Is there a way to test these diverging opinions?
Nick
Sure, compare the two ideas by actually building each of them, and then measure and hear the differences. I can't tell you how many times I have bought gear based on theory, and my ears were often disappointed.
Gary
Gary, the difference is theory is not law, but Thevenin, Kirchoff, Norton are
laws. The answer is it was not the laws, but the so called theory that failed you. Their theories don't follow the laws, as folsom and his diy leaders just demonstrated through folsom's posts. You have been cheated Gary.
Secondly, designs that did not sound right? I agree Gary. They were probably making up theories, instead of using laws.
------------------
For general public consumption.
Not surprising since most designers either don't understand the laws, or follow the laws, especially diyers. Some large companies either don't understand the laws, or they don't want you to understand. Marketing, shilling, con jobs is big business.
For instance, capacitors have ESR, DA, and inductance problems. So whose capacitors are accurate? Well, every manufacturer claims his is. So who is right? Well, if you read some forums strings, and diyers, either one of two opinions exist.
1. All capacitors sound the same. Surprise, your component does not sound right (although junk capacitors and parts, poor designs were used, poor venue for testing, poor selection of music etc.).
2. We tested different brands and found, X, brand was the best. Problem is, they tested wrong, so the best, most accurate capacitor, Y, became extinct, because Y was judged bad by incompetents.
True example. X capacitor was judged to be better than Y etc. because Y was bright sounding in the circuit. But the problem was the value of the capactors tested were too small of value. If the proper size were used, Y would have won.
(How did this happen? Because years ago, SETs guys had problems with overloading their small amplifiers and a burp would be heard. We can eliminate the burp by using a smaller capacitor. (Of course, the frequency response won't be flat.)
They would use 0,47uf, 0,82uf coupling capacitors (tube circuits), to eliminate burp, gain more prominent midrange. But it sounded thin with Y capacitor. But X capacitor sounded better because it was designed to sound more full, for a given value/size. So Y capacitor went into the bin, and became extinct.
Eliminating the burp also allowed individuals to use less efficient speakers, so larger marketing audience.
A few, even reasoned that the old time radios used them, better midrange, so who cared about natural bass, the full range anyway.
I have tested many brands, and the most accurate sounding capacitor (and fairly inexpensive) is now extinct. All the other inferior caps are still being sold, still the best. And now we have the super expensive caps, which I can't afford to test.
Improper testing, and improper size by individuals and diyers led to the crappy state we are now in. It is all about money and looks.
So that is why theory has a bad reputation. Use poor designs/theory, and poor quality parts, which don't follow the laws of science.
But the laws are still in force and they do work. That includes parts quality as well. If they would follow them, components would sound a lot better. But anyone can make a buck if they call themselves a designer and push the snake oil. Who is to know?
cheers
steve