Measurements aren't taken in the real world and the way the equipment is used, it's usually taken in isolation, not the system as a whole with music.
Mastering legend Bernie Grundman explains why the measurement crowd has it all wrong!
There's a great new interview with Bernie Grundman about the AJA UHQR where he relates that a component that a measures perfectly, but uses a lot of electronics in the signal path to get that result, sounds inferior to electronics that don't even measure flat, but have less in the pathway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGLFTm6jMrY
I recently read one of these "reviews'' where they admit they mostly don't even listen, but just rely on measurements. It was one of the most amateur reviews I had ever read, and now the we have one of the top trusted golden ears (one who actually creates the content) state that measurements don't indicate what something is going to sound like.
I'll take Bernie's perspective over an idiot with an analyzer touting cheap gear that measures well, just to make people feel superior about their (sometimes) midfi gear.
- ...
- 33 posts total
Qualia can be reproduced yes with any accuracy levels , they cannot be interpreted and perceived as meanings without a brain/consciousness... Music is not sound... Music is sound+meanings... This fact escape the objectivist crowd as escape the subjectivist crowd that audio is not based on mere arbitrary taste but on psycho-acoustics multi-disciplinaries understandings with multiple concepts and many kind of measures ...
There is no singular place in the brain where is stored musical memory , it is distributed on many levels and many location zones all connected in the brain ... The brain dont create consciousness but it is like a radio receiver it tune consciouness and the ground of meanings which come from a non located universal memory ... The brain dont create meanings no more than the prime numbers distribution is created and existed because of the brain ... The prime numbers distribution is a non conventional object existing absolutely, it is discovered as when we discovered a new sun or a new galaxy ...We create as human species the symbolic form associated with a numerical basis, ten or the basis 60 or 20 or two etc yes , this is relative choices ... But the prime numbers cannot be understood as a relative conventional objects as with a numerical basis ... They are highly specified infinite non conventional object... Any spirit, angels or extra terestrials , even God, know them as their own "body" ... They are ultimately music and rythm in a non commutative space as described by mathematician Alain Connes ...The founder of non commutative geometry ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr60YwJrPa0 And as claimed by the mathematician Shai Haran in his astounding book " the real prime" , P-adic numbers based on primes are more natural and more fundamental than real numbers ... You cannot put primes aside no more than you can put God in a bag ... 😁
|
Bernie Grundman’s knowledge, experience, and expertise speaks for itself. If you want to challenge that, you’ll need to do a whole lot better than "he is simply incorrect" because there is a mountain of evidence that he’s not.
That’s one of the differences between you and Bernie. |
@cleeds + 1 |
Quarelling - really? Debating would be the right word. Anyway, you also probably lack the complete knowledge on this topic and yet you are putting out your point in the debate. I do acknowledge that human hearing is far complex beyond current science and I do not understand it. But like to read and discuss about it - because that is the most FUNdaMENTAL thing about this wonderful passion/hobby.
So true. Besides he did not even address the question - why 2 people hear differently, as proved by science. |
- 33 posts total