11-05-2020, 01:31 PM
Well after reading through things here and noticing more and more complex approaches to audio reproduction I am still of the opinion on keeping things simple. I note Jeffrey's post "As I keep saying, we don't just listen with our ears " and agree.
As an engineer examining the system I do notice that one thing requires addressing, although has been hinted at throughout: Assessment of the physical and mental capabilities of the user / listener. A simple point would be that all peoples' hearing is different. How can any electronic system be designed for correctness without addressing and assessing these differences individually; Noting here that simple tone controls or even the usual equalizers will not be sufficient. Like with hearing aids individual assessment would really be required. Perhaps still out of reach for commercial companies.
Covering Amie's point about the expensive ECC82. Yes it is probably expensive at £50 but when compared to the latest super mega processing chip, also costing £50, that will be obsolete by September and, although mathematically technically superior, for most listeners is neither here nor there? Sales and peer pressure will win out. Companies will sell all manner of 'latest gadgets' with brief lifetimes knowing full well they can push even harder the next model. 'Audio phools', as they are often termed, are a point to extreme but there are a lot of casual / everyday users who are, in many ways, led on in exactly the same way by the latest technology and it's supposed, and often underutilised in practice, benefits.
I am not suggesting it at all but exemplifying the greater scope of the problem. To each his or her own. For me it's 'simple'. For others it's complex processing etc.
Tracy
As an engineer examining the system I do notice that one thing requires addressing, although has been hinted at throughout: Assessment of the physical and mental capabilities of the user / listener. A simple point would be that all peoples' hearing is different. How can any electronic system be designed for correctness without addressing and assessing these differences individually; Noting here that simple tone controls or even the usual equalizers will not be sufficient. Like with hearing aids individual assessment would really be required. Perhaps still out of reach for commercial companies.
Covering Amie's point about the expensive ECC82. Yes it is probably expensive at £50 but when compared to the latest super mega processing chip, also costing £50, that will be obsolete by September and, although mathematically technically superior, for most listeners is neither here nor there? Sales and peer pressure will win out. Companies will sell all manner of 'latest gadgets' with brief lifetimes knowing full well they can push even harder the next model. 'Audio phools', as they are often termed, are a point to extreme but there are a lot of casual / everyday users who are, in many ways, led on in exactly the same way by the latest technology and it's supposed, and often underutilised in practice, benefits.
I am not suggesting it at all but exemplifying the greater scope of the problem. To each his or her own. For me it's 'simple'. For others it's complex processing etc.
Tracy
