Digitalitis

[Gregadd]

Ron,

IMHO you can´t compare them. Digitalitis is a rumor, never proved in conditions that can be accepted as a real fact.

The rainbow effect is well understood and studied effect - the projector companies knew that a percentage of viewers would be sensitive to it, but found that they could live without such customers. Economics rule ...

The point is that in the UK people listening to FM broadcasts of classical music have been subjected to digital music since 1972 without knowing it and no one complained ... In fact broadcasts of live concerts by the BBC going through the digital links were considered "the finest sound quality available in the world."

Edit - digitalistis spell corrected!

Hmm? Do you consider," lack of awareness" and "the finest sound quality available" as logically inconsistent to be logically inconsistent?
I love digital as long as I don't know it's digital? Deja vu.
Amazing discipline on the BBC to keep that underwrap.

 

[Audire]

Not a surprise Joe. One of the things we learn early in med school is that only half of what we are taught is true. The problem is that often don't know which half!

I'm no expert in the auditory system, but the visual system certainly uses learned behavior as a part of visual development from infancy to adulthood. The most obvious example is amblyopia or lazy eye that leads to poor vision in some children with eye muscle imbalance issues. The solution is often to patch the good eye and force the child use the bad eye. This is thought to force the development of synaptic connections from the eye to the brain and there is no question it works, especially if it is done in young childhood. Some kids can go from legally blind to almost 20/20 vision with such treatment. Forcing the eye brain connection is therefore a learned adaptive response in these kids. I am unaware if such an analogous pathology and treatment exists in the auditory system.

Marty,

Thanks for your post.

My audio journey has gone like this (ages app.):

(1) Grew up on analogue - father’s tape and vinyl until I was 17
(2) From 18-25 - all CDs.
(3) From 26-28 - all vinyl
(4) From 29-65 - all digital, mostly CDs and then came streaming
(5) Then I heard a good vinyl setup. I had to get one. It is my favorite format.

So, the majority of my life I was digital. According to your point above I should still enjoy digital more, because that was what my brain essentially learned the majority of my life. But I don’t.

We hear analogue signals. Hair cells essentially act as Analogue to Digital Converters. So we hear in analogue and the brain processes the signals as digital. Here’s the way I understand it works.

 

[Yuen A.]

If Redbook playback gives you the problems of unnatural hardness, glare and congestion on a regular basis, then perhaps some optimization is required.

I think "optimization" is not the right word to use here. Rather, it should be "masking". "Optimization" implies that my sound system is the cause of the unnatural hardness, glare, dryness, graininess and congestion of the sound I hear. But I don't hear these artifacts when listening to excellent high resolution recordings!

 

[Kingrex]

Cool hearing video. I wonder if fatigue comes from an overload of ions at a particular frequency that over fills the cell and stretches it so to speak.

 

[Al M.]

I think "optimization" is not the right word to use here. Rather, it should be "masking". "Optimization" implies that my sound system is the cause of the unnatural hardness, glare, dryness, graininess and congestion of the sound I hear. But I don't hear these artifacts when listening to excellent high resolution recordings!

No, optimization, not masking. Too.many audiophiles seem to be in the business of masking problems rather than solving them. If I would have masked problems in the past, which I could have done easily, I would not have achieved the high level of resolution that I am enjoying now. Instead, I solved my problems with electronics, room acoustics and set-up.

Either your DAC is not as good at decoding Redbook as it should be, or something else is going on with your system.

Another thing that I found is that the better the system becomes, the more recordings turn out to be excellent or very good. I have learned to blame the recording last. Often laying that blame turns out to be just a copout, and the problems lie elsewhere, system, room, set-up. Of course, there will remain those recordings that are irredeemable.

 

[the sound of Tao]

I have been having little intolerance to solid state in general. Well, I have condition called "solid statitis".

I’m struggling with late onset boxitis myself my doctor said take two horns and call me in the morning.

 

[bonzo75]

I have been having little intolerance to solid state in general. Well, I have condition called "solid statitis".

I think the word is Statistics

 

[bonzo75]

I’m struggling with late onset boxitis myself my doctor said take two horns and call me in the morning.

Horns can allow you to sit and listen for too long causing gastroentritis

 

[the sound of Tao]

Horns can allow you to sit and listen for too long causing gastroentritis

But my proctologist said I should try applying some gentle digititis for temporary relief… my lord I’ve never been so offended

 

[microstrip]

Sorry, Francisco, but I do not understand the relevance of this post to the instant question. We have two ears, and our ears are listening to two loudspeakers. When listening to our stereos our brains are focused on sound coming primarily from two locations in front of us. Listening to two or more sources of sound at the same time seems very consistent with what humans have dealt with for eons.

Well, as long as our arguments are just he have two ears and we are hearing to two loudspeakers we can invite kindergarten children to our discussions. I have nothing to add, I explained my point - it just needs understanding what is a vector.

 

[microstrip]

Hmm? Do you consider," lack of awareness" and "the finest sound quality available" as logically inconsistent to be logically inconsistent?
I love digital as long as I don't know it's digital? Deja vu.
Amazing discipline on the BBC to keep that underwrap.

No, the fact was well known and publicized in the press - I read about its characteristics in Wireless World. But at that time audiophiles were not aware that PCM (as they called it) was not natural.

 

[Gregadd]

"...not aware PCM ...was not natural..."[ text omitted].
Sounds like a double negative. Would you care to elaborate.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

We hear analogue signals. Hair cells essentially act as Analogue to Digital Converters. So we hear in analogue and the brain processes the signals as digital.

As I said above, it is more complex than that and even such a model does not usefully inform the discussion. (I acknowledge that I have not listened to the YouTube clip because, generally, I do not listen to YouTube clips.)

 

[Audiophile Bill]

I’m struggling with late onset boxitis myself my doctor said take two horns and call me in the morning.

The ear (pinna in particular) is a horn.

Do you like cats, Graham?

 

[the sound of Tao]

The ear (pinna in particular) is a horn.

Do you like cats, Graham?

Ha, at home we have only woofers Bill… this is the look my new woofer Cleo shot me when I told her boxes were out from now on and she’d have to settle for a folded baffle I was building her to play in

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Ha, at home we have only woofers Bill… this is the look my new woofer Cleo shot me when I told her boxes were out from now on and she’d have to settle for a folded baffle I was building her to play in
View attachment 95511
View attachment 95512

Nice woofer. She has a Henry’s pocket on her ear by looks of it - this is an interesting anatomical feature that people don’t really know exactly the purpose but theory has it that it improves hunting by being able to detect higher pitch sounds better.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Nice woofer. She has a Henry’s pocket on her ear by looks of it - this is an interesting anatomical feature that people don’t really know exactly the purpose but theory has it that it improves hunting by being able to detect higher pitch sounds better.

Wow, natural selection is amazing… and another fine reason stick to 2 way rather than crossing to some super tweeters lol… my woofer refuses to play in the listening room because she’s super sensitive to my tweeters lol

 

[thedudeabides]

I enjoy these type threads for their physcological introspective value and, IMHO, has nothing to do with listening to and enjoying music. Which is fine. To me it is very simple. Everyone hears differently and, in the end, it is all subjective preference.

 

[the sound of Tao]

There are so many potential itis’s that can relate to preferences and the complexities of perception. There are types and there are states. Is the itis a type or a state? For example I do believe that there is also sonicaddictive-itis where the call and chemical thrill of synthetically heightened and sensational, exciting immersive and dramatic sonic fields outweighs perhaps the desire for more balanced and even more naturalistic and realistic centred outcomes in music.

Where does this sea of distortions leave any choice not based in holistic summation against the benchmark of the sound of instruments in real life. If we use this as a chance to explore the nature of previous experiences building towards expectation itself and how it factors into choice and preference and new experience that would perhaps help frame a bigger picture than just trying to make up a new scapegoaty audiophile term like digitalitis and lay blame for what could be far more diverse and complex issues about individual differences between hearing and ways of perceiving.

We’re unlikely to learn anything while we assume we have the answers… making up simplistic one cause covers all terms like digitalitis may just as easily obscure potential truths about possibly more complex and varying natures in perception rather than just simple issues of sensitivities in hearing leading to our preferences.

 

[tima]

For example I do believe that there is also sonicaddictive-itis where the call and chemical thrill of synthetically heightened and sensational, exciting immersive and dramatic sonic fields outweighs perhaps the desire for more balanced and even more naturalistic and realistic centred outcomes in music.

As if we need more cowbell.

Where does this sea of distortions leave any choice not based in holistic summation against the benchmark of the sound of instruments in real life. If we use this as a chance to explore the nature of previous experiences building towards expectation itself and how it factors into choice and preference and new experience that would perhaps help frame a bigger picture than just trying to make up a new scapegoaty audiophile term like digitalitis and lay blame for what could be far more diverse and complex issues about individual differences between hearing and ways of perceiving.

Maybe it will be better understood when a therapy is developed.

We’re unlikely to learn anything while we assume we have the answers… making up simplistic one cause covers all terms like digitalitis may just as easily obscure potential truths about possibly more complex and varying natures in perception rather than just simple issues of sensitivities in hearing leading to our preferences.

or obscurity descends when we demand answers where there are no real questions?

Potential itis - gotta love it.