"Fella" wrote in message
Have a read folks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-end_audio_cables
Has anyone read this thesis in it's entirity? :
On a really empty stomach... ;-)
“A New Methodology for Audio Frequency Power Amplifier
Testing Based on Psychoacoustic Data that Better
Correlates with Sound Quality”
The word new seems to be misappropriated there.
"Daniel Cheever points out a number of flaws in
conventional testing that indicate the ear is extremely sensitive to tiny
signals well above the normally-expected range of human hearing.
He may claim that, but he doesn't prove it. His idea of evidence corresponds
to most well-educated people's idea of unfounded assertions.
The high-order harmonics to which he refers exert an influence on our
perception
of the sound that is vastly disproportionate to their strength, to the
point that research from as far back as 1937 indicates
that high-order harmonics may actually exceed the subjective effect of
their
lower-order cousins."!!!!
That is indeed is common knowlege, and has been long before 1989. He says
that, and it is true. I provide evidence to support this belief at
http://www.pcabx.com/technical/nonlinear/ . Note the date at the bottom of
the page 6 years ago!
So tell us "arns" how is all this wrong and how is all
what u say "right"?
It's not all wrong because part of it is common knowledge. Unfortunately the
paper's BS factor is pretty high.
A few eyars back I turned Cheever's paper over to a well-known audio
authority (PhD, AES papers) who was researching the same topic. I can't
remember his exact words, but as I recall they weren't anything that I'd
quote in public. Let's just say that he was *highly dismissive*. ;-)