is there such thing as high dynamic range headphones?

[dalethorn]

dale, as requested, do *you* actually have anything to back up what you have been saying, apart from banding around two names? have you done any testing that you can give us the results of, or are you just hypothosising?

I have over 100 headphone reviews, mostly posted here, but you can see a plain-text list at dalethorn dot com. I also have quite a lot of other tech things there, especially in software routines for automation and analysis. But beyond that, the argument "proving a negative" is fallacious, and the other guy keeps hammering that argument as though he intends to win by bludgeoning.

There is one person in this argument who is bludgeoning, and it's you.

Nobody here is trying to "prove" a negative as you keep repeating like a stuck record.

We are simply saying that is what we believe and that it makes sense. I personally have ABX'd these things and found nothing. I have seen links to others who have done the same.

No, of course this does not make it 100% proof, but the fact is, it looks like the probable truth to a fairly high statistical probability.

Your nonsense claims need proof, not ours that simply re-iterate the accepted truth.

And no, naming some people who disagree does not count as truth, nor does testing a few headphones and posting War and Peace style "reviews". Link to tests that go some way to verifying your claim. Otherwise it is simply background noise from a street drunk who is convinced he's Napoleon.. Maybe he is...but the accepted facts would tend to confirm he isn't.

Now you've gone from arguing to lying. I provided 2 names of very reputable and accomplished engineers, which you are definitely not. And how do you respond? See nothing, hear nothing, know nothing, then put it on someone else. Do some reading and learn something, and quit trolling.

Lying? How?

I could name at least 2 well-respected people who insist that Noah's Ark was a real event., tell you to look them up and low and behold they would say it was so...Does that make it so? No, it's a fairy story made up a few thousand years ago, probably to scare children.

It's irrelevant and in utterly NO WAY "proof".

The only troll here is you Dale. You are constantly repeating the same stuff. As I said, the position I, and most take on your claim is that it is not true. It's the accepted truth that WAV and FLAC are audibly identical.

Naming 2 people is NOT linking to proof. It's simply mentioning 2 people who share your crackpot viewpoint.

Please, stop calling troll over and over like a stuck record and supply links to actual scientific studies that back up your claim. A good start would be successfully passed ABX tests carried out in properly monitored conditions.

Oh, what's that? You can't. Oh there's a HUGE surprise.

Your disinformation tactics are transparent - just like talking about me being banned from xyz, implying someone who's banned is a bad person, like Nelson Mandela or MLK etc. Whatever - go get a life and stop ruining this forum.

 

[dalethorn]

Proof? What the heck are you talking about?

ok, let's try this again.

You said "and today we have learned that there are audible differences in everything"

I've asked for some direct links from you that back up that statement. Nothing more, nothing less.

You're disinforming - admit nothing, deny everything, demand proof, then refuse to accept it. Classic trolling!!

No, it's not trolling, it was a genuine request for some proof to back up your statement. Just floating names isn't proof. Now, if you'd you'd care to link to the/a study, by those names or otherwise, that backs up what you are saying, I would be most grateful, and also interested to read.

So far, you've only provided two names, nothing else. Playing the troll card isn't going to work I'm afraid as I feel I've been very courtious in my requests and no personal insults have been used, however you seem to have now reverted to them, which is a shame quite frankly.

The obligation is on you, not me. If you demanded that someone prove the Earth goes around the Sun, they'd be wasting their time on you. I'd suggest that anyone who's seriously interested in what's upsetting you go to those 2 guys I mentioned, and learn some things from those accomplished engineers, rather than waste time with your "see nothing, hear nothing, doesn't exist".

 

[dalethorn]

I couldn't decide which one of these pictures is the most relevant so I posted a link to them all.

Clicky

Your post is pure troll. It's no longer arguable - you're posting rubbish for no good purpose at all. Classic.

 

[fr0g]

dale, as requested, do *you* actually have anything to back up what you have been saying, apart from banding around two names? have you done any testing that you can give us the results of, or are you just hypothosising?

I have over 100 headphone reviews, mostly posted here, but you can see a plain-text list at dalethorn dot com. I also have quite a lot of other tech things there, especially in software routines for automation and analysis. But beyond that, the argument "proving a negative" is fallacious, and the other guy keeps hammering that argument as though he intends to win by bludgeoning.

There is one person in this argument who is bludgeoning, and it's you.

Nobody here is trying to "prove" a negative as you keep repeating like a stuck record.

We are simply saying that is what we believe and that it makes sense. I personally have ABX'd these things and found nothing. I have seen links to others who have done the same.

No, of course this does not make it 100% proof, but the fact is, it looks like the probable truth to a fairly high statistical probability.

Your nonsense claims need proof, not ours that simply re-iterate the accepted truth.

And no, naming some people who disagree does not count as truth, nor does testing a few headphones and posting War and Peace style "reviews". Link to tests that go some way to verifying your claim. Otherwise it is simply background noise from a street drunk who is convinced he's Napoleon.. Maybe he is...but the accepted facts would tend to confirm he isn't.

Now you've gone from arguing to lying. I provided 2 names of very reputable and accomplished engineers, which you are definitely not. And how do you respond? See nothing, hear nothing, know nothing, then put it on someone else. Do some reading and learn something, and quit trolling.

Lying? How?

I could name at least 2 well-respected people who insist that Noah's Ark was a real event., tell you to look them up and low and behold they would say it was so...Does that make it so? No, it's a fairy story made up a few thousand years ago, probably to scare children.

It's irrelevant and in utterly NO WAY "proof".

The only troll here is you Dale. You are constantly repeating the same stuff. As I said, the position I, and most take on your claim is that it is not true. It's the accepted truth that WAV and FLAC are audibly identical.

Naming 2 people is NOT linking to proof. It's simply mentioning 2 people who share your crackpot viewpoint.

Please, stop calling troll over and over like a stuck record and supply links to actual scientific studies that back up your claim. A good start would be successfully passed ABX tests carried out in properly monitored conditions.

Oh, what's that? You can't. Oh there's a HUGE surprise.

Your disinformation tactics are transparent - just like talking about me being banned from xyz, implying someone who's banned is a bad person, like Nelson Mandela or MLK etc. Whatever - go get a life and stop ruining this forum.

Erm.

For one, I have never mentioned you being banned, although it does not surprise me.

Disinformation? AFAIK I am not gving a whole lot of information here, just refuting your BS.

Lying? Which you did not reply to.

I wonder who is spreading disinformation?

Quite frankly, this little exchange renders your headphone reviews questionable at best.

I did used to listen to your responses in headphone threads, as although I find your over the top reviews a little boring, I thought you were probably someone to take into account for such advice as you have so much experience...but I am starting to doubt that it's partiularly useful. Kind of like taking relationship advice from a prostitute...Lots of experience, but nothing particularly solid.

All people are asking for is a simple link to "proof" of your outlandish claims. That's it. Is that so difficult you need to resort to strawman and ad hominem tactics?

 

[dalethorn]

dale, as requested, do *you* actually have anything to back up what you have been saying, apart from banding around two names? have you done any testing that you can give us the results of, or are you just hypothosising?

I have over 100 headphone reviews, mostly posted here, but you can see a plain-text list at dalethorn dot com. I also have quite a lot of other tech things there, especially in software routines for automation and analysis. But beyond that, the argument "proving a negative" is fallacious, and the other guy keeps hammering that argument as though he intends to win by bludgeoning.

There is one person in this argument who is bludgeoning, and it's you.

Nobody here is trying to "prove" a negative as you keep repeating like a stuck record.

We are simply saying that is what we believe and that it makes sense. I personally have ABX'd these things and found nothing. I have seen links to others who have done the same.

No, of course this does not make it 100% proof, but the fact is, it looks like the probable truth to a fairly high statistical probability.

Your nonsense claims need proof, not ours that simply re-iterate the accepted truth.

And no, naming some people who disagree does not count as truth, nor does testing a few headphones and posting War and Peace style "reviews". Link to tests that go some way to verifying your claim. Otherwise it is simply background noise from a street drunk who is convinced he's Napoleon.. Maybe he is...but the accepted facts would tend to confirm he isn't.

Now you've gone from arguing to lying. I provided 2 names of very reputable and accomplished engineers, which you are definitely not. And how do you respond? See nothing, hear nothing, know nothing, then put it on someone else. Do some reading and learn something, and quit trolling.

Lying? How?

I could name at least 2 well-respected people who insist that Noah's Ark was a real event., tell you to look them up and low and behold they would say it was so...Does that make it so? No, it's a fairy story made up a few thousand years ago, probably to scare children.

It's irrelevant and in utterly NO WAY "proof".

The only troll here is you Dale. You are constantly repeating the same stuff. As I said, the position I, and most take on your claim is that it is not true. It's the accepted truth that WAV and FLAC are audibly identical.

Naming 2 people is NOT linking to proof. It's simply mentioning 2 people who share your crackpot viewpoint.

Please, stop calling troll over and over like a stuck record and supply links to actual scientific studies that back up your claim. A good start would be successfully passed ABX tests carried out in properly monitored conditions.

Oh, what's that? You can't. Oh there's a HUGE surprise.

Your disinformation tactics are transparent - just like talking about me being banned from xyz, implying someone who's banned is a bad person, like Nelson Mandela or MLK etc. Whatever - go get a life and stop ruining this forum.

Erm.

For one, I have never mentioned you being banned, although it does not surprise me.

Disinformation? AFAIK I am not gving a whole lot of information here, just refuting your BS.

Lying? Which you did not reply to.

I wonder who is spreading disinformation?

Quite frankly, this little exchange renders your headphone reviews questionable at best.

I did used to listen to your responses in headphone threads, as although I find your over the top reviews a little boring, I thought you were probably someone to take into account for such advice as you have so much experience...but I am starting to doubt that it's partiularly useful. Kind of like taking relationship advice from a prostitute...Lots of experience, but nothing particularly solid.

All people are asking for is a simple link to "proof" of your outlandish claims. That's it. Is that so difficult you need to resort to strawman and ad hominem tactics?

This will certainly be lost on you, but out of respect for other sincere people here, here's a link to why blind tests are useless for refined audiophile gear:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-143

And respectfully for the readers of this forum who'd like to learn rather than read your bellicose sputterings, look up Barry Diament (a very accomplished engineer) and John Swenson (a genius engineer). Those are 2 people a sincere and curious audiophile can really learn from.

 

[cheeseboy]

I'd suggest that anyone who's seriously interested in what's upsetting you go to those 2 guys I mentioned, and learn some things from those accomplished engineers, rather than waste time with your "see nothing, hear nothing, doesn't exist".

dale, firstly, the only person getting upset here is you. I've asked a very simple question that you provide some links to back up your catch all statement. I've looked up those two guys and can't find anything that would back up your statement which is why I'm asking you for some direct links.

Now either you can provide them, which would be great, or you can't. I don't really see why you are getting your nickers in such a twist and suddenly calling everybody a troll for asking for such a simple thing....

So, I'll try again, please please please can you provide me with some links (from the guys you keep mentioning) that back up your statement?

 

[cheeseboy]

This will certainly be lost on you, but out of respect for other sincere people here, here's a link to why blind tests are useless for refined audiophile gear:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-143

honestly, there's so many holes in that article I don't know where to start.

 

[dalethorn]

I'd suggest that anyone who's seriously interested in what's upsetting you go to those 2 guys I mentioned, and learn some things from those accomplished engineers, rather than waste time with your "see nothing, hear nothing, doesn't exist".

dale, firstly, the only person getting upset here is you. I've asked a very simple question that you provide some links to back up your catch all statement. I've looked up those two guys and can't find anything that would back up your statement which is why I'm asking you for some direct links.

Now either you can provide them, which would be great, or you can't. I don't really see why you are getting your nickers in such a twist and suddenly calling everybody a troll for asking for such a simple thing....

So, I'll try again, please please please can you provide me with some links (from the guys you keep mentioning) that back up your statement?

Blah blah blah blah blah ..... ad nauseam. I ALREADY gave you the very best info in the business and that's all you need. You don't need to be concerned about how I FEEL because it's none of your business. Now go do some reading and learn and stop trolling.

 

[dalethorn]

This will certainly be lost on you, but out of respect for other sincere people here, here's a link to why blind tests are useless for refined audiophile gear:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-143

honestly, there's so many holes in that article I don't know where to start.

Yes, holes as you say. Translation: It requires you to know art before you can have an informed opinion. Tsk tsk, such a burden to have to read and learn.

 

[cheeseboy]

Blah blah blah blah blah ..... ad nauseam. I ALREADY gave you the very best info in the business and that's all you need. You don't need to be concerned about how I FEEL because it's none of your business. Now go do some reading and learn and stop trolling.

so that's a no then, you can't supply the links that back up the statement. Ok then, at least we know what you say is just your opinion. Thank you.

 

[cheeseboy]

Yes, holes as you say. Translation: It requires you to know art before you can have an informed opinion. Tsk tsk, such a burden to have to read and learn.

"know art" *ROFL*

Honestly, I think I've been extremely courtious, I've asked genuine questions and all I've had back is abuse and a hissy fit. Duley reported, not that anything ever gets done about it but there you go....

 

[fr0g]

This will certainly be lost on you, but out of respect for other sincere people here, here's a link to why blind tests are useless for refined audiophile gear:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-143

honestly, there's so many holes in that article I don't know where to start.

Yes, holes as you say. Translation: It requires you to know art before you can have an informed opinion. Tsk tsk, such a burden to have to read and learn.

I am actually astounded by the sheer arrogance of this reply.

Are bananas the atheist's worst nightmare too? Simple question.

 

[fr0g]

dale, as requested, do *you* actually have anything to back up what you have been saying, apart from banding around two names? have you done any testing that you can give us the results of, or are you just hypothosising?

I have over 100 headphone reviews, mostly posted here, but you can see a plain-text list at dalethorn dot com. I also have quite a lot of other tech things there, especially in software routines for automation and analysis. But beyond that, the argument "proving a negative" is fallacious, and the other guy keeps hammering that argument as though he intends to win by bludgeoning.

There is one person in this argument who is bludgeoning, and it's you.

Nobody here is trying to "prove" a negative as you keep repeating like a stuck record.

We are simply saying that is what we believe and that it makes sense. I personally have ABX'd these things and found nothing. I have seen links to others who have done the same.

No, of course this does not make it 100% proof, but the fact is, it looks like the probable truth to a fairly high statistical probability.

Your nonsense claims need proof, not ours that simply re-iterate the accepted truth.

And no, naming some people who disagree does not count as truth, nor does testing a few headphones and posting War and Peace style "reviews". Link to tests that go some way to verifying your claim. Otherwise it is simply background noise from a street drunk who is convinced he's Napoleon.. Maybe he is...but the accepted facts would tend to confirm he isn't.

Now you've gone from arguing to lying. I provided 2 names of very reputable and accomplished engineers, which you are definitely not. And how do you respond? See nothing, hear nothing, know nothing, then put it on someone else. Do some reading and learn something, and quit trolling.

Lying? How?

I could name at least 2 well-respected people who insist that Noah's Ark was a real event., tell you to look them up and low and behold they would say it was so...Does that make it so? No, it's a fairy story made up a few thousand years ago, probably to scare children.

It's irrelevant and in utterly NO WAY "proof".

The only troll here is you Dale. You are constantly repeating the same stuff. As I said, the position I, and most take on your claim is that it is not true. It's the accepted truth that WAV and FLAC are audibly identical.

Naming 2 people is NOT linking to proof. It's simply mentioning 2 people who share your crackpot viewpoint.

Please, stop calling troll over and over like a stuck record and supply links to actual scientific studies that back up your claim. A good start would be successfully passed ABX tests carried out in properly monitored conditions.

Oh, what's that? You can't. Oh there's a HUGE surprise.

Your disinformation tactics are transparent - just like talking about me being banned from xyz, implying someone who's banned is a bad person, like Nelson Mandela or MLK etc. Whatever - go get a life and stop ruining this forum.

Erm.

For one, I have never mentioned you being banned, although it does not surprise me.

Disinformation? AFAIK I am not gving a whole lot of information here, just refuting your BS.

Lying? Which you did not reply to.

I wonder who is spreading disinformation?

Quite frankly, this little exchange renders your headphone reviews questionable at best.

I did used to listen to your responses in headphone threads, as although I find your over the top reviews a little boring, I thought you were probably someone to take into account for such advice as you have so much experience...but I am starting to doubt that it's partiularly useful. Kind of like taking relationship advice from a prostitute...Lots of experience, but nothing particularly solid.

All people are asking for is a simple link to "proof" of your outlandish claims. That's it. Is that so difficult you need to resort to strawman and ad hominem tactics?

This will certainly be lost on you, but out of respect for other sincere people here, here's a link to why blind tests are useless for refined audiophile gear:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-143

And respectfully for the readers of this forum who'd like to learn rather than read your bellicose sputterings, look up Barry Diament (a very accomplished engineer) and John Swenson (a genius engineer). Those are 2 people a sincere and curious audiophile can really learn from.

clutch at straws much?

 

[dalethorn]

Blah blah blah blah blah ..... ad nauseam. I ALREADY gave you the very best info in the business and that's all you need. You don't need to be concerned about how I FEEL because it's none of your business. Now go do some reading and learn and stop trolling.

so that's a no then, you can't supply the links that back up the statement. Ok then, at least we know what you say is just your opinion. Thank you.

Really? Just my opinion? Unbelievable! You mean there is something *besides* opinion here?

 

[dalethorn]

This will certainly be lost on you, but out of respect for other sincere people here, here's a link to why blind tests are useless for refined audiophile gear:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-143

honestly, there's so many holes in that article I don't know where to start.

Yes, holes as you say. Translation: It requires you to know art before you can have an informed opinion. Tsk tsk, such a burden to have to read and learn.

I am actually astounded by the sheer arrogance of this reply.

Are bananas the atheist's worst nightmare too? Simple question.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. If it keeps trolling, then it's probably a troll. For the record, I supply information here, which you're free to use or disregard. So far you haven't given even ONE helpful bit of information here, you've just poisoned the discussion with negativity. Your problem hoss, not mine.