*) If, as you report in #5749, David Karmeli found even the empty room overdamped, that is quite a strange position to take, but not entirely surprising given his, let's say, unusual opinions.
It is not a 'strange position' or an 'unusual opinion'. It is not an opinion at all. It is an empirical observation based on actual listening, not on keyboarding. You are commenting on a component you've never heard. You seem to be assuming an empty room is inherently undamped.
It's been fun to go for a value proposition for my digital leg of the source triad, and to see how much sound quality I can get for as relatively little money as possible. My entire digital set up, including cables, has an MSRP of under US$15,000.
It is not a 'strange position' or an 'unusual opinion'. It is not an opinion at all. It is an empirical observation based on actual listening, not on keyboarding. You are commenting on a component you've never heard. You seem to be assuming an empty room is inherently undamaged.
What a strange argument, Tim. As I said the post you partially quoted, I have heard that room, and it was not overdamped and instead, the sound in it was open and free. So if it was not overdamped being not empty, then how could it be overdamped in an empty state?
What a strange argument, Tim. As I said the post you partially quoted, I have heard that room, and it was not overdamped and instead, the sound in it was open and free. So if it was not overdamped being not empty, then how could it be overdamped in an empty state?
You heard the room with acoustic treatments. You did not hear the empty room. You infer a conclusion on one based on your conclusion about the other. You keep telling us "I am a scientist" but that does not seem to reflect scientific method. Neither does finding unusual a conclusion from observation, as in David's case. You would have been better off without the gratuitous ddk remark.
It's been fun to go for a value proposition for my digital leg of the source triad, and to see how much sound quality I can get for as relatively little money as possible. My entire digital set up, including cables, has an MSRP of under US$15,000.
You heard the room with acoustic treatments. You did not hear the empty room. You infer a conclusion on one based on your conclusion about the other. You keep telling us "I am a scientist" but that does not seem to reflect scientific method. Neither does finding unusual a conclusion from observation, as in David's case. You would have been better off without the gratuitous ddk remark.
Validity is one thing but somewhere truth value is required for a good conclusion. You reason not with facts but with unfounded assumptions as your premise.
Validity is one thing but somewhere truth value is required for a good conclusion. You reason not with facts but with unfounded assumptions as your premise.
Ron, Natural and intuitive is a very interesting way to describe the listening experience of different audio formats. Could you expand a bit on what you mean by “intuitive”?
Ron, Natural and intuitive is a very interesting way to describe the listening experience of different audio formats. Could you expand a bit on what you mean by “intuitive”?
By "intuitive" in that sentence I did not mean a sonic attribute. I meant only that the concept of analog recording and analog reproduction makes sense to me intuitively. It makes sense to me that someone sings into a microphone and a continuous waveform is recorded, and then, later, that continuous waveform is reproduced.
