As this is one of the shill bastions of all time I personally fail to understand the argument.
One clip sounds better than the other and Vyda cables are fantastic I own three.
So much is lost when we fight truth for the sake of personal righteousness the over zealous protestations that skirt emolument have no place at my table.
The Ideal rules of engagement would allow light or shade to be cast on all purveyors of equipment so as to benefit vicariously from the information.
Just to point you also fail to understand that the question is not "personal righteousness" it is general technical ethics. But surely sometimes people prefer ignorance.
I am a believer that in this hobby we should be objectively and subjectively honest, accepting the limits imposed by both approaches.
Yes and no. AGC systems are integral systems - they set the volume based on previous history but are constantly checking level and changing gain if needed .
So assuming the person recording does not alter the gain on the component (unlikely with cables) or the phone, the odds of automated gain change of significant value to account for the differences between the before-after video seems slim. Keeping Ockham in mind, the simplest explanation for the differences would be the component that changed led to the differences we heard, namely the cables. Qoud erat demonstrandum. :--)
Just to point you also fail to understand that the question is not "personal righteousness" it is general technical ethics. But surely sometimes people prefer ignorance.
I am a believer that in this hobby we should be objectively and subjectively honest, accepting the limits imposed by both approaches.
I understand your point, but I'm not sure if you understand the difference between being intellectually sophisticated and being a pompous ass. The former understands context and has a high degree of empathy...the latter doesn't, despite having exactly the same amount of knowledge as the former.
Your points are not incorrect per se, but they belong to a dedicated "WBF's video police" thread. In the context of this particular thread, they are way off because it comes across as disrespectful to the OP.
No hard feelings on my part or anything similar, I'm just pointing out the obvious.
I understand your point, but I'm not sure if you understand the difference between being intellectually sophisticated and being a pompous ass. The former understands context and has a high degree of empathy...the latter doesn't, despite having exactly the same amount of knowledge as the former.
Your points are not incorrect per se, but they belong to a dedicated "WBF's video police" thread. In the context of this particular thread, they are way off because it comes across as disrespectful to the OP.
No hard feelings on my part or anything similar, I'm just pointing out the obvious.
So assuming the person recording does not alter the gain on the component (unlikely with cables) or the phone, the odds of automated gain change of significant value to account for the differences between the before-after video seems slim. Keeping Ockham in mind, the simplest explanation for the differences would be the component that changed led to the differences we heard, namely the cables. Qoud erat demonstrandum. :--)
Plus the fact that this video is an additional data point to other videos which Vienna will put up which might validate or not findings from the first video, and that these cables are used by the general, Gian, and Rhapsody. So, even if there is a gain difference, so what? Even if there wasn't, had that been the only data point, it wouldn't have amounted to much. As data points grow, they amount to something even if the gain for that video was different
Actually the right thing would be for microstrip is to show us how a same track can be so different on gain with a phone recording on normal iphone recording software at same position using same gear on same volume if he is the methodical guy as he claim to be.
if he fail to provide such evidence and resume back to quoting stuff and “force” us to take his ideaology and methodology then everybody can rest the case from now on.
That is a good one, Al, but I suspect it is much greater than that. Readers were told to ignore me in this thread by someone who simply disagrees with my opinion about the value of these types of videos. I find that to be incredible on an audio forum such as this one. Here is one side saying videos "SUCK" and the other side finding them useful in a limited way. That is a big divide. For some, it seems to be about cancelling those who disagree with them - shutting them down, silencing their opinion. And then the insult about not being able to process information? Incredible.
"Ignore him - he has no business derailing the thread. Processing information can be tough."
We are better than this at WBF. This is a forum for exchanging ideas and having an open exchange of different opinions. We are here to learn from each other. We can usually discuss Analog v. Digital in a respectful manner.
The irony is that my comments, as well as those from others, about the value of these videos, did not derail the thread at all. If fact, the discussion has become richer and quite interesting. Different opinions are a good thing. I am with Sound of Tao: why do our views differ so much about these videos?
That is a good one, Al, but I suspect it is much greater than that. Readers were told to ignore me in this thread by someone who simply disagrees with my opinion about the value of these types of videos. This is one side saying videos "SUCK" and the other side finding them useful in a limited way. That is a big divide.
So assuming the person recording does not alter the gain on the component (unlikely with cables) or the phone, the odds of automated gain change of significant value to account for the differences between the before-after video seems slim. Keeping Ockham in mind, the simplest explanation for the differences would be the component that changed led to the differences we heard, namely the cables. Qoud erat demonstrandum. :--)
Ockham says that if you have a process that produces measurable high level signal differences and a process that only introduces minimal, barely measurable differences , the first one should be responsible for the changes. Perhaps an Ockham that uses a Philishave , not a razor, will prefer the second ...
The best post in the thread, Al M. People should realize that digital is the guilty evil entity in this debate - once we digitize a signal with a mobile phone we are immediately making a measurement. The question is that the recording shows as a very poor measurement, that must be analyzed with high bias factors to have a meaning.
Digital versus analog will last forever because it is a preference for an illusion and we enjoy debating illusions.
I understand your point, but I'm not sure if you understand the difference between being intellectually sophisticated and being a pompous ass. The former understands context and has a high degree of empathy...the latter doesn't, despite having exactly the same amount of knowledge as the former.
Your points are not incorrect per se, but they belong to a dedicated "WBF's video police" thread. In the context of this particular thread, they are way off because it comes across as disrespectful to the OP.
No hard feelings on my part or anything similar, I'm just pointing out the obvious.
Well, understanding the context is what triggered my first post - I explained it clearly. I tried to explain why mobile phones videos are acceptable for some tasks and not for others and the technicalities of the method being suggested and its risks. Thanks for the compliment.
My points do not belong to any WBF police - but IMHO unfortunately your post approaches a much more dangerous "WBF censorship police". It looks obvious.
My points do not belong to any WBF police - but IMHO unfortunately your post approaches a much more dangerous "WBF censorship police". It looks obvious.
Well, understanding the context is what triggered my first post - I explained it clearly. I tried to explain why mobile phones videos are acceptable for some tasks and not for others and the technicalities of the method being suggested and its risks. Thanks for the compliment.
My points do not belong to any WBF police - but IMHO unfortunately your post approaches a much more dangerous "WBF censorship police". It looks obvious.
I don't think my post approaches or encourages censorship, because censorship implies the complete eliminations of your views. I said that they belong to a different thread, which is very different from censorship.
I strongly believe video posters simply want to show off and are the typical insecure audiophiles who want constant affirmation. I bet they are fully aware how bad the sound is in their videos.
Vienna, please install those cables quickly, listen to them, report what you hear, and make those videos ASAP. This thread needs to get back on topic before the original content is cancelled.
Just don't do it too quickly as there will be criticisms of the cables not having "settled" long enough. The Atlas Lambda also needs an hour of play before any critical listening. BTW, how long do you let your iPhone 11 warm up before hitting the "record" button? I also hear remaining battery life can have an effect on quality too.
