The Subjectivist/Objectivist Synthesis, by Jason Stoddard
- Thread starter Al M.
- Start date
A good, temperate call for calm from both sides
Tricky for me
The objectivist who I liked personally but wound me up big time was the infamous Purite Audio/Keith
He spent long periods trying to convince me that power cords cannot make any difference, that Class D SS better than Class A tubes, and that tweaks like Mooks, Entreq were sheer black magic/kitty litter/ways to part me naively of my hard earned
Specs were all, and also more a deeply held bias based on how he thought the universe worked
We agreed to disagree for the umpteenth time when on replacing sublime Bakoon Class AB on his Cessaro Liszts w bland Mola Mola Class D, he went red in the face saying the specs said Mola superior, and I said my ears told me v different
Tricky for me
The objectivist who I liked personally but wound me up big time was the infamous Purite Audio/Keith
He spent long periods trying to convince me that power cords cannot make any difference, that Class D SS better than Class A tubes, and that tweaks like Mooks, Entreq were sheer black magic/kitty litter/ways to part me naively of my hard earned
Specs were all, and also more a deeply held bias based on how he thought the universe worked
We agreed to disagree for the umpteenth time when on replacing sublime Bakoon Class AB on his Cessaro Liszts w bland Mola Mola Class D, he went red in the face saying the specs said Mola superior, and I said my ears told me v different
Most (may be all?) parameters of audio is not univocal from number point of view.
These parameters have appoximate threshold area what may be considered as border between "good" and "worse".
The parameters may have several gradations.
Engeneer should use numbers in work. Other way he/she may lost direction of improvement.
When work every day with audio and people who give feedback about quality, you begin understand correlation between subjective quality and numbers.
Of course, it is not exact math. But engeneer should know: when sound improved by distortions and when sound improved by more exact transmitting/processing.
These parameters have appoximate threshold area what may be considered as border between "good" and "worse".
The parameters may have several gradations.
Engeneer should use numbers in work. Other way he/she may lost direction of improvement.
When work every day with audio and people who give feedback about quality, you begin understand correlation between subjective quality and numbers.
Of course, it is not exact math. But engeneer should know: when sound improved by distortions and when sound improved by more exact transmitting/processing.
Don't worry, they have excellent sales and are a hit with younger audiences who apparently like that kind of humor.
"flat" is not feature.
THD should be measured in full frequency range.
Also THD for hardware depend on level.
So this parameter depend on 2 variables. Impossibly something know exactly by 1 number of THD.
Similar threads
Members online
- SirVeza
- orange55
- biztibi
- bonzo75
- itay123
- audioline
- John T
- audiolab
- MarcelNL
- gian60
- Johngp
- Thundersnow
- sapirg
- thekong
- flkin
- JeremyMTB
- Nirlin
- bryans
- andromedaaudio
- admin1959
- Newt53
- hopkins
- tapepath
- Mark212121
- audioguy3107
- defride
- seatrope
- af428
- trekpilot
- Erikl
- XV-1
- frekivalto
- GuyB
- Lazz
- Rexp
- Myles1972
- soarsz
- dminches
- aangen
- ch5588
- Gregadd
- rpk
- morricab
- M27HF
- Porsche
- jazzdude99
- Another Johnson
- Dvuc
- Markwang
- JGlacken
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |