I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.


I just can't clear my head of this. I don't want to start a measurements vs listening war and I'd appreciate it if you guys don't, but I bought a Rogue Sphinx V3 as some of you may remember and have been enjoying it quite a bit. So, I head over to AVS and read Amir's review and he just rips it apart. But that's OK, measurements are measurements, that is not what bugs me. I learned in the early 70s that distortion numbers, etc, may not be that important to me. Then I read that he didn't even bother listening to the darn thing. That is what really bugs me. If something measures so poorly, wouldn't you want to correlate the measurements with what you hear? Do people still buy gear on measurements alone? I learned that can be a big mistake. I just don't get it, never have. Can anybody provide some insight to why some people are stuck on audio measurements? Help me package that so I can at least understand what they are thinking without dismissing them completely as a bunch of mislead sheep. 

128x128russ69

I smoke a ton of weed and I think @mahgister ​​​​@holmz do not smoke enough man. 

@music_is_life none is likely well below “not enough” 😎

Wow the most complex object in the universe! Really? That’s big! Who knew we even had discovered that? Here I was thinking maybe that was God or something similarly impossible to render. I wonder what that sounds like? Hopefully not fatiguing. I think I’ll stick to reggae and Bach. Still can’t quite even figure out what makes my Dog tick.

God is not an object.... 😊

And this is uncontroversial... Ask any mathematician which is the most complex object and the more packed with information object in the universe...

it is the prime distribution...And there exist even a theorem describing this fact discovered in 1975 called the Voronin universality theorem...

 

«This extraordinary 1975 result receives surprisingly little coverage (it was difficult to find a clear and accurate statement anywhere on the WWW in March 2004):

Let f(z) be any analytic function which is nonzero in the open disc |z| < r for some 0 < r < 1/4 and continuous up to the boundary of this disc. Then a disc of radius r centred on the line Re[s] = 3/4 can always be found in which the zeta function approximates the behaviour of f(z) in |z| < r, within any given accuracy.

In other words, given such an f(z), r and > 0, we can always find some real value t such that

Note that through a simple translation and rescaling procedure, we can obtain as a corollary that the (nonzero) behaviour of any analytic function on any open disc in the complex plane can be reproduced with arbitrary accuracy by the zeta function acting on one of these discs of radius 1/4 in the right half of the critical strip.»

 

Wow the most complex object in the universe! Really? That’s big! Who knew we even had discovered that? Here I was thinking maybe that was God or something similarly mysterious. I think I’ll stick to reggae.

 

Numbers are not objects either. Yet one can represent them. Unlike God. So guess which is more complex? Where did our ability to appreciate music come from?  Not numbers.  Just saying.