Audio Critic's Ten Biggest Lies

Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
Not as a rule. A straw may be perceived as bent if placed in and viewed through a glass of water yet you and I both know the straw isn't bent in reality.
Assuming that the straw is actually straight in reality. :)

EDIT: My responses are getting more and more lame...
 
Highlander

Highlander

Full Audioholic
Assuming that the straw is actually straight in reality.
The point is that science can explain why the straw is bent in a way that is reproducable every time. Musicgioni's perceptions almost certainly aren't.

My responses are getting more and more lame...
Quit while you're behind. :D:D:D
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
Quit while you're behind. :D:D:D
I'm always behind... :D

What I was saying was that perception is how we as individuals sense "reality." So, we only know what is "real" based on our perceptions and interpretations. I agree that science can explain why our perception of the straw is changed when it is placed in water. Perhaps what I'm getting at is the age old argument of whether or not there are any fundamental truths.

However, I'm not arguing if his amps sound different. I don't know. In any case, if he's happy with his amp...good for him. :)
 
Highlander

Highlander

Full Audioholic
...please expand on this.
You'd wondered:

...whether or not there are any fundamental truths.
I wrote that there were. Tomorrow enquired what some might be, but stipulated that:

Scientific or mathematical identities (proofs) don't count.
Discussion of fundamental truths would to me encompass matters on a universal scale so why, given that science and therefore mathematics has a fair bit to say about our universe should it be excluded? If we include mathematics, which mostly is deterministic, then fundamental truths will fall out of the equations. Hence, my comment about a deterministic universe. For Tomorrow not to permit scientific or mathematical identities must imply that he doesn't believe or doesn't want to believe the universe to be deterministic.

Or that he was simply fishing for something bigger. :D
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Question:
Are there any problems associated with wrapping hot water tanks (e.g., rusting of tanks, overheating)? Should new hot water tanks be wrapped?

Answer:
There appears to be no hard evidence to either substantiate or refute any claim that wrapping hot water heaters with insulation will directly cause the tank to rust and fail prematurely. Our Energy Library searched but found no studies to support any rusting claims. I also talked to some plumbers I know and they hadn’t heard of any substantiated cases of tank degradation from wrapping hot water heaters. Failing a study to support the claim, let’s look at it logically.

Rusting of the tank is one problem and its longevity is another. Rust is usually caused by excessive moisture. Why should insulation around a dry tank cause excessive moisture? There are really only two ways for moisture to get under the insulation wrap: through condensation or a leak of some kind. Vapor in the air reaching the dew point and condensing happens on cool surfaces that are below the dew point – and this won’t happen at the elevated temperatures you find under the insulation wrap. The other possibility is a small leak in the heater or one of the plumbing joints coming into the heater. If there is a slow leak in the tank or water is getting under the tank, then, yes, a jacket could hold in more moisture and cause premature rust. Obviously, rusting is not desirable. But unless the rust on the outside of the tank is quite severe, it would have a minimal effect on the actual performance of the water heater. The tank itself should certainly not rust any more with a jacket than without, and, again, the rust would have to be very severe to have a noticeable effect on performance or longevity.

EnergyIdeas Clearinghouse has been the most comprehensive, technical resource that Pacific Northwest business, industry, government and utilities use to implement energy technologies and practices. EnergyIdeas is operated and managed by the Washington State University in Olympia, Washington.
www.energyideas.org/default.cfm?o=h,g,ds&c=z,z,2381
Thanks for your input. Jneutron brought up an extreme condition of having 50F groundwater and running the tanks out of hot water. So, if the burner cannot keep pace heating the water quicker than it is being used, that tank liner could/would go below the dew point and vapors would condense, depending on the amount that is able to penetrate and the rate of penetration until the liner temp is above this dew point.

More insulation could not overheat the tank unless the high temp cut off probe is broken:D
 
Adam

Adam

Audioholic Jedi
Thanks, Robbie. I was actually wondering to which flavor of determinism you were referring.

For Tomorrow not to permit scientific or mathematical identities must imply that he doesn't believe or doesn't want to believe the universe to be deterministic.
Do you believe that the universe is deterministic? If so, does that mean that it is? Careful now...perception = reality is coming back around.
 
Highlander

Highlander

Full Audioholic
Do you believe that the universe is deterministic?
(sigh) I knew that'd be the next question. Does that mean that the answer's that it is? :D

I'm not dodging the question but as it stands it's couched too generally, not to mention that I don't have concrete views on certain things. For example, I'd be willing to state my view that the universe expanding, stars being born/dying etc are deterministic. Mankind's future as deterministic, i.e. preordained, well that's a whole other discussion.

If so, does that mean that it is? Careful now...perception = reality is coming back around.
No need to be careful; belief is neither the same as perception or reality. :)
 
Last edited:
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
MDS, you want scientific proof a component sounds different than another?
I cannot and will not speak for MDS; he is quite capable.
No, we want evidence, since you made some testable claims about amps in particular, that YOU can hear audible differences between properly designed amps and that is how you came to your conclusions about audible differences. If you don't have such evidence, why shouldn't your testimony be just another anecdote with dubious merit?

Buddy I think you and others that think like you are MISSING the point! These components are making SOUND. Your ears should be the ultimate judge after all is said and done. Meassurements only show part of the picture. If a component measure good but still sound like crap then it is crap.
I doubt he/others are missing any points. But I see you certainly are. You have no evidence, except biased perceptions, that well measured components can sound like 'crap.' You have not researched much it seems, in audio land. Don't feel badly, no one is immune.

But if you think it is my preconditioned brain that made me to hear differences between my Threshold and the Plinius then I rest my case!
But you have offered no evidence that you can or able to hear differences under bias controlled protocols. What is one to think, that you are exempt or immune from bias? Such a person has not been found yet. And yes, the brain does look for differences, even when the same component is presented twice, it will find a difference. Again, there is more for you to look into it seems.


What about differences between a Baldwin a Yamaha or a Steinway grand piano? What about the differences between a Stradivari and a "run of the mill" violin?

And why are we drifting into pianos and violins??? A diversion tactic?
But, I am glad at least you brought up the Strad:D There was a research into it and no, the varnish didn't help:D Yet, another urban legend with insufficient data. But, let me help you out here:

http://agnews.tamu.edu/dailynews/stories/BICH/Sep2203a.htm

What you believe or not is you affair. Trying to pass something on as facts, be careful.;)

Have you ever heard a Stradivari playing side by side to a Guarneri? No deofferecne again eh?
Best not to jump off the deep end. the world of the Internet bring much to your fingertips:D See above.

If you had read my previous posts I posted that I am a scientist with the a MSc in Physics (specialized in solid state) so please do not tell me that you believe in scientific research...I have made this my way of life.

And, you think you are exempt or immune from audio BS, imaginations and flawed or unreliable perceptions? Please. You have dealt your hand pretty well and have nothing in that hand but what other 'golden ears' tend to proclaim.


Still though, I have ears and I can listen.
Yes, you can. But, you are not immune nor exempt from the the flaws of perceptions and human nature. And, yes, the brain's ability to fool your senses inputs and fabricate what was not there. Yes, I see that steel pipe being bent in a 5 gal bucket of water too.


but I also believe that the ultimate measure of a component should be OUR OWN ears.
No matter how much it may be misleading you?

Like when talking about food the ultimate judge should be our own taste buds and not an analysis of the recipe!
Oh, now you are talking about a preference, right? But then, even food taste and differences can be judged under bias controlled conditions, as is also done with wine, to take human bias out of the equation and arrive at reliable answers. Better believe it how much it is used.

I will never accept that all "well designed" components sound the same and the resistance to this FACT from some people surprises me.
I see, now you have demonstrated having a closed mind. Rather telling, isn't it? Well designed doesn't mean operation outside of design limits, not having high output impedance, or low input impedance not nonlinear frequency response, etc.


If I can hear a difference then it exists. If I can not then it is of no consequence to me....
So far, you have not shown any evidence that you can. You make lots of claims to this but evidence is rather non existent.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Yes, you can measure the differences. The differences in such instruments can be analyzed by recording the device in question by excitation of the 'whole' instrument with a controlled stimulus in an anechoic chamber. Analysis of the recorded signal with FFT will reveal different harmonic distributions relative to the fundamental(s).
If it makes a difference, it would be measurable by difference. But such difference measurement would be difficult if not impossible to execute: you would need two identical violins with different finishes. Due to a multitude of variables, this is likely impossible. One can chip away a flake of the varnish coat and analyze it in a lab to determine it's physical effects as a mass loading object on the wood. But it is doubtful it has any appreciable effect unless it is of substantial thickness, or it contains a chemical that changes the properties of the wood itself.
You claim to be of a scientific camp. Yet, it seems that you ignore the principles of your professional life when it comes to your personal one.
-Chris

Interesting that he dismisses cables, YET, they all measure differently:D
And, even the same cable will at different lengths. :D
But, components will measure well and sound like junk:confused:
 
Tomorrow

Tomorrow

Audioholic Ninja
Why not? Do you not consider the universe deterministic?
Identities are constructs. That's why not. 1+1 = 2 is a construct. It has no reality other than as a construct.

Do you believe that human constructs are "truth", then? That would make you take a full turn back to 'reality is only what is perceived'...not your point of view, I believe.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
...I am not just trying to make any points man except to share with you guys my personal experiences and help open some eyes to the truth
Truths? How so? Persona experiences arrives at the truths? Or, perhaps some observations, experimentation and some credible, objective testing that can be replicated? Is that how some truths are arrived at, or at least until some better testing shows something different? You have not shown any truths here, just speculation based on very subjective and biased perceptions.


About 20 years ago I too fell for the CD lie "perfect sound forever"
A marketing gimmick :D


NO freind I am not trying to make a point or EVEN start a discussion on LP vs CD...I am just trying to make this point:
The CDs measure perfect compared to any LP. Still they sound stale compared...
That is your preference speaking, not reality. Again, nothing to feel badly about. One of those preference based choices.

YEs the CD sound has imporved substantially since its begginings but why should it do so if it was "perfect" from the start?
Perhaps there was a learning curve for the mastering engineers how to implement the RED Book specifications?


And why do about all my LPs sound so envolving compared to most CDs even being so inferior in measurments?

Perhaps that not all CDs are mastered the same? Perhaps some are compressed to the hilt?
Perhaps you have not done the right comparisons properly? Bias? Preference? Lots of reasons.

... but only LISTENING will ever show us how our own God given "measuring" insurments will react to the sound...
And this special instrument has no limits in its capability? I am surprised then that this wonderful instrument is not used to measure components in the first place; why measure with instrument?

Have a good one

Gerry
Yes, we are having a great time :D
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
OOOPPPSS I forgot to comment something else: Why are we all getting things so seriously when we are at forum where a wrong comment of someone about water heateers prompts a whole "in depth" disucssion from members about...WATER HEATERS!!!! And this in a suppesedly serious forum about the differecnes of music reproduction equipment...
I rest my case guys!
Cheers to all and enjoy the music!
OH, but this is the STEAM VENT board. Did you miss that?
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top