I find it ironic to the extreme, that you are now acting as if you are the knowledgable person, and I am to be ignored.
I remember when you first started posting replies to me years ago, all you had were a handful of white papers to cite and quote from, and little or no understanding of what they meant, or the true implications of their contents.
I had real world experience of the subject, formal training (or my own research and readings), I had actually listened to all of the things under discussion, in many cases using controlled listening tests. I had performed measurements, run experiments, performed analysis of said measurements and listening tests.
As a practicing engineer and longstanding member of the Audio Engineerig Society, with three US patents to my name, three AES papers presented, several magazine articles published, a list of audio design credits a mile long, I have the benefit of over 25 years of professional experience in the audio field.
However, one thing is still the same, despite your having picked up some of the jargon and buzzwords over the years, you still depend on the work of others, rather than actually trying any of this for yourself. It is all still strictly in the realm of theory and what you call science. You are not an EE, you do not have any first hand experience with engineering or audio design, you do not even claim to have any specific audio equipment, nor have you ever revealed what sort of audio system, if any, you own.
As with all things, the application of a particular discipline depends on the depth and breadth of one's knowledge of that discipline, and while someone who is well versed in a discipline can speak with some authority with regard to the science and theory, it still doesn't replace one minute iota of actual experimentation or first hand experience (such as listening).
You say I have been discredited. One could easily say the same about you, it would depend on who was asked.
I can say with some certainty that the few people that you might be able to get to back up your statement by agreeing with it, would be folks who have argued bitterly with me in the past over audio cable sonics. This is widely recognized to be a very contentious topic, one which even ordinarily reasonable people get very hot and excited about, with lots of name calling and flaming. It is not too surprising that someone who I had argued with over this topic would be willing to state that they thought I was full of BS.
However, that would not make it true, nor does it provide ANY sort of evidence for the statement that I have been discredited.
For someone who prides himself on the application of logic to an argument, I find your logic on this subject quite flawed. Even if one were to accept someone else's opinion regarding my stance on audio cables, that I was incorrect in my theories, speculations, or arguments regarding audio cables, this does not automatically mean that all of the other subjects I post on would also be wrong or without merit.
My posts and information on room treatment acoustics are highly regarded from all sides, including the more honest cable naysayers. My posts and information on various other aspects of audio playback projects, such as balanced power, iolation transformers, AC Line Filters, etc., is also highly regarded. My DIY AC Line Filter has been one of the most popular projects used for the purpose it was designed for. It is also very highly regarded, and has NOT ONE word of denigration posted for it.
All in all, my posts and information, have been very well received by the vast overwhelming majority of the folks who have read it, tried it, and then posted positively about it.
The ONLY negative comments one will find on the internet about me are ALL strictly related to audio cable sonics. I think that the most telling part of that, is that of the folks who have actually taken the time and trouble to build one of my DIY audio cable designs, virtually ALL of them have had a positive experience, and posted their thanks and praise of the designs.
The only people likely to state that they think I am peddling BS are the ones who STRICTLY ON THEORY, say that my stance on audio cable sonics is wrong. I note that NO ONE has ever provided the same kind and level of proof that they demand from others, to show that any of my theories or my listening tests are somehown wrong, incorrect or BS. Many claim to hae done so, including mtry, but when pressed to provide that evidence, it is never forthcoming, or a complete red herring is cited as a distraction.
On the other hand, as I said earlier, there are quite a few people that would be quite willing to say that mtrycrafts does not know what he is talking about on any subject audio related.
It is a fact that he has been ignored and dismissed by a great many folks once they find out that he is speaking STRICTLY from theory, and not any personal experiences.
One side comment, relevant to this thread. While digital audio is mostly concerned about the transfer and processing of digital data bits, it is NOT completely immune to problems because of this. Jitter can rear it's head and cause the sound to become less than pure.
I talk about this at:
http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/jitter.html
where I provide over 33 citations to back up what I talk about.
It is NOT just about getting the ones and zeros there intact, it is about the TIMING of doing so, and how clean this is, and how clean it stays.
Jon Risch
