For me, I would say 2 things. I am a conservatory-trained musician and I do trust my ears. But ASR has reminded me to double check my opinions on a piece of gear to make sure I’m not imagining improvements. Not to get into double blind testing, but just to keep in mind that the brain can be fooled and make doubly sure that I’m hearing what I think I’m hearing. The second is power conditioning. I went from an expensive box back to my wiremold and I really don’t think I can hear a difference. I think that now that I understand the engineering behind AC use in an audio component, I am not convinced that power conditioning affects the component output. I think. 
So please resist the urge to pile on. I think this could be a worthwhile discussion if that’s possible anymore. I hope it is. 

chayro
amir_asr
777 posts
 

@mahgister 

but hearing theory is impossible to understand with only Fourier tools and theory..We need other more ecological approach because sound phenomenon CANNOT BE RECONSTRUCTED as the ears produce them with ONLY FOURIER TOOLS...

Is it diffucult to understand ?

The claim no.  The proof, absolutely.  How have you convinced yourself of any of this without a single controlled test?  You say the ears matter yet your designer has not provided a single comparison with ears that his amplifiers sound better than any other amplifier.  

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,806 posts
 

He does not used ONLY fourier tool but his hearing theory ideas then musical real music too and mainly...

amir_asr
777 posts
 

@mahgister 

You are not able to contradict me about hearing theory and then you resort to absurdities and put them in my mouth ..

There is no dispute about the research you put forward.  That the brain applies non-linear processing to what it hears is a given.  Nothing in there said anything about measurements.  That came from your designer who wants to sell amplifiers with certain characteristics.  To which I say fine.  Please prove that they are audibly superior to competing design.  He doesn't have this proof.  And you don't either.

amir_asr
777 posts
 

@mahgister 

He does not used ONLY fourier tool but his hearing theory ideas then musical real music too and mainly...

Ah, we finally make progress.  So measurements with "fourier" tool is instructive to tell us about fidelity of audio gear.  Well, that is what I am producing.  And what your manufacturer is NOT.  

As to whether he is testing with real music, no proof of that is provided whatsoever.  We don't even know the song titles let alone how such a test was conducted.

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,806 posts
 

The point of our discussion is simple :

 

Is a measuring tool set is enough to predict the linear well behaviour of circuits ..,.Yes... But it is not enough to qualify and determine the ultimate  sound value...listening is necessary..

i added to this that we must enlarge and added to fourier theory an ecological theory of hearing to understand what we hear... Magnasco and Oppenheim say that...

 Where is the mystery ?

My basic point is simple...

Your information is useful,  but you cannot qualify all amplifier only on the specs measured... listening test arenecessary...

It is useful to have a hearing theory... No one can object to that...

This is why the Magnasco and oppenheim experiment is important as the final note of many other experiments in the same direction revealing the limites of Fourier tools for understanding hearing..

There is no mystery in what i said... this is evident

 

 

 

 

More to discover