>Corona says:
If it tests good and sounds bad its bad"
In other words, you didn't know how to test what you were hearing
>Corona says:
"if it tests bad and sounds good its good.
In other words, you didn't know how to test what you were hearing
>Corona says:
"The truth is if we won the Nobel Prize for Physics you would then be saying: Physics theory has nothing to do with great sound. "
If you won the Nobel Prize, you would have gone through exactly the process I outlined. You would have published your work and proved to the satisfaction of others the correlations between sound and physical phenomena.
Obviously there are engineering, physics, and psychoacoustic phenomena behind what we hear. However demonstrating that something sounds one way or another is no proof of underlying physics. Like the majority of pc makers, you can sell your products based on sound, but if you are going to claim physical reasons that stand on any merit, you are going to have to provide evidence. Handwaving at theoretical physics is specious logic.
On white papers, there are about 80 years of work in audio that is firmly grounded in published measurement and engineering theory.
