It's quite humorous that "skeptics" constantly whine for explanations for audio devices, or dismiss them out of hand, yet are never able to figure them out for themselves. Looks like the whining will continue. Oh, sweet mystery of life, eh, punkinhead?

How Stuff Works

Quote:

Quote:
Do you believe that the subjective impression of tempo is inalterable by audio equipment?

Yes!

Other than "equipment" that adds reverb or echo, as used by mixing engineers. Even then, the basic tempo never changes.

--Ethan

Then you are mistaken. One can alter the *sense* of tempo many different ways without altering the actual tempo. Funny that you would mention a classic example. Slap echo in a room will have a huge impact. So will slow bass (please lets not get into a debate about slow bass, if you don't understand that it is a figurative description of a type of bass distortion that is not meant to be taken any more literally than calling the sound "bright" then move on. But the word itself should be a hint as to how that particular flavor of distortion affects the sense of tempo). Actually any number of distortions can affect it. Just changing the spectral balance can subtly change that impression of tempo. And we havn't even talked about turntables. They certainly can affect the sense of tempo by affecting the actual tempo.

Quote:
"It is an attitude you project in regards to subjectivists in general."

I still don't get it. I'm an audiophile too! I listen to music - and also record professionally and play several instruments - so I go by my ears all the time. If anything, the arrogance comes mostly from the other side. As in "I don't need no stinkin' science to tell me what I know I hear." In fact, those people do need science. If you change an AC power cord and hear an improvement, science can explain why. And it's not because the AC power cord changed the sound.

You do seem to get it pretty well actually. You just about nailed the source of confrontation. Audiophiles actually do not need science to enjoy their hobby. if you wish to have them consider it then telling them they are wrong about their current methods of enjoyment and that they *need* science to be better audiophiles is simply not going to go over very well. That is unfortunate because if your ideas were presented in a less conforntational manner without the implied arrogance of "you're dumb I'm smart, you are doing audio worng I do it right and I'm gonna fix you as an audiophile and as a thinker" you might get a lot more audiophiles thinking about room acoustics. But that attitude creates an instantanious atmosphere of the same old confrontational situations that have plagued audio for years. Then any chance of meaningful communication and learning is shut off immediately and completely.

Quote:
"I think you would do yourself a bit of a favor to pull it back at times when addressing beliefs with which you disagree."

Well let's discuss this some more. There's a difference between belief and knowledge.

See, you are already off on the wrong foot. The next thing to come is you have knowledge , they have belief and your knowledge can beat up their belief. You headed straight to the same old destructive patterns. i could see that without reading what you say next. Let's see if i was right.

Quote:

To me, a belief is an unfounded opinion that may or may not be true. Versus knowledge, which can be explained satisfactorily using logic and evidence. When it comes to AC power cords and Ted's magic bowls, I can explain in excruciating detail why neither can change the sound arriving at your ears.

I feel like a psychic. Did I nail it or did I nail it. Of course I did. One doesn't need to be a psychic to see this same old tired useless debate rplay itself. "My superior knowledge can beat up your beliefs." Problem is that the subjectivists' experience that leads to many of those beliefs has already been confirmed and has established a certain confidence that you are wrong and they are right. Then that confrontation becomes all inclusive and your very valuable ideas on room acoustics are tossed out. Most unfortunate

Quote:
But what do the believers have?

You might be surprised. Many of them (us) have great sounding systems that we thouroughly enjoy.

Quote:

All I've ever seen is "I'm sure I heard the change, you have to believe me," followed by angry insults when I reply with logic and evidence.

You might see much more if you find a way to step back.

Quote:

If I'm wrong Scott, please show me how and why I'm wrong.

--Ethan

Hopefully this post helped

Keep it real. The teleportation tweak does not take up space.

Quote:
One can alter the *sense* of tempo many different ways without altering the actual tempo. Funny that you would mention a classic example. Slap echo in a room will have a huge impact. So will slow bass

But those are both room acoustics issues! When I see references to PRaT it's always as regards electronic gear and wires.

Quote:
(please lets not get into a debate about slow bass, if you don't understand that it is a figurative description of a type of bass distortion

I think you need to get your terms clear. Distortion is generally the result of nonlinearity. As in added harmonics or IM components. Sometimes distortion is used to describe linear changes, such as phase shift and frequency response. But modal ringing (rooms) and group delay (crossovers) are perfectly good terms that are more descriptive and accurate than slow bass or bass distortion.

Quote:
Just changing the spectral balance can subtly change that impression of tempo.

Evidence please!

Quote:
And we havn't even talked about turntables. They certainly can affect the sense of tempo by affecting the actual tempo.

Well, sure. But that's not caused by a preamp or speaker wire either.

--Ethan

Quote:
Audiophiles actually do not need science to enjoy their hobby.

Of course, but that's beside the point. I never talk about enjoyment. All I address is what can or cannot make an audible change to the sound. So you not only did not nail it, you totally missed the point. Can you find one post by me where I said anything about enjoyment?

The confrontation comes when someone says they put their speaker cables on elevators and it made a huge change to the sound. No, it didn't make any change to the sound. They only think it did. This is the truth of the situation! And I will not lie about audio fact to appease anyone.

Now, you could argue that propellerheads like me should shut up and let people enjoy their silly tweaks, even if they're deluded that the sound got better. That's fine and I agree! I see dozens of posts about magic fuses etc every day at the Audio Asylum, and I gladly leave them alone.

The reason people like me pipe up in forums is when someone asks honestly if a particular tweak or product really works as claimed. I see those posts every day too in forums. At that point it's no longer a matter of letting the misguided enjoy their systems their way. Now it's consumerism, and advising someone who genuinely wants to know the truth and has asked the public for opinions. And that's when nerds like me butt heads with believers.

The only other time I pipe up is when I see outright fraud, as is the case currently.

--Ethan

"Keep it real. The teleportation tweak does not take up space."

That's an excellent point. The New Intelligent Chip, by comparison, takes up infinitely more space, about 3,000 atoms.

Blah blah blah blah, I noticed that you didn't even bother explaining how pace and rythm could change

I thought you said you were the one who came here to educate all of us, El Ignoramuso? If you start off not even knowing the difference between the musical performance and the reproduction of that performance, then I suggest you entertain yourself reading Kait's nursery book excerpt. For that's about more at your comprehension level. If you're still asking this question after you've gotten through with that, then take out your Mickey Mouse record player, and next take out your little wee-wee, and plonk it on the record. Now that tiny mass is not in itself going to be enough to slow the speed down any, but it might throw the pitch off by half a point. So if you have good ears and listen very carefully, you should be able to hear a change in the pace and rhythm, despite the fixed nature of what was recorded on the record.

nor what air is yourself.

Air is the precious resource on this planet that is being wasted on you.

Just who are these " professional audio engineers with over 40 years experience in the business, who are trying to educate me about audio terms"?

Wow. It appears that -you- don't even know what you're doing here. Let me put that in the form of a question, and we'll see if you can get it:

Q. "Which one of us here is most likely to toss you out on your sockpuppet ass, you silly shilling troll?".

Tic. toc. tic. toc. tic. toc.

"basic audio nomenclature"? You mean made up terms for the subjective audiophile when they can't resort to real terms.

Good gosh, what turnip truck did you just fall off of? Audio is subjective by nature, Cretinus Maximus. Hence there are subjective terms to describe observations, as there are objective ones. They're both "real" and have their uses. But then, you're a sockpuppet troll commissioned by Ethan and have no use to anyone here except him. So I can understand why you have a problem with understanding "real".

The rest of your post was just more whining and not worth replying to.

No Socky, this is just you trying to run away from the question that I and John asked you. Don't respond to me unless you answer it: As JA himself has asked you, why are you here? If your intent is an inherently hostile one, with the aim of causing disruption to our community, or pursue an agenda against a particular industry member, or all members, then your time here will be short.

Quote:

Quote:
One can alter the *sense* of tempo many different ways without altering the actual tempo. Funny that you would mention a classic example. Slap echo in a room will have a huge impact. So will slow bass

But those are both room acoustics issues! When I see references to PRaT it's always as regards electronic gear and wires.

Quote:
(please lets not get into a debate about slow bass, if you don't understand that it is a figurative description of a type of bass distortion

I think you need to get your terms clear. Distortion is generally the result of nonlinearity. As in added harmonics or IM components. Sometimes distortion is used to describe linear changes, such as phase shift and frequency response. But modal ringing (rooms) and group delay (crossovers) are perfectly good terms that are more descriptive and accurate than slow bass or bass distortion.

Quote:
Just changing the spectral balance can subtly change that impression of tempo.

Evidence please!

Quote:
And we havn't even talked about turntables. They certainly can affect the sense of tempo by affecting the actual tempo.

Well, sure. But that's not caused by a preamp or speaker wire either.

--Ethan

let's get back to the original exchange.

AS "Do you believe that the subjective impression of tempo is inalterable by audio equipment?"

Ethan "Yes!"

It does seem that despite the semantic argument that you are acknowledging that speakers can and will do this and you are also acknowledging that TTs do it too. As for electronics, you want proof that spectral balance will alter the sense of tempo. Do a test. Do a blind A/B comparison with a skew in the spectral balance and ask the testees if they heard any difference in the sense of tempo. I think you will find with some consistancy a change in that sense of tempo with a rise in the extreme highs or a rise in the mid bass or a rise in the presence range. try it and see if I am right.
At any rate it is clear that the equipment can alter the sense of tempo with playback.

Quote:
It does seem that dispite the semantic argument that you are acknowledging that speakers can and will do this

No, speakers cannot change tempo. Bass notes can swell over time in a bad room. But none of this is what PRaT proponents are talking about. And if bass notes do swell over time, that's an offset, not a change in tempo. And it's a room acoustics issue anyway, not inside the gear.

Quote:
you want proof that spectral balance will alter the sense of tempo. Do a test. Do a blind A/B comparison with a skew in the spectral balance and ask the testees ...

No, you made the claim, you provide the proof. Put up a couple of clips where only one is EQ'd and when played the music seems to have a different tempo. If you can't do that, then perhaps you need to rethink your position.

Quote:
it is clear that the equipment can alter the sense of tempo with playback.

If you insist.

--Ethan

Quote:

Quote:
It does seem that dispite the semantic argument that you are acknowledging that speakers can and will do this

No, speakers cannot change tempo. Bass notes can swell over time in a bad room. But none of this is what PRaT proponents are talking about. And if bass notes do swell over time, that's an offset, not a change in tempo. And it's a room acoustics issue anyway, not inside the gear.

Quote:
you want proof that spectral balance will alter the sense of tempo. Do a test. Do a blind A/B comparison with a skew in the spectral balance and ask the testees ...

No, you made the claim, you provide the proof. Put up a couple of clips where only one is EQ'd and when played the music seems to have a different tempo. If you can't do that, then perhaps you need to rethink your position.

Quote:
it is clear that the equipment can alter the sense of tempo with playback.

If you insist.

--Ethan

Ethan, seriously, did I ever say that speakers can change the tempo? You do understand the difference between actual tempo and *sense* of tempo do you not? All kinds of different things affect that.

Is it really too difficult to do the experiment that I suggested? Do you really need me to do the EQ for you? hey it's up to you. You can choose to give it a try or not. You have to do the blind comparison if you want personal varification. The idea that you need me to do the EQ seems a bit petty actually.

Quote:
Blah blah blah blah, I noticed that you didn't even bother explaining how pace and rythm could change

I thought you said you were the one who came here to educate all of us, El Ignoramuso? If you start off not even knowing the difference between the musical performance and the reproduction of that performance, then I suggest you entertain yourself reading Kait's nursery book excerpt. For that's about more at your comprehension level. If you're still asking this question after you've gotten through with that, then take out your Mickey Mouse record player, and next take out your little wee-wee, and plonk it on the record. Now that tiny mass is not in itself going to be enough to slow the speed down any, but it might throw the pitch off by half a point. So if you have good ears and listen very carefully, you should be able to hear a change in the pace and rhythm, despite the fixed nature of what was recorded on the record.

nor what air is yourself.

Air is the precious resource on this planet that is being wasted on you.

Just who are these " professional audio engineers with over 40 years experience in the business, who are trying to educate me about audio terms"?

Wow. It appears that -you- don't even know what you're doing here. Let me put that in the form of a question, and we'll see if you can get it:

Q. "Which one of us here is most likely to toss you out on your sockpuppet ass, you silly shilling troll?".

Tic. toc. tic. toc. tic. toc.

"basic audio nomenclature"? You mean made up terms for the subjective audiophile when they can't resort to real terms.

Good gosh, what turnip truck did you just fall off of? Audio is subjective by nature, Cretinus Maximus. Hence there are subjective terms to describe observations, as there are objective ones. They're both "real" and have their uses. But then, you're a sockpuppet troll commissioned by Ethan and have no use to anyone here except him. So I can understand why you have a problem with understanding "real".

The rest of your post was just more whining and not worth replying to.

No Socky, this is just you trying to run away from the question that I and John asked you. Don't respond to me unless you answer it: As JA himself has asked you, why are you here? If your intent is an inherently hostile one, with the aim of causing disruption to our community, or pursue an agenda against a particular industry member, or all members, then your time here will be short.

This will be my last post to you directly Frog Face since all you can do is spew vile and insults with not an ounce of information.
I notice you STILL won't define the terms "rythm and pace" other than to use an outdated example of the weight and mass of a phono stylus placing so much drag upon the record that it slows it down which is laughable in itself since any well made turntable should be able to keep it's speed the same correct? Oh I suppose if I had placed MY "wee wee" on it then it WOULD come to a complete stop unlike placing your miniscule organ on it which would result in no change at all
No comment on "air" either, figures since you avoided the first two terms also
I would think anyone who wants to toss me out already would have. Don't think that you are immune yourself little croaker.If anyone is abusing the forums it would be you and you're continuous shilling and name calling and going off topic.
And as usual you resort to more blah blah blah.....

So YOU are threatening ME saying my time here will be short? Are YOU the one that decides who comes and goes? lol If so I would think that Ethan would have been booted a year ago correct?
My REASON for being here is discussing Ted's promised measurements and the result of the third party's test results. What are YOUR reasons for being here other than to be a pain in the ass and run your mouth blah blah blah 24/7?

I think your reason for being here is shown in the following , just to cause trouble......

My REASON for being here is discussing Ted's promised measurements and the result of the third party's test results. "Discuss"?? Did you say "discuss"? You seem to be unable to understand that your posting history is available and open to all. And it says that all you've done in your 39 posts is attack Synergistix, and anyone that got in your way of attacking Synergistix. That's it. It's your entire raison d'etre. If you think your agenda against one of our industry members isn't bleeding obvious, then you're stupider than you even look. Besides spewing your vile hatred at Ted, you have the same vile hatred towards all audiophile members here, and as JA noted, you don't even hide your anti-audiophile agenda. That makes you a hostile agent. No different than a born-again Christian invading an atheist discussion forum, so you can preach the word of Jesus Christ and save people from going to hell. You came along at the same time as Joamonte, your sockpuppet-mate, to join Ethan in attacking Ted D. You battled it out in the first S-Art thread, then moved to the 2nd one. Then when Ted opened this thread to post evidence as positive reviews of his product, you were tripping all over yourself to be the first one to respond here with no less than 3 attacks. You've continued this pattern since.

I have proven recently that your sockpuppet-mate "Joamonte" who followed the exact same pattern as you, was a shill with ties to Ethan Winer, and is a manufacturer of acoustic treatment products. You hung out on the same acoustics forums as Ethan, and you admit to having technical background in acoustics and REW, which is highly specialized knowledge in the audio community. But of course neither of you says two words to Ethan in ALL of your posts, pretending you don't know him. Right. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink. So I'm sorry if I don't show you the respect you think you deserve as a troll (and by God not a very smart one), who came here with a hidden agenda to defame the reputation of one of our industry members. If it helps you feel better, I wasn't much more welcoming of the first wave of Ethan's previous sockpuppets, when he had a hankering to falsely accuse another company that advertises in Stereophile of "fraud", and felt he need to bring in plants to prop up his attack campaign.

This will be my last post to you directly Frog Face since all you can do is spew vile and insults with not an ounce of information. That's funny coming from a trolling sockpuppet, for four reasons. One, the irony of you whining about me insulting you, while calling me "Frog Face". Two, the irony of me being about the only person who bothers to respond to your trolling garbage. And even I often don't. And three, you don't "spew vile". Learn to speak English, if you're going to try to insult someone in the language. Four, I have heard that one before from everyone from Joamonte to Ethan Winer. And as much as I would wish, it's never happened yet. For example, why do you say you won't respond "directly"? Is this to give you an "out", because you know you don't enough willpower to simply avoid me completely? Neither does the guy who pulls your strings, so I would expect as much from you. But I'll give you the chance to put some conviction behind your words. We'll make it interesting! You shell out $10 bucks for every reply you make to me, $5 for every time you mention me. If the hypocritical words you spew are as worthless as your boss Ethan's, then I'll have made a million by the end of the month. So start by shutting up, and not responding to this post. Stay shutted up about me, until such time as you get bored with the other threads on the forum and leave, or get booted. Here is your chance, for once, to prove me wrong about you!

Quote:
This is a great point. I never want to alienate anyone, not even people who would never ever be a customer. I'm not here to piss off anyone. And if you read my posts you'll see the only time I get angry is when others attack me first. Look at the posts from Frog-boy and a few others, then compare the tone they use against me, and constant accusations, to the tone I use when explaining my view of audio science. Do you see me get angry or be insulting to anyone other than those few trouble-makers who insult me first?

Yes Ethan. Yes, you are very much insulting, without provocation. If it's not obvious enough, you just proved your own lie by calling me insulting names like "Frog-Boy", when I did not even involve myself in your convo with Scott! Yes you are here to piss people off, as you're doing in this very post, and as we all saw at the top of the Synergistics thread, with your angry, insulting,and false cries of "fraud" etc., against a member who did nothing to you. And if that's not enough, you know you're being deceitful again, because I already proved how you insult people as a matter of course, when you disagree over their personal preferences or opinions. As in the below. What makes this example so true, is that unlike here, the board in question is made up of pro-objective audio enthusiasts, who are all very civil toward each other regularly....

The following exchange shows Ethan falsely accusing a fellow member of having a commercial agenda on behalf of a competitor of his (sE). Which is exactly the same false accusation Ethan has been making against me both very recently, and since the very first day I signed on! Ethan is also claiming this member is attacking him. On what basis is Ethan accusing the member of attacking him? Well get this! Ethan is accusing the member "badboymusic" of attacking him, simply because Badboy recommended to someone else, that they try an acoustic treatment product he thinks works well. Except it's not one of Ethan's "RealTraps", and he thinks it might be better than the one Ethan was trying to push in that thread. Because Badboymusic was recommending a competitive product, Ethan called this "throwing stones" at him. It just gets more paranoid and insulting from there, folks!

badboymusic: "The SE Reflexion Filter I have sounds much nicer IMO. edit: James, You should ask them to send you one to do a sound comparison"

Ethan Winer: "As long as you're here to throw stones on behalf of sE"

badboymusic: "People offer their opinions on this site about products all the time."

(The King of Self-Contradiction wrote):

Ethan Winer: "Yes, but usually they have the intelligence and decency to comment only on products they've actually tried."

badboymusic: "So you insult my intelligence and claim to know what products I have tried. Ethan Winer, since you are the owner of the company Real Traps. Are you not concerned in the slightest that your constant bullying of others will make people not want to purchase your products? At the very least I would think you would stop it, if for no other reason than how it could hurt your business. You don't see anyone from the company SE insulting the people who preferred the PVB."

The Listener: "Just because of Mr.Winers forum (re)presentation I became biased (meaning: I won't buy any) towards Real Traps products, too. But that doesn't have to mean anything for others and it doesn't represent the only reality. Just our opinions about his "wiseguy" attitude. It's just personal ethics."

Ethan Winer: "If you read this thread from the top you'll see I didn't start it, or say anything bad about the sE RF. The immature teenager started that by throwing stones at me. Please address your complaints about childishness to him."

badboymusic: "If you are addressing that to me, could you please point out the part where I'm acting like an immature teenager in any previous posts in this thread?, or how stating that I prefer the SE product is throwing stones at you? I have not said anything inappropriate once in this thread or been insulting. You cannot say the same."

Badboy of course was right. When asked to support his lying claims about Badboy being the first to thrown stones, Ethan did what Ethan always does: avoided having to take responsibility for his false claims. Anyone can look at the top of that thread and see that Badboy did not begin the insults, Ethan did. After lying about Badboy being the first to insult him, Ethan then launched the following insulting attack on Badboy. It came from Ethan Googling the internet for any dirt he could find on Badboy. He found his MySpace page, which had some clips of him playing guitar. Ethan then attempted to bring Badboy's reputation on audio acoustics into disrepute, by arguing that because he plays bad guitar, his opinions on audio should be completely disregarded as incompetent. (WTF??!). And this is notwithstanding the -fact- that Badboy had already written a disclaimer on his MySpace page, stating that his guitar playing was bad, and the clips were just a test he put up of a guitar amp for a friend! And notwithstanding the fact that Badboy still recommended people go to Ethan's site to learn about traps, after he was insulted by Ethan!

Yes folks, this -is- who Ethan Winer is. The pettiest and meanest man in show business.

Ethan Winer: "Folks, this guy claims to be experienced enough to comment knowledgeably and expect his opinions to be taken seriously. But check out the music clips on his MySpace page: badboymusic on MySpace Yeah badboy, you're a real effin' pro all right.

Finally, Badboymusic allows himself to share what he had learned about a very specific set of comparison product test videos Ethan "had" on his site. Which is that Ethan rigged the tests, to produce a better performance

Badboymusic: Since you were so rude and went out of your way to insult me and by berating a link to what turned out to have little to do with me, but more about my amp. (which I think sounds beautiful) I thought I'd point out a few things about your "Hard Data"...

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/printthread.php?Board=rants&main=77164&type=post

Quote:
Ethan, seriously, did I ever say that speakers can change the tempo?

That's what I thought you were saying when you wrote, "you are acknowledging that speakers can and will do this."

Quote:
You do understand the difference between actual tempo and *sense* of tempo do you not?

Sure, one is real and the other is imagined. I deal with reality.

Quote:
Is it really too difficult to do the experiment that I suggested? Do you really need me to do the EQ for you?

Yes, you made the claim. Now back it up. Why should I spend time trying to duplicate what you feel could make your point? What EQ would I use? What frequency, Q, and how much boost? Or is it cut? Further, speaker cables and properly operating preamps etc do not change the frequency response. So when a reviewer or audiophile claims some new wire or preamp affected "pace," I know it's in their imagination.

Scott, understand that I do this stuff all the time. I have never noticed EQ affecting the tempo of music. Maybe I missed the magic settings? Whatever, you show me an example, and I'll tell you if the tempos seem different. Pretty simple, yes?

--Ethan

Quote:
This will be my last post to you directly Frog Face since all you can do is spew vile and insults with not an ounce of information.

I don't understand why every sane forumite doesn't do the same. If you ignore trolls they eventually go away. Of course, Frog is so full of himself he might not notice for a while that nobody is paying attention to him.

--Ethan

Quote:
I have never noticed EQ affecting the tempo of music. Maybe I missed the magic settings?

Try some compression, Ethan. Or try using an MP3 codec set to 128kbps. Or adding random noise. The sense of musical pace can be affected both positively and negatively. And read Martin Colloms' and Peter van Willenswaard's comments (engineers both) at http://www.stereophile.com/reference/23/ .

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Quote:
Try some compression, Ethan. Or try using an MP3 codec set to 128kbps. Or adding random noise. The sense of musical pace can be affected both positively and negatively.

Yes, compressors have time constants, so with some settings they can add a new "tempo" on top of the tempo of the music. And I already mentioned crossover group delay and room ringing which affects the rise time of bass notes as well as the decay time. But none of that has anything to do with changing cables or consumer gear. Versus side-effects from audio tools used by professional mix engineers. I'm pretty sure I made that point at least three times so far in this thread!

--Ethan

Quote:
"Ethan, seriously, did I ever say that speakers can change the tempo?"

That's what I thought you were saying when you wrote, "you are acknowledging that speakers can and will do this."

Instead of guessing you can actually refer to that which I was directly refering to. That being the "subjective impression of tempo."

Quote:
"You do understand the difference between actual tempo and *sense* of tempo do you not?"

Sure, one is real and the other is imagined. I deal with reality.

Oh c'mon. You said "I'm an audiophile too! I listen to music - and also record professionally and play several instruments - so I go by my ears all the time." So are telling us that when you "listen to music" and "go by your ears" you do not form any subjective impressions? One of which would be your subjective impression of tempo?

Quote:
"Is it really too difficult to do the experiment that I suggested? Do you really need me to do the EQ for you?"

Yes, you made the claim. Now back it up.

I already have backed it up. I have done comparisons many times under blind conditions in which the subjective impression of tempo has been altered without there being an actual change in tempo? Satisfied?

Quote:

Why should I spend time trying to duplicate what you feel could make your point?

Apparently you are skeptical of the claim. It is extremely simple to test. i have already done it. If you aren't going to take my word for it where does that leave us? I think it leaves us with you doing your own personal varification of what I have reported. That is up to you.

Quote:

What EQ would I use?

What do you have that is easy to use?

Quote:
What frequency, Q, and how much boost? Or is it cut?

For giggles try a 3 db, a 6 db and a 12 db boost at 100Hz. then try it at about 3k and then try it at about 9K

Quote:

Further, speaker cables and properly operating preamps etc do not change the frequency response.

Lets return to the context of this discussion.

AS "Do you believe that the subjective impression of tempo is inalterable by audio equipment?"

Ethan "Yes!"

So now we are talking about just cables and preamps that meet your specific operating criteria? I think "audio equipment" covers a broader range than cables and preamps that meet your approval.

Quote:

So when a reviewer or audiophile claims some new wire or preamp affected "pace," I know it's in their imagination.

It is their perception. This takes us back to that atitude I was refering to. "my reality can beat up your beliefs." You habitually use charged language and you wonder why you piss people off.

Quote:

Scott, understand that I do this stuff all the time. I have never noticed EQ affecting the tempo of music. Maybe I missed the magic settings?

Or maybe it is a mind set. Just because these things don't affect your peronal sense of tempo does not mean it does not affect other peoples' sense of tempo. I do think it would be fun to do some blind tests with a skew in the frequency response, and a skew in the actual tempo that brings the spectral balance closer to the same overall balance of the EQed version and do a three way comparison.

Quote:

Whatever, you show me an example, and I'll tell you if the tempos seem different. Pretty simple, yes?

I guess not. That test would do nothing to prevent your bias of a no difference result from affecting your perception. I neglected that aspect of things. I think a more thourough test would be more revealing. One in which we used a single reference and from that reference we used a series of various changes that can be equipment related and throw in some versions where the tempo has actually been altered near the threasholds of human detection. then randomly sample the various versions and ask if the tempo was altered or not altered ech time. That would be a good test. but obviously that isn't going to happen.

Quote:

Quote:
Try some compression, Ethan. Or try using an MP3 codec set to 128kbps. Or adding random noise. The sense of musical pace can be affected both positively and negatively.

Yes, compressors have time constants, so with some settings they can add a new "tempo" on top of the tempo of the music. And I already mentioned crossover group delay and room ringing which affects the rise time of bass notes as well as the decay time. But none of that has anything to do with changing cables or consumer gear. Versus side-effects from audio tools used by professional mix engineers. I'm pretty sure I made that point at least three times so far in this thread!

--Ethan

To quote JA. "everything sounds the same except when it doesn't."

Last time I checked speakers and compressors were under the catagory of audio equipment. Has this changed? Will I find them in the groccery section or furniture?