Have you been a lifelong misogynist or has your mother done it to you more recently?Are you a lifelong bachelor or just lucky?
Have you been a lifelong misogynist or has your mother done it to you more recently?Are you a lifelong bachelor or just lucky?
I look forward to Amir's review.Partly agree wtih you. I looks, however, they do not objectively "measure" their final fine tuning, but they do it by ear-brain listening...
Are you a lifelong bachelor or just lucky?
Have you been a lifelong misogynist or has your mother done it to you more recently?
Have you been a lifelong misogynist or has your mother done it to you more recently?
I read their description of musicality to mean accuracy.
Something the subjectivist crowd often brings up. "There are things we cannot measure but the human ear/brain can hear it."
It looks, however, they do not objectively "measure" their final fine tuning, but they do it by subjective ear-brain listening...
He is lying to you. Telling the tale to make the sale.This is an eternal issue for endless discussion, I assume...
Just let me share this again here, which I have once shared in my thread post #316;
I had interesting communication at Watchnerd's thread entitled "Poll: Best Looking Stereo Integrated Amp", and the specific communication on "musicality" started by Doodski's post #851 showing Yamaha's (advertisement) YouTube video clip for the development of their integrated amplifier A-S1100;
In the video clip at 1:09, Mr. Taro Morii, Supervisor HiFi Group, specialist on fine tuning of Yamaha amplifiers, said;
We have developed it (A-S1100) based on the concept from A-S3000. The sound concept is "musicality", or to be more specific, the quality of low frequencies, the straight-forwardness of response, and authenticity of the sound...
really subjective comment, but it looks they are/were actually fine tuning the amplifiers based on this, i.e. what they call "musicality", in the final stage of their development by using their ears and brain.
And I believe no amplifier nor speaker is released to the market without the intensive ear-listening final fine tuning. Then the whole of "audio gears + room + environmets" is our HiFi "music istrument"...
Furthermore, we (you) do not always "like" the audio gear(s) which measured to be the best.
Something the subjectivist crowd often brings up. "There are things we cannot measure but the human ear/brain can hear it."
We retort, an analyzer can hear much better than any human can. Which is the truth. But thinking about the question I did being to wonder... Could it be possible for there to be a form of measurement we have not found yet? Is science completely clear on this point? Or is there possibly another measurement out there be to found. Usually in my experience science is evolving.
Of course, I am not saying that the measurements used are not valid, they have helped me personally assemble some amazing sounding systems. I'm not as well versed in the science of audio as others in this forum. But I was wondering if there is a possibility, that there could be other measurements "underdiscovered". Or at this point are we just increasing our abilities to further analyze (as well as improve the actual technology) in the ways we already know how?
oh for pete's sake! Once in my adult life I saw one woman at a meeting of the Minnesota Audio Society. Never other than that have I seen one woman at a meeting. How many women log onto this site (ASR) more than once? I've seen misogynist groups, and this isn't one of them.Have you been a lifelong misogynist or has your mother done it to you more recently?
Maybe they do fine tuning, then again maybe they do not. This is called marketing.In the video clip at 1:09, Mr. Taro Morii, Supervisor HiFi Group, specialist on fine tuning of Yamaha amplifiers, said;
We have developed it (A-S1100) based on the concept from A-S3000. The sound concept is "musicality", or to be more specific, the quality of low frequencies, the straight-forwardness of response, and authenticity of the sound...
really subjective comment, but it looks they are/were actually fine tuning the amplifiers based on this, i.e. what they call "musicality", in the final stage of their development by using their ears and brain.
And I believe no amplifier nor speaker is released to the market without the intensive ear-listening final fine tuning. Then the whole of "audio gears + room + environmets" is our HiFi "music istrument"...
That is actually a request to prove a negative. The correct question is: what evidence is there of audible phenomena that cannot measured?It could be a ridiculous question for all I know.
Is it the case that every single thing can be measured?
And what area of performance are they "tuning"? If they know what sound property they want to effect they must know how to modify the amps measurable performance to get there. They don't just stand over an amp and wave a magic wand or sprinkel magic dust on it do they? Remember the Stereophile Carver challenge?Partly agree wtih you. It looks, however, they do not objectively "measure" their final fine tuning, but they do it by subjective ear-brain listening...
Something the subjectivist crowd often brings up. "There are things we cannot measure but the human ear/brain can hear it."
Something the subjectivist crowd often brings up. "There are things we cannot measure but the human ear/brain can hear it."
We retort, an analyzer can hear much better than any human can. Which is the truth. But thinking about the question I did being to wonder... Could it be possible for there to be a form of measurement we have not found yet? Is science completely clear on this point? Or is there possibly another measurement out there be to found. Usually in my experience science is evolving.
Of course, I am not saying that the measurements used are not valid, they have helped me personally assemble some amazing sounding systems. I'm not as well versed in the science of audio as others in this forum. But I was wondering if there is a possibility, that there could be other measurements "underdiscovered". Or at this point are we just increasing our abilities to further analyze (as well as improve the actual technology) in the ways we already know how?