IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!
- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.
- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.
- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
[TOS #2] From: High Playback Sampling Frequencies, From Topic ID: 93518
wakibaki
post Feb 21 2012, 00:01
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (saratoga @ Feb 20 2012, 05:09) *
I don't really agree with this analogy.


If I wanted to say 'an increase in sampling frequency is directly analogous to a decrease in THD' I would have said 'an increase in sampling frequency is directly analogous to a decrease in THD'

The purpose of discourse is communication, not the deliberate evasion or misconstruction of meaning.

I presented an idea which was missing from the discussion.

Please do me the courtesy of focussing on the main thrust of my remarks rather than the trivialities of their presentation and not putting a construction on them contrived only to afford yourself the opportunity to disagree.

w


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Feb 21 2012, 00:16
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 5162
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 20 2012, 18:01) *
QUOTE (saratoga @ Feb 20 2012, 05:09) *
I don't really agree with this analogy.


If I wanted to say 'an increase in sampling frequency is directly analogous to a decrease in THD' I would have said 'an increase in sampling frequency is directly analogous to a decrease in THD'


If you did not think they were analogous then you probably should not have made that analogy.

QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 20 2012, 18:01) *
The purpose of discourse is communication, not the deliberate evasion or misconstruction of meaning.


Deliberate evasion?

QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 20 2012, 18:01) *
Please do me the courtesy of focussing on the main thrust of my remarks rather than the trivialities of their presentation and not putting a construction on them contrived only to afford yourself the opportunity to disagree.


I think that I did above. Am I missing something in particular that you expect of me?

This post has been edited by saratoga: Feb 21 2012, 00:17
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 22 2012, 02:32
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (saratoga @ Feb 20 2012, 23:16) *
I think that I did above. Am I missing something in particular that you expect of me?


Evidently.

w

This post has been edited by wakibaki: Feb 22 2012, 02:32


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tpijag
post Feb 22 2012, 02:33
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 2355
Joined: 19-May 08
Member No.: 53637



Cryptic bullshit. You got something to say, just say it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 22 2012, 02:40
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (tpijag @ Feb 22 2012, 01:33) *
Cryptic bullshit. You got something to say, just say it.


Figger it out fuckwit.

w


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 22 2012, 14:15
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (knutinh @ Feb 22 2012, 06:59) *
192kHz, 384kHz,... they will never stop.


They will never stop if you continue to offer them succour in the form of such pessimistic views.

w


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 22 2012, 22:21
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (Ethan Winer @ Feb 22 2012, 17:42) *
QUOTE (saratoga @ Feb 21 2012, 21:54) *
No matter how big of a number you have people will eventually find a way to bullshit about a bigger one.

Exactly. Some people prefer to believe in magic. They may even be wired that way. They wanted to believe when watching the X Files years ago, and they want to believe in magic today too. Education is our only hope. I've always thought that school kids should be taught logic and consumerism starting in in the first grade. Seriously.

--Ethan


I've tried to point out already that posts like this are counterproductive and to a degree constitute a self-fulfilling prophecy. No matter how dim a view you take of human nature reiterating it in this fashion does absolutely nothing to prevent the situation recurring and smacks of a desire to encourage it in the expectation of being able to turn round at some future point and say 'I told you so'. I really can't be expected to run round whatever fraction of the membership feel like this to turn them all off like dripping taps, so if anybody else is tempted to post in this vein, please try and exercise some self-restraint.

w

This post has been edited by wakibaki: Feb 22 2012, 22:33


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 22 2012, 22:26
Post #8





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10339
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 22 2012, 13:21) *
I've tried to point out already that posts like this are counterproductive and to a degree constitute a self-fulfilling prophecy.

To what degree would that be?

This smacks of magical thinking. wink.gif

This post has been edited by greynol: Feb 22 2012, 22:28


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 22 2012, 22:43
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:26) *
QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 22 2012, 13:21) *
I've tried to point out already that posts like this are counterproductive and to a degree constitute a self-fulfilling prophecy.

To what degree would that be?

This smacks of magical thinking. wink.gif


You really imagine that having a whole load of people running round saying 'I expect people to behave is such-and-such fashion' doesn't influence how people actually behave?

That smacks of burying your head in the sand.

w


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 22 2012, 22:55
Post #10





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10339
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 22 2012, 13:43) *
You really imagine that having a whole load of people

This is analogous to HA how? Do you honestly think the number of people on HA communicating on the topic in precisely the way you think is detrimental constitutes a "whole load of people"?

In case you didn't catch it, I'm looking for numbers and now you've evaded my request for specifics by giving yet more generalities.

FYI, this forum routinely goes out of its way to demonstrate how high resolution provides no audible benefit every bit as much as it makes fun of people who either can't understand it or refuse to understand it.

If we were to tell people that they already have all they could desire with two-channel audio, would you be happy with that or would we then be harming the situation since people like to do the opposite of what they are told?

It seems you just like to argue.

This post has been edited by greynol: Feb 23 2012, 00:14


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 23 2012, 00:04
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
It seems you just like to argue.


Wrong. I like to argue, but I also like to agree

QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
Do you honestly think the number of people on HA communicating on the topic in precisely the way you think is detrimental constitutes a "whole load of people"?


No, but every one whose behaviour I can change is one less remaining of the whole load of people in the world whose behaviour I require to change. Mighty oaks from little acorns grow.

QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
In case you didn't catch it, I'm looking for numbers and now you've evaded my request for specifics by giving yet more generalities.


I haven't evaded your request. Your demand for numbers is impossible to fulfil, but that doesn't invalidate my point. Darwin's theory about evolution of species was not supported numerically when first posited. Perhaps you'd like to suggest on that basis that it is inaccurate?

I didn't see you asking the other posters expressing their views on human nature to qualify their views with numerical support, so I guess you're partisan in this issue and given over to the view that the situation is hopeless, as they are. Or perhaps you just like to argue, and you think you'll get a better argument out of me. biggrin.gif

Please respond to my point. Do you really imagine that having a whole load of people running round saying 'I expect people to behave is such-and-such fashion' doesn't influence how people actually behave?

QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
FYI, this forum routinely goes out of its way to demonstrate how high resolution provides no audible benefit every bit as much as it makes fun of people who either can't understand it or refuse to understand it.


I knew that, and anyway, so what?

QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
If we were to tell people that they already have all they could desire with two-channel audio, would you be happy with that or would we then be harming the situation since people like to do the opposite of what they are told?


This is on the verge of being incoherent.

QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
If we were to tell people that they already have all they could desire with two-channel audio, would you be happy with that


If you were to tell people that they already have all they could desire with two-channel audio I would say that you have an inaccurate view both of people's desires and of the capabilities of multi-channel audio.

QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
would we then be harming the situation?


You certainly wouldn't be doing your credibility any favours.


QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 22 2012, 21:55) *
people like to do the opposite of what they are told


Where are your numbers to support this assertion? Why do you take me to task for a behaviour you feel free to indulge in yourself?

w


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 23 2012, 00:08
Post #12





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10339
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



The last point was to illustrate how you could argue in the other direction seeing that like to argue. That I provide numbers is hardly necessary.

QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 22 2012, 15:04) *
If you were to tell people that they already have all they could desire with two-channel audio I would say that you have an inaccurate view both of people's desires and of the capabilities of multi-channel audio.

We're doing just fine informing people that sample rates of 192 are unnecessary, TYVM.

Anyway, thanks for your insightful view into human nature. May it stand along side the work of Darwin.

My personal belief (and I make no apologies in presenting it and would be honored to be credited in its fulfillment) is that the audiophile rags and their faith-based minions aren't going to stop pushing for more once they've reached some arbitrary threshold.

This post has been edited by greynol: Feb 23 2012, 00:39


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Feb 23 2012, 00:36
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 5162
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 22 2012, 18:04) *
Darwin's theory about evolution of species was not supported numerically when first posited. Perhaps you'd like to suggest on that basis that it is inaccurate?


I don't agree with that. Darwin spent many, many years developing a large body of quantitative evidence for his theory of evolution prior to positing it. He realized that his ideas were radical and might not be seriously considered unless accompanies by overwhelming evidence, and so he spent 15 years gathering evidence and refining his conclusions before publishing his work. Indeed, it was his detailed work classifying the minute differences between large numbers of barnacles that demonstrated conclusively to him that natural population variation (an essential aspect of evolution) was ubiquitous.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 23 2012, 01:48
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



You want an argument with numbers in it?

Every person sitting over a keyboard dripping on about how 'nothing's ever going to change' is one (1) more person not getting down and putting their shoulder to the wheel in the conviction that things are going to change.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

w


--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 23 2012, 01:54
Post #15





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10339
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



How wonderful for things to be so black and white. I often wonder how I would feel about the subject if I hadn't reviewed countless hundreds of posts by people who argue in favor of increased resolution.


--------------------
Your eyes cannot hear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wakibaki
post Feb 23 2012, 02:20
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 23-July 11
Member No.: 92474



QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 23 2012, 00:54) *
How wonderful for things to be so black and white. I often wonder how I would feel about the subject if I hadn't reviewed countless hundreds of posts by people who argue in favor of increased resolution.


Is that all you have to say?

w



--------------------
wakibaki.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Feb 23 2012, 03:02
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 5162
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (wakibaki @ Feb 22 2012, 19:48) *
You want an argument with numbers in it?

Every person sitting over a keyboard dripping on about how 'nothing's ever going to change' is one (1) more person not getting down and putting their shoulder to the wheel in the conviction that things are going to change.


Logically speaking, I don't see how arguing that someone isn't helping proves that they could be helping. Its entirely possible (and indeed quite likely) that no one here has the ability to prevent companies from profitably preying on the ignorant regardless.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th December 2014 - 20:28