<<I like what you do with the exception that you depend too much on
your hearing to make fine distinctions. Since what we hear is too
influenced by our attitudes, our minds transform the sound to fit
what we think about equipment for instance, it's really very hard to
know what your hearing brought you. That makes your detailed
statements hard or impossible to confirm by repeating the experiment.
And that's the basics of science, what we find must be repeatable by
others. >>
This is fascinatingly at odds with the predominant precepts at play
in the field I come from; that of acoustic music recording. Certain
equipment designers & engineers are excoriated for paying too much
attention to specs & not listening. I've never heard the idea stated
before that depending on our listening constitutes a fallacy in the
pursuit of audio quality.
<<Be aware I don't take folks statements without trying to repeat the
experiment to verify. I'm a scientist, it's built into my nature.>>
There are those who feel audio recording is more about art than
science. I guess it depends on the end use of the recording.
Scott Fraser
|