On 4 Apr 2005 23:58:00 GMT, "Michael Mossey"
wrote:

The whole point of audio is to duplicate a conscious experience.

Some would say that it is to reproduce the original sound. You are
attempting to overcomplicate what it a simple goal - if difficult to
realise.

You accuse others of 'reductionism', I accuse you of sophistry.

Example: intermodulation distortion interferes with the conscious
experience of music more than harmonic distortion. So an amplifier
that has a tiny amount of intermodulation distortion and NO harmonic
distortion, is less accurate than an amplier that has a lot of harmonic
distortion and no IM distortion. The amplifier with less distortion in
terms of numbers is arguably LESS accurate. This shows the danger of
separating the conscious effect of distortion from the measurement of
distortion.

You claim to have graduated from Caltech, majoring in Engineering, and
you believe that such amplifiers are possible? Hmmmm

Besides, all you argument above shows, is that THD is not the best
indicator of audible distortion. We knew that already.

Now, if I want to assert that digital is less accurate than analog, of
course I eventually have to provide evidence that a measureable form of
distortion exists. Digital has measureable distortion

Does it? What distortion is that?

--the question is
whether it is audible. I know it's not a question for you, but it is
still an open question for me.

I fear that your life will be full of 'open questions' if you persist
in ignoring evidence. Life is short, questions are many.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering