Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Testing audiophile claims and myths - Page 100

post #1486 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parall3l View Post


Try this video

 

I nominate this video as required viewing before sign up.

post #1487 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Again, that's a closed-minded attitude. Maybe you didn't read my reply to your previous post? If you did then this is irony^2.

 

 

I've learned and been convinced of many things on different forums including sound science on head-fi and I'm happy to change my beliefs (again, not unconditionally).

I don't care what you do or don't hear but I will not ignore what I do. bigsmile_face.gif

post #1488 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

You can't prove a difference doesn't exsist. That's the very point. It may or may not but measurements are not proof.

With the right kind of measurements and/or proper blind testing, you pretty much can. Sound is not magic.

post #1489 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

You can't prove a difference doesn't exsist. That's the very point. It may or may not but measurements are not proof.

 

That's a logical fallacy. You can't prove a negative.

post #1490 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

Perhaps I should have said no one that doesn't want to change their mind will be convinced on a message board

 

I've changed my mind based on what I've learned in message boards. Haven't you?

 

But of course, I don't mind changing my mind if I find a better source of information... How about you?


Edited by bigshot - 10/17/12 at 7:52pm
post #1491 of 3125

Basically expanding on goodvibes, think back to the periods before this one. EM radiation, what lies beyond the earth, the notion that the earth is round, mathematics: these were all discovered/developed by those before us and have been passed down through education. That reminds me there are always things left unknown or imperceptible. However, I take the side that the differences of what we DO measure are insignificant enough to be outside of our dynamic perception's ability to resolve the difference. Mind trickery, as others say. Science lives on!

post #1492 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

 

That's a logical fallacy. You can't prove a negative.

Right, this is correct. 

 

I should have said that you can pretty much tell that an audible difference isn't detectable by the human ear through proper testing, not that you can prove one doesn't exist in any way. Which is all that really matters unless you're doing something weird with your headphones instead of listening to them. Or maybe if you're a dog or something.

 

There may very well be several unknowns that create a difference, but that doesn't really matter if the difference isn't perceivable. 

post #1493 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

 You can't prove a negative.

Isn't that what I just said? You guys just can't get your heads around that to the point of arguing against yourselves to try and make your case.

post #1494 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

Isn't that what I just said? You guys just can't get your heads around that to the point of arguing against yourselves to try and make your case.

Yes. He was pointing out that it was a logical fallacy to use the fact that you can't prove something as proof of something.

 

It's the logical equivalent of telling people they shouldn't discredit those who believe in unicorns, Santa Clause, etc due to the lack of absolute evidence against them.

post #1495 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewy4 View Post

Yes. He was pointing out that it was a logical fallacy to use the fact that you can't prove something as proof of something.

 

It's the logical equivalent of telling people they shouldn't discredit those who believe in unicorns, Santa Clause, etc due to the lack of absolute evidence against them.

I never argued that lack of proof proved anything. Are you guys professional debaters to twist everything so easily. I'm not asking for proof or trying to prove anything. You are. I'm happy! bigsmile_face.gifand you guys just aren't satisified with that.


Edited by goodvibes - 10/18/12 at 8:27am
post #1496 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

OK, but I'm not asking for proof. You are. I'm happy!bigsmile_face.gif

Ignorance is bliss, right? bigsmile_face.gif

post #1497 of 3125

You tell me. I do sound for a living. I've passed double blinds given by 3rd parties on systems of my choosing but I'm sure that could be spun as well. I could do the same for you and I bet you'd hear it under correct conditions but so what? If I can't argue it correct, it can't be true because I should be able to change your minds on a message board. LOL  I gave a soft personal opinion and only say to keep an open mind and get jumped by zealots. 

 

And I'm out for good. I respond to a post about measurements and get everything spun back at me with words put into my mouth and insults. Guys, wherever you go, there you are.


Edited by goodvibes - 10/18/12 at 8:52am
post #1498 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

You tell me. I do sound for a living. I've passed double blinds given by 3rd parties on systems of my choosing but I'm sure that could be spun as well.

 

And I'm out for good. I respond to a post about measurements and get everything spun back with at me with words put into my mouth and insults. Guys, wherever you go, there you are.

Says the one who calls others closed-minded, zealots and know it alls. Goodbye, will miss the irony!

post #1499 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

I never argued that lack of proof proved anything. Are you guys professional debaters to twist everything so easily. I'm not asking for proof or trying to prove anything. You are. I'm happy! bigsmile_face.gifand you guys just aren't satisified with that.

Exactly what are you trying to do?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post

You tell me. I do sound for a living. I've passed double blinds given by 3rd parties on systems of my choosing but I'm sure that could be spun as well.

 

And I'm out for good. I respond to a post about measurements and get everything spun back with at me with words put into my mouth and insults. Guys, wherever you go, there you are.

And Sound Science would be glad to hear the results and details of those studies, as that is what this forum is about.

 

This particular subforum is not about taking people's word that they hear differences in equipment. There are other places for that. It's about finding evidence that supports or denies the existence of those differences, and discussing the science behind why or why not differences in equipment exist.


And part of the science behind why people hear these differences is a psychological aspect, so sorry if you're offended by that.

post #1500 of 3125
Quote:
Originally Posted by xnor View Post

Says the one who calls others closed-minded, zealots and know it alls. Goodbye, will miss the irony!

One more response. I use measurements almost daily. I know their value and if you're going to call me ignorant for having a different opinion than yours, I would think it safe to assume that you're zealous. Saying to keep a more open mind is not calling you a close minded know it all unless you've got rabbit ears. How else to say that I feel the scope if greater than just measurement? You can't take every point of disagreement as an insult while throwing actual ones about off hand and not expect a response.

 

I do blind compare all the time when comparing lossless encoders, cables, A2Ds etc. because I'm not a true subjectivist. I need repeatability. I know my way around a circuit board as well. I don't understand why more aren't more aware of differences and wont take the path of speculation on a message board. I just wanted to point out that I have a different view so that newbies have another perspective than simply the one that gets pounded whenever this discussion crops up.


Edited by goodvibes - 10/18/12 at 9:20am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths