"MZ" wrote in message
...
are. Yet you still cling to the notion that the human auditory system
is
more precise.

No, you cling to mistaken notion that precion has anything to do with this
problem. I suggest you read up on the actual problem, rather than
spouting off
about the precision of measuring equipment.

Why are you changing your tune? You've attempted to refute my point that
the measured distortion is low by claiming that the test equipment is less
accurate than the auditory system. I've therefore addressed that silly
assertion of yours and demonstrated that it's untrue.

No, you said it's more PRECISE. Why are you blathering on and on when you can't
tell the difference between accuracy and precision? Why are you ignoring me
every single time I tell you this? I can tell you're not stupid. But you're
stubborn, and you're dead set on "proving" me wrong, even though you can't find
anything to prove to me that I don't already know. You're on a witch hunt,
hoping to find some audiophile with "mystical assertions." I'm sorry I can't be
that person for you, but maybe they have pay phone services where you can
indulge your fantasies.

In the mean time, if human ears can't tell the difference between live sound and
stereo reproduced sound, then all the testing equipment and precision in the
world is irrelevant. If human ears can (and almost all the time they can), then
again testing equipment is irrelevant. Now if these differences are due to
amplification (which they often are, at least in part), it's because of
distortion of some sort. There are actually many links in the reproduction
process, and distortion is added at every single step. (This distortion can be
cumulative. For example, if we had some reproduction system where every step in
the process reduced the amplitude by .1 dB, then after 10 or so iterations of
this we'd have a noticeable (by the human ear) difference in amplitude.)

Now if the human ear can hear distortion and measuring equipment can't, then
there's something wrong with the measuring equipment, user or technique. So far
I hope I haven't said anything you'd disagree with, even though you're chomping
at the bit to do so. Now, why exactly is it so important for you to believe
that a person can not hear any difference between 2 amps? What cornerstone of
science will crumble to the ground for you if this is so? You agree (now) that
all amplifiers exhibit distortion. What exactly is so hard to swallow when it
can be heard? It happens, and it's measurable (at least in theory) by machines.
If I can hear a difference between 2 amplifiers and it isn't being measured,
then there's a problem with the measurement, not with me. If the measuring
equipment is good enough, then the same problem will show up. What is so hard
to swallow about that?