Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › What is the rationale behind the prohibition of DBT discussion?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What is the rationale behind the prohibition of DBT discussion? - Page 29

post #421 of 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

So short listening of specific passages is preferable to long term listening due to adaptation to the sound.

 

(I also think that such adaptation is mistaken for burn in, where people advise listening to something to get used to it and so often it results in an 'improved sound'.)


Past few posts everyone is talking about something different. So everyone is right, just not right in saying the other person is wrong.

 

The longer you listen to a headphone though the better you should become accustomed to its sound. Which is why break in is psychoacoustic. If you look at graphs of brand new headphones, and then ones that have been used for hundreds of hours, they don't change at all. Or if there is a change, it is so small it could be due to the placement of headphone. (like .1 of a decibel) 

 

 

To be able to compare two headphones on a purely sensory basis (with as little audiophile banter as possible) it would have to be quick, exactly, so you do not adapt, and are not working with anything other than sensory memory.

 

The comparison of sensory memory would actually put cable believers at a great advantage biologically, to detect changes if they were actually there. But, most cable believers say such tests are riduculous.

post #422 of 454

There seems to be one forum where DBT discussion is prohibited. That is "Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum)".

 

I think that it is weird that DBT is not allowed to be discussed there. Surely someone who might have come up with an very cool tweak, for example, might well be interested in discussion about whether the sonic consequences could be heard in a double blind test?

post #423 of 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by p a t r i c k View Post

There seems to be one forum where DBT discussion is prohibited. That is "Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum)".

 

I think that it is weird that DBT is not allowed to be discussed there. Surely someone who might have come up with an very cool tweak, for example, might well be interested in discussion about whether the sonic consequences could be heard in a double blind test?


Absolutely, but there's a culture here of subjective opinions being gospel and many poorly tolerate their subjective impressions being questioned.  That's just the reality of these discussion groups.  I think we all allowed this culture to go wayward, I'm afraid.

 

Then again, there's poor tolerance for subjective impressions that are not backed up by objective testing, as if the objective tests available are perfect and THE final word.  So there are problems on both side.

 

So for me, it's one of poor tolerance on both sides of the fence.  Poor tolerance nurtured by desire for great sound and envy on one side, with desire for great sound and anger at having ones newly and expensively expanded pleasure zone being threatened.  Soon enough, challenging discussions degenerate.  Hence the restrictions.

post #424 of 454

I'd say that measurements (however useful) aren't the last word, but double blind listening tests are, or at least as close to last word as we get.  And far past any reasonable doubt as well.

 

If you can't show you can hear it without also seeing it, than how can you say you can really hear it at all?

 

Also keep in mind that DBTs can't prove that something is 'better' than something else.  That is a subjective judgment.  They can only prove whether things sound different or identical to the human ear.  That is an objective quality.  Some people seem to think that because a DBT can't make a subjective judgment it means that cables or whatever can't be judged at all by such a protocol.  This is also wrong.  If A and B can be differentiated in a DBT, than someone may prefer A over B or B over A and no one can say they are wrong.  If however X and Y can't be differentiated via DBT than no one can prefer one over the other (based on sound) because they sound identical.  If X = 7 and it is shown that X = Y, than some who says they prefer X over Y has essentially said that prefer 7 over 7.  Such a statement is logically inconsistent as well as physically impossible.  Somehow though, people say prefer the sound of solid wire to the sound of stranded wire.

post #425 of 454

DBT is particularly banned from the cable/tweek forum as DBT consistently shows such to be based on psudoscience. I am sure if blind testing was mentioned with regards to amps and headphones (that is unlikely due to the fit) such would be welcomed as mainly thye do show a difference. 

post #426 of 454

I call for a rename of the Cables forum to Sound Pseudoscience then.

post #427 of 454

I emailed Chord cables and asked if they use blind testing. The answer was yes, but they will not release the results.

post #428 of 454

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

I emailed Chord cables and asked if they use blind testing. The answer was yes, but they will not release the results.


Whether they did or not, and whether the results were statistically correct or not, are of no importance to this forum, as DBT discussion isn't allowed in the Cables forum anyway.

post #429 of 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

I emailed Chord cables and asked if they use blind testing. The answer was yes, but they will not release the results.

 

That single word yes hides a whole load of questions.

 

One, do they use DBT or single blind testing ?

 

Two, Is it same/different or preference testing ?

 

Three, when they blind test are they testing ?

(1) multiple samples of a single cable model against each other for consistency or

(2) samples from their own *different* cable models against each other or

(3) samples of their own cables against competitors' cables

(4) samples of their own cables against stock cables


If they did have consistent preference expressed for their cables vs competitors/stock I would be highly surprised that they would not want to reveal the data as it would be a huge sales puff, for instance " 8/10 audiophiles prefer our cables to..." would be an advertising goldmine !

 

Of course if they found a definite preference for their cheaper cables vs their expensive ones that would be a problem as there would be no rational reason for anyone to buy the expensive ones and selling the expensive ones when they know that they are less good would be of dubious ethics (you will like it less but it costs you more !)

 

Of course if they found a definite preference for their more expensive cables vs their cheap cables then would they issue a warning on the cheaper ones (provably not as good as ....) , which might put folks off buying their budget cables, but if they stopped making the buidget ones they risk ,losing custom from the budget sector and some folks who might have bought the budget cables might not spring for the expensive ones ?

 

Of course if they found no definite preference for any of their lines of cables that would be a problem as there would be no rational reason for anyone to buy the expensive ones and their profit margins would drop

 

Of course if they found no definite preference for their cables vs stock that would be a problem as there would be no rational reason for anyone to buy their cables at all

 

It is a puzzlement !

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soaa- View Post


Whether they did or not, and whether the results were statistically correct or not, are of no importance to this forum, as DBT discussion isn't allowed in the Cables forum anyway.

 

We are in the Science forum in this thread so DBT discussion is allowed !

 


Edited by nick_charles - 10/5/10 at 8:44am
post #430 of 454



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

DBT is particularly banned from the cable/tweek forum as DBT consistently shows such to be based on psudoscience. I am sure if blind testing was mentioned with regards to amps and headphones (that is unlikely due to the fit) such would be welcomed as mainly thye do show a difference. 



actually the policy change to extend the prohibition of DBT "debates" to all forums is what is under discussion in this thread - the prior state of just Cables having a no DBT policy wasn't bothering too many people

 

but the ban was extended to all forums with Sound Science created to be a ghetto to contain debate of DBT - which is currently banned from all other HeadFi forums

 

community debate of moderation and forum policy is actively discouraged by thread/post deletion

 

as an "open" response I propose a campaign of conditional contribution pledges - I will become a headfi contributor Only if the DBT ban is lifted - except for possibly allowing the Cables forum to proceed under DBT rules


Edited by jcx - 10/5/10 at 10:56am
post #431 of 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post



 



actually the policy change to extend the prohibition of DBT "debates" to all forums is what is under discussion in this thread - the prior state of just Cables having a no DBT policy wasn't bothering too many people

 

but the ban was extended to all forums with Sound Science created to be a ghetto to contain debate of DBT - which is currently banned from all other HeadFi forums


I guess I should read the rules smily_headphones1.gif

 

Is DBT debate now prohibited in all forums?

post #432 of 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by p a t r i c k View Post

I guess I should read the rules smily_headphones1.gif

 

Is DBT debate now prohibited in all forums?


The magic power of "Find" tell me that neither "dbt" nor "blind" appear anywhere in the TOS.

 

Of course there's probably a line in there somewhere that says they can do whatever they want so its all moot anyway, as rules are subject to change at any moment for any reason, without consistency or fairness.  So far IME, the mods seem to be relatively fair and only slightly heavy handed by the standards of some other boards.

 

I've said before in this thread that because this thread is privately owned, they do have the right to do whatever they want with it.  Since I like this place and want it to last, I would advise them to keep it as free as possible.  Its the best way to promote knowledge, and that's what people come here for.  This site's assets are the users, and they can leave at any time.

post #433 of 454

I just don't see why everything is so charged. With research and studying both sides only stand to gain, not lose in the end.

 

And I am with MaverickRonin: DBT is as close as we are going to get in terms proving/disproving humans can detect sonic differences without other triggers. Might not be the final word, but it is substantial proof and should not be brushed aside as so many people like to do here.

 

DBT is science. Just BT is science. You have a control group and an experimental group and you take measurements and then state your findings... nothing mind blowing or groundbreaking here just a basic experiment.

 

Why this is viewed as pseudo science, especially by those who, for all intents and purposes, believe in witches and wizards is beyond me, and beyond reasoning.

 

I really do hope UE conducts his experiments to shed some light with lots of pertinent data.

post #434 of 454

If someone has already posted this, I apologize.  But it's a very cool tool.   Everyone on the forum should have it.

 

Audio DiffMaker      <----  Download Me

 

 

Presented at the 125th AES convention 
"Detecting Changes in Audio Signals by Digital Differencing"

 

 

Check out the tests that come with it  Here.

 

Read the AES paper Here.

 

 

Edit: Ah,  I see khaos974 posted it already, none the less it is worth checking out.


Edited by upstateguy - 10/5/10 at 9:29pm
post #435 of 454

i had overlooked khaos974's posting of the link, cheers, looks very useful!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › What is the rationale behind the prohibition of DBT discussion?