![]() It is nevertheless possible to have a product that measures well but doesn’t sound so good. From an interview in the Ultimate Audio magazine, famed amplifier designer Nelson Pass: But an attempt to synchronize every listening impression to a chart is a fools’ game. I still think that measurements is needed for design purposes. Science simply is inadequate to make an complete account of everything people observe in nature. For instance, why does Quantum mechanics radically depart from the laws of classical mechanics? Or the classic question “Where does the force of gravity comes from”? We can observe the effects of gravity, but nobody has been able to explain the source of that force. If you take a look at other fields involving the human senses, you would see that the human sense is far superior than any of the currently available machinery when it comes to observing the physical world. In fact, if you really take a deep study in science, you will find that science in itself has difficulties in coming up with a solution for many of its questions. ![]() The tools we have, at least for now, are far inadequate when it comes to capturing the full reality observed in the physical world. It’s like trying to measure the volume of the ocean with a ruler. They may be good in dealing with numbers and voltages, but the physical world require a far richer set of parameters to describe. The reason that we never go entirely with measurements is that we, as listeners, know that machines are severely limited when it comes to capturing the entire gamut of sound. How can we do that? Who can show us proof that the entire gamut of information captured by the human ear can be translated into numbers? Much of the demands have been put on us as reviewers to give proofs, often in the form of numbers and measurements, if what we are describing as “good sound” indeed is a real thing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |