Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Against stupidity the very gods themselves contend in vain." Audiophile Example #2
I don't keep up with the "hot" subject in audiophile techno-babble as
much as I used to, but "jitter" was once a biggie. Come on now: were are talking about phenomenon that occurs on a scale of NANOSECONDS (billionths of second). Electricity (and therefore electrical signals) moves at a rate of about 1 foot per nanosecond. From all the graphs that claim to measure this phenomenon it appears that it's not a cumulative thing; and even if it was how many billionths of a second have to add up before you can hear the effect?? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two:
rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Mike Prager North Carolina, USA |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Prager" wrote in message
... Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Mike Prager North Carolina, USA It has gotten ridiculous around here lately, hasn't it? I guess those of us who like and get pleasure from the hobby are supposed to just go away and be quiet and listen to our systems, rather than having anything to say, but...........hey, that's not a bad idea, is it? Maybe some of the "haters" would benefit from doing the same. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
... "Mike Prager" wrote in message ... Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Mike Prager North Carolina, USA It has gotten ridiculous around here lately, hasn't it? I guess those of us who like and get pleasure from the hobby are supposed to just go away and be quiet and listen to our systems, rather than having anything to say, but...........hey, that's not a bad idea, is it? Not good at all. Sooner or later I am going to hear some type of "ugly" from my speakers; you are familiar with everything that is likely to follow, aren't you? A different pleasure part of the hobby will be set in motion. One might even attempt to post a question on rec.audio.high-end. Or if you are either a glutton for punishment, or want to lighten up by getting a few laughs, there is always rec.audio.opinion. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Norman M. Schwartz" wrote in message
... "Harry Lavo" wrote in message ... "Mike Prager" wrote in message ... Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Mike Prager North Carolina, USA It has gotten ridiculous around here lately, hasn't it? I guess those of us who like and get pleasure from the hobby are supposed to just go away and be quiet and listen to our systems, rather than having anything to say, but...........hey, that's not a bad idea, is it? Not good at all. Sooner or later I am going to hear some type of "ugly" from my speakers; you are familiar with everything that is likely to follow, aren't you? A different pleasure part of the hobby will be set in motion. One might even attempt to post a question on rec.audio.high-end. Or if you are either a glutton for punishment, or want to lighten up by getting a few laughs, there is always rec.audio.opinion. That's why I stay away from rec.audio.opinion. I hate nonsense and flaming. Even at the expense of missing an occasional laugh. For my interests, rec.audio.pro, rec.audio.tech, rec.audio.marketplace, and rec.audio.tube serve as good alternatives (although two of these are going through extended flame wars that may cause me to drop them). And Audio Asylum serves well for SACD and DVD-A discussion. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Prager wrote:
Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Why? Because the guy asked how much jitter it takes to be audible, that makes him a hater of high-end audio? Do "high-end lovers" think that question is unimportant or irrelevant? Do you? bob |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Prager wrote:
wrote: Mike Prager wrote: Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Why? Because the guy asked how much jitter it takes to be audible, that makes him a hater of high-end audio? Do "high-end lovers" think that question is unimportant or irrelevant? Do you? Audibility of jitter is a question that has been studied before. That message had no interesting factual content;it was just a diatribe apparently based on some preconceived notion. But it did elicit at least one substantive response. That's sometimes how we move ahead here. Unless I've missed previous posts, that individual has contributed nothing to this group other than telling some enthusiasts they are wrong, wrong, wrong. All I have seen is disdain (or hate) for this hobby, nothing that indicates any love for or pleasure in it. That's right: high-end audio is a HOBBY. People do it for FUN. I am always up for intelligent discussion, but I'd rather have Carrie Nation meet in church with her fellow liquor haters than come into the bar where I'm having a drink. A flawed but revealing analogy. A guy who argues that jitter doesn't matter is not arguing that high-end audio is an evil hobby, or even a dumb one. He's only arguing that jitter doesn't matter. Now why would someone think that "jitter doesn't matter" is a statement of hatred? All right, I'll concede that his tone was disdainful. But there is a difference between being critical of people who believe things that are (or that you believe to be) demonstrably wrong and being critical of people because they choose to pursue a particular hobby. You've taken the first statement to imply the second. I don't want a PETA representative on my fishing trip. That's why I suggested that I'd prefer those whose only purpose here is to pick fights to find another place to vent their spleen. Of course, it's their right to stay here and do nothing but carp, pick fights, argue, and twist other people's words. Usenet is just that kind free. But, those of us who ENJOY the hobby might have more fun if those who HATE it find their own spot. Who knows, they might enjoy it, too! Now Bob, I don't think there are that many whose comment are only, or mainly, that sort of tendentious griping, but it seems there are more and more who can't let a discussion go it's course without picking a fight. Too bad, I think. Well, think of it as partially making up for the voluminous instances on the non-moderated and thought-policed sites where people have asserted that if you can't hear differences between such-and-such either your system or your hearing must be defective. bob |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Prager wrote:
wrote: Mike Prager wrote: Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Why? Because the guy asked how much jitter it takes to be audible, that makes him a hater of high-end audio? Do "high-end lovers" think that question is unimportant or irrelevant? Do you? Audibility of jitter is a question that has been studied before. That message had no interesting factual content; it was just a diatribe apparently based on some preconceived notion. Unless I've missed previous posts, that individual has contributed nothing to this group other than telling some enthusiasts they are wrong, wrong, wrong. All I have seen is disdain (or hate) for this hobby, nothing that indicates any love for or pleasure in it. Personally, I love getting new gear and reading what knowledgable folks have to say about sound and sound reproduction. I don't love the torrent of nonsense I've got to wade through to find high signal/noise discussion, whenever 'high end hobbyists' tend to congregate. That's right: high-end audio is a HOBBY. People do it for FUN. So do butterfly collectors. Yet they manage to adhere to scientific notions about the object of their hobby, with little if any objection. So maybe it's love the hobby, hate the *hobbyists*? -- -S It's not my business to do intelligent work. -- D. Rumsfeld, testifying before the House Armed Services Committee |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ...
Mike Prager wrote: Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Why? Because the guy asked how much jitter it takes to be audible, that makes him a hater of high-end audio? Do "high-end lovers" think that question is unimportant or irrelevant? Do you? It's going to take a lot (whatever the electro-physico explanations). In the early days of CD, when there were only 1 box units available to play discs, golden eared high enders were endorsing 2 boxes; drives and D/A converters to get superior sound. Isn't that where jitter entered the picture? One box delivered better (jitter free) sound. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Norman M. Schwartz" wrote:
wrote in message ... Mike Prager wrote: Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Why? Because the guy asked how much jitter it takes to be audible, that makes him a hater of high-end audio? Do "high-end lovers" think that question is unimportant or irrelevant? Do you? It's going to take a lot (whatever the electro-physico explanations). In the early days of CD, when there were only 1 box units available to play discs, golden eared high enders were endorsing 2 boxes; drives and D/A converters to get superior sound. Isn't that where jitter entered the picture? One box delivered better (jitter free) sound. By basic principles ( lack of need for a clock recovery circuit ) the potential for a 1 box solution to be superior in respect of jitter is indeed true. Just depends how clean your system clock is. Graham |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
... "Norman M. Schwartz" wrote: wrote in message ... Mike Prager wrote: Perhaps it's time for the group to split into two: rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.high-end.haters. Why? Because the guy asked how much jitter it takes to be audible, that makes him a hater of high-end audio? Do "high-end lovers" think that question is unimportant or irrelevant? Do you? It's going to take a lot (whatever the electro-physico explanations). In the early days of CD, when there were only 1 box units available to play discs, golden eared high enders were endorsing 2 boxes; drives and D/A converters to get superior sound. Isn't that where jitter entered the picture? One box delivered better (jitter free) sound. By basic principles ( lack of need for a clock recovery circuit ) the potential for a 1 box solution to be superior in respect of jitter is indeed true. Just depends how clean your system clock is. OK, and my point was/is that the listener who wanted the best and latest equipment for listening to CD was told (by insiders having good and trained ears) to go out and replace their adequate single boxes with two boxes with added jitter. So therefore "jitter" in *practicality* was/is a red herring, and that they didn't hear the deleterious effect of jitter. Do you think anyone can suffer by the presence of jitter today (please no DBTs )? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Jim wrote:
I don't keep up with the "hot" subject in audiophile techno-babble as much as I used to, but "jitter" was once a biggie. Come on now: were are talking about phenomenon that occurs on a scale of NANOSECONDS (billionths of second). Electricity (and therefore electrical signals) moves at a rate of about 1 foot per nanosecond. From all the graphs that claim to measure this phenomenon it appears that it's not a cumulative thing; and even if it was how many billionths of a second have to add up before you can hear the effect?? If the receiving circuitry doesn't have a nice stable phase-locked loop that rejects the input jitter, the timing error is analogous to an error in the amplitude domain. If you're clever at information theory you can indeed prove this fact. SPDIF bit period is around 350 ns @ 44.1kHz samplking rate. So jitter of +/ 1 ns for example would be an error of 1 part in 350, or about -50dB ref full signal. That's a lot of error. Graham |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FA GODS HAND TUBE AMP ART? | Marketplace | |||
S888Wheel awove his incredible stupidity | Audio Opinions | |||
The Stupidity of Bob and Brian | Marketplace | |||
A wonderful example of arroagance and stupidity from RAHE | Audio Opinions | |||
Torresists - Krueger's Fellow Libeler - Exhibits His Stupidity | Audio Opinions |