On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 19:02:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 17:21:42 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 14:48:30 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 15:25:15 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 12:39:51 -0700, "Joel Koltner"
wrote:

"John Larkin" wrote in message
om...
Yup. The audio people tend to be like that, way out of the mainstream
of rational electronic design. They tend to fiddle with bizarre
circuits until some big-shot's hearing-damaged subjective response is
satisfied. There's a lot of superstitious learning involved. And a lot
of plain BS.

Almost amusingly, the audio industry is full of so much nonsense that there's
a lot of conterfeit merchandise out the You're probably familiar with the
"white van" speakers scam (e.g.,
http://dansdata.blogsome.com/2010/07...-three-queens/)
and there are entire websites devotes to fake headphones
(http://fakeheadphones.com/).

I have to believe that -- besides plain old greed -- one of the reason the
counterfeiters do so well is because so few people can actually hear the
difference between, e.g., $100 headphones and $500 headphones, or $250
speakers and $2500 speakers.

That might be true but I think another thing that might be true is so
many have little to no frame of reference, especially with
'electronic' music (aka rock & roll or any of the others).

To make matters worse, human hearing, and perception in general, is
adaptive so we get 'acclimated' to things.

In the audio world, that's called "burn-in."

John


Do you actually 'work' at being useless or does it just come
naturally?

---
In all fairness, Larkin isn't useless, but his attempts at pretending
to be privy to what he knows nothing about makes it seem so.

---
JF

I've designed a bit of audio, enough to know that the audio biz is
populated mostly by idiots. And enough to know that it doesn't pay
very well.

John