Before I started audio, I was an electronic geekazoid going back 30 years.
These two hobbies complement each other well. I understand electronics,
learned audio then I learned over time about human perception of audio.
This is a hobby, not a career path like others choose.
Earl Geddes is an audio guru as he makes a living doing this.
http://www.gedlee.com/
From time to time I follow some of his debates and he also believes that audio electroncs has come along way, much like I do. One doesn't need to spend
big bucks on expensive sources to get great sound. He uses a $200 or less
source to audition his high end uber speakers.
I bought a 'jack of all formats' DVD player for $126 shipped. I see no need to
spend $500, $1000, $5000 on an expensive player because humans don't
have the ability to hear any improvment, if any, that high end sources offer.
Some things that you measure or see on electronics instruments {scopes}
are just not audible, the human ear doesn't have the resolution to hear it,
akin to claiming your ***** eye can see the edge of the universe.
Another example is the Behringer digital crossover because I've been doing auditions with it recently. For the past year on the DIY electronics forum {DIYA},
the geeks think they hear bad stuff from this device unless they operate it under
a certain condition. Many are doing mods, gutting the unit to improve it. They all
hear improvements but very few do a blind test. Of those that do a decent blind
test, they can't tell a difference. Only the voodoo folks hear differences because
it's all in their head. I've done so many configurations with this digital crossover to
make it sound bad I can't do it.
It's easy to fall prey to improved SQ when something was changed, but
many times the auditioner is fooled.
If I build something that involves audio and electronics, I too spec the better parts like polyproylene caps in the signal path, better quality op-amps, etc,
but this is just normal human behavior to want the best parts in spite
that I can't prove that it will sound better.
These two hobbies complement each other well. I understand electronics,
learned audio then I learned over time about human perception of audio.
This is a hobby, not a career path like others choose.
Earl Geddes is an audio guru as he makes a living doing this.
http://www.gedlee.com/
From time to time I follow some of his debates and he also believes that audio electroncs has come along way, much like I do. One doesn't need to spend
big bucks on expensive sources to get great sound. He uses a $200 or less
source to audition his high end uber speakers.
I bought a 'jack of all formats' DVD player for $126 shipped. I see no need to
spend $500, $1000, $5000 on an expensive player because humans don't
have the ability to hear any improvment, if any, that high end sources offer.
Some things that you measure or see on electronics instruments {scopes}
are just not audible, the human ear doesn't have the resolution to hear it,
akin to claiming your ***** eye can see the edge of the universe.
Another example is the Behringer digital crossover because I've been doing auditions with it recently. For the past year on the DIY electronics forum {DIYA},
the geeks think they hear bad stuff from this device unless they operate it under
a certain condition. Many are doing mods, gutting the unit to improve it. They all
hear improvements but very few do a blind test. Of those that do a decent blind
test, they can't tell a difference. Only the voodoo folks hear differences because
it's all in their head. I've done so many configurations with this digital crossover to
make it sound bad I can't do it.
It's easy to fall prey to improved SQ when something was changed, but
many times the auditioner is fooled.
If I build something that involves audio and electronics, I too spec the better parts like polyproylene caps in the signal path, better quality op-amps, etc,
but this is just normal human behavior to want the best parts in spite
that I can't prove that it will sound better.
