Some people may also say "the truth hurts". As long as that truth comes in the form of discussion and not name calling nor demeaning inferences, then why would hearing facts be considering as beating up on someone?
My pet peeve is people that come onto forums and post a load of baloney spouting nothing but marketing jargon they read on websites then try to defend it without a shred of real world proof. So many self professed audiophiles fill this category.
I say if you like the sound and hold those beliefs, fine, but if you are going to post around these ideas as being fact (or sell them as many audio salespeople do), you should expect an opposing opinion. Just because someone refutes an idea on the level of scientific proof does not make them individuals with a god complex.
No one likes to be proven wrong, but bitter apples will not change the tide either.
I think prz (Tony) has ideas and Semi had some knowledge. I feel like i personally know alot more about clock jitter now even though Alan had once described it in a prior post (and i don't recall anyone objecting to Alan's opinion at the time). Tony still believes it is an issue, Semi does not.
Can the human ear actually hear a sound freckle that occurs at a nanosecond point?
I certainly do not believe this while others may ask, what is a nanosecond?
So who is right?
Well, perhaps if someone could produce a simple scientific fact, from a paper or a decently published book on how small a time scale human ears can pick out changes then i'm satisfied. I know it is a high standard to hold since these articles must be researched at more than the public library but hey, that is the standard to which i hold my facts. They have to be proven, pure and simple.
In the world of electronics, there is very little that cannot be measured especially in regards to audible and even (human) inaudible sounds.
For one i'm glad that the Axiom forums have been filled with more fact than myth.
