You're right. I would be surprised however if there wasn't a fairly good correlation between accuracy and subjective enjoyment for most people. Afterall, if a system could create the "you are there" experience, which, by definition is an accurate one, then wouldn't that be the holy grail of hifi?sideshowbob said:Not necessarily. "Sounds better" is a subjective thing. Accuracy isn't.
merlin said:Nah!
You can check out but you can never leave![]()
A TacT system with a 2 watt/channel power amp and computer speakers wouldn't give me 100% accuracy or a "you are there" experience.michaelab said:And merlin is right about TacT. In theory at least it has the potential to give you that "you are there" experience, 100% accuracy, since it is in essence a big global feedback loop that encompasses the entire system, speakers and room included.
michaelab said:Clearly it cannot bend the laws of physics.
Michael.
But that's the beauty of the null test (for amplifiers). It takes all those variables into consideration simultaneously. An amp that has a smaller residual signal on a null test is indisputably more accurate than one that has a greater residual.7_V said:Accuracy is not easy to define.
Is an amplifier with 0.01% THD at 1kHz, 25W rms and 0.001% IMD more accurate than an amp which has them the other way around?
How do you rate the flatness of the frequency response curve against the distortion?
Is an amp that is -1dB at 12kHz and 50W rms better, worse or the same as an amp that's -1dB at 1kHz, 50W?
michaelab said:You're right. I would be surprised however if there wasn't a fairly good correlation between accuracy and subjective enjoyment
michaelab said:, I've got a question about TacT RCS2.2x: does it require multiple subs to work well or can it still work its magic with just a normal pair of stereo speakers?
Michael.