[mike1127]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real Man of Genius /img/forum/go_quote.gif I find the following statements highly questionable: "One thing is for certain---very few audiophiles are interested in doing blind tests, and if they do pass, they aren't interested in "spreading the word." We can know this because if hundreds of audiophiles were doing tests at the 5% significance level, we would expect 5% of them to reject the null hypothesis by chance alone. Places like this board and Audio Asylum would have dozens of members eager to report the tests they passed." No one is going to pass a proper DBT by chance alone.

Actually, at a 5% confidence level, 5% of people will pass by pure guessing. That's what the meaning of "confidence level" is. Read about statistics.

Quote:

If audiophiles could prove the claim or broadcast supportive data most certainly would.

Not "most". I would say "hardly any." There are hardly any audiophiles interested in doing blind tests on cables, and of those who do them, I would wager hardly any are interested in spreading the word.

Quote:

Science predicts no audible difference based on the nature and physical properties of the cable itself.

Not exactly. Cables will always be slightly different and have a slight effect on the sound, but you have to combine that with a model of the ear's sensitivity.


Quote:

The simple solution to reverse placebo is to take people who don't care (wives, friends) and test them. As far as I know these have also failed.

This is not a "simple solution." A lot of cable-disbelievers put trust in the result of their own DBT tests. So the issue needs to be raised if bias is affecting them. A lot of collective knowledge we have is from past DBT tests, including those in which cable-disbelievers participated.

Secondly, people who don't care would not be likely to have trained ears. And in fact they still have an expectation. The first time they listen to A or B and think, "Oh no! That's so hard!" the rest of the test will be biased.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real Man of Genius /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am uncertain what the point is. Who is claiming that DACs or CD Players all sound the same?

There are some corresponding posts in this thread and on the Science forum, most from the same 5-6 people.

Quote:

Different DACs and CD sources have measurable differences that are therefore audible do they not? Post #33 shows such a difference.

These are signals at the lowest end of the amplitude scale. The differences may not be significant for higher amplitudes. However, converter linearity can also vary significantly and is a question of price. On the other hand, it doesn't pay off in the form of significantly better standard measuring values such as harmonic distortion: They may very well be considered below the hearing threshold.

Quote:

You seem to be saying something like: "Since the differences in DACs/CD Players are obvious but not measurable then the fact that differences in cables not being measurable is invalid and has no bearing on whether or not the differences should be audible".

I like to make such a connection in the context of cables, but here I'm just curious about the «typical» objectivist attitude toward digital source devices and foremost the involved developers. Either they think that millions of audio professionals are deluded themselves or that they're part of a gigantic conspiracy against the consumers. And none of the consumer magazines is willing to uncover it, because they participate on the conspiracy, not least due to their financial dependency.

That's a tough hypothesis. Political journalists may also be forced to self-censoring now and then, but there are at least a few braves among them who uncompromisingly stand by their conviction, e.g. by founding low-budget/non-profit publications. Doesn't happen in audio.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Oedipus Rex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Most are probably deluding themselves as well, but I'm quite sure many of them know they are selling only their well manufactured brand name. Have you ever wondered why the real big companies like Sony that does create audiophile grade headphones don't sell 20 000 $ DACs even though I'm certain that it is not for lack of know how.

It doesn't need to be $20,000, $2000 is enough to be considered an irrational price given that there are $200 CDPs and DACs around that offer the same measuring data. All big companies have (had) their expensive flagships costing multiples of their equally-measuring budget products.

Quote:

Also, ever wonder why the soundcard manufacturers like Creative don't have any expensive audiophile cards? I mean, surely such a company could create a much better audiophile DAC/soundcard than some hobbyist with a soldering iron and at a fraction of a cost. E-MU 1616M, their flagship, costs something like 450 $ new, and comes with lots of inputs and AD converters that a card meant only for listening would not need.

Creative is a company focussing on the mass market. That's why I've never asked myself this question. There are other, audiophile soundcard manufacturers, and their products prices are accordingly higher. The best studio ADCs/DACs even cost half a fortune, and for a reason.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, apart from those people making sure they get as much money as they can for their products, and between them fighting to give more functionality to their products whilst others give better looks, they all live from the same things. They all get money from users/companies who buy blindly or who look for this or that brand or even for more functionality. If they fill their pockets why care about if they "sound better" or not when they have actually gone past human threshold...

You don't seem to speak out of own experience, but rather out of a fixed opinion (astonishing, considering your young age!).

Quote:

As soon as their DACs get past the human threshold they are just competing against each other to get the best NUMERICAL RESPONSE, or the best look, or the biggest benefit, .... It really sucks to have these conversations with some people who keep adding more and more marketing BS, to confuse customers

Obviously you are one of the most militant anti-audiophile activists on Head-Fi. How come? I can only recommend you to cool down and relax. Most people on earth are looking for best personal profit, but many among them try to give others (the concerned, be they customers or employers) some serious countervalue at the same time. That's how it is. There are other, worse things than cable sellers and audiophile shops. I'm thinking of arms manufacturers, tobacco companies, hard-drug distributors, investment bankers, combustion-engine manufacturers, põrn industry...



Quote:

Originally Posted by sanderx /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also as long as there is a perception that measurements don't matter, the all area is in essence in a crisis.

Measurements do matter, but they don't tell everything. If measurements are near perfection (as in today's electronics devices), then they lose their meaning if there are still audible differences. But maybe they're worth exploring from a scientific perspective nonetheless, since they are most likely responsible for the differences anyway. This shows that the official hearing thresholds – established by means of blind tests! – are questionable to say the least.
.

 

[royalcrown]

Just wanted to point this out...

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I like to make such a connection in the context of cables, but here I'm just curious about the «typical» objectivist attitude toward digital source devices and foremost the involved developers. Either they think that millions of audio professionals are deluded themselves or that they're part of a gigantic conspiracy against the consumers. And none of the consumer magazines is willing to uncover it, because they participate on the conspiracy, not least due to their financial dependency. That's a tough hypothesis. Political journalists may also be forced to self-censoring now and then, but there are at least a few braves among them who uncompromisingly stand by their conviction, e.g. by founding low-budget/non-profit publications. Doesn't happen in audio.

It does happen, it's just that standing by a conviction often means that you don't get any attention in the spotlight. See:

GoodSound! Monthly Editorial - The Misinformed Misleading the Uninformed -- A Bit About Blind Listening Tests (5/2009)

It's mainly that people ignore it or give it little credence because it conflicts with mainstream audiophile opinion. The same thing happens to, say, third party politicians whose views conflict heavily with the bipartisan mainstream.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by indydieselnut /img/forum/go_quote.gif First, thanks goes out to all the contributors on this thread...it has made for a VERY interesting and educating fifteen minutes.

Thank you for the kind words.

Quote:

Responding to the quote above, my personal feeling is that we possess a langauge rich enough to communicate our sentiments without resorting to "bad words".

I disagree.

I feel there are times when "bad words" more adequately and succinctly express one's sentiments than any other words. Why do you think we came to use them in the first place?

In my opinion, "bad words" simply add to the richness of our language.

Quote:

Obviously, only by the permission of the collective populace do words end up being "bad".

Sure. But that doesn't make it any less irrational. And I resent the "collective populace" attempting to force the irrational on others, as should any rational person.

Quote:

There have been a lot of people giving their opinions regarding the subject being discussed, I thought I would give mine about a relatively unimportant topic

Relatively unimportant?

Realive to ****ING WHAT!?

Kidding aside though, I think it's a more important issue that most consider it.

Quote:

I've owned very expensive cables and very inexpensive cables. After much experimentation (only listening, only me, only my system), I decided that I could discern a difference between Nordost Heimdall and Blue Jean Cables. However, the decision that immediately followed that one was that the difference didn't warrant the price of admission. If the price of admission was of no consequence to me, I'd happily own Odins.

But you'd be happier (and so would I) owning mine.

Hey, people should use whatever criteria they want when deciding what they like, what they prefer, and what they buy and shouldn't be judged by others for their choices.

k

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by royalcrown /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just wanted to point this out... It does happen, it's just that standing by a conviction often means that you don't get any attention in the spotlight. See: GoodSound! Monthly Editorial - The Misinformed Misleading the Uninformed -- A Bit About Blind Listening Tests (5/2009) It's mainly that people ignore it or give it little credence because it conflicts with mainstream audiophile opinion. The same thing happens to, say, third party politicians whose views conflict heavily with the bipartisan mainstream.

Yes, I forgot that in the internet age it's easy to voice the own opinion to a broad public – with relatively small expense. But I don't recall an «alternative» print publication.
.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike1127 /img/forum/go_quote.gif If I may request that you refrain from insulting people.

Sorry. But I simply have absolutely no respect for the man.


Quote:

Has Tom written up his results for a peer-reviewed journal?

Not that I'm aware of.

Quote:

If not, do you find Tom's tests to be better documented than Jon's?

What tests of Jon's have been documented, other than his single blind tests that he disingenuously passes off as double blind?

Quote:

One funny thing about your report about Tom: if he's been doing this for 20+ years, we can assume he's done, maybe, 100 such tests? At the 5% confidence level, around 5 of those would reject the null hypothesis from chance alone. So you're saying there have been no reported successes with Tom's approach?

I don't know how many he's done, and to that end don't make any assumptions.

And no, I'm not aware of any reported successes.

If you'd like more information, get in touch with Tom. He's pretty accessible.

k

 

[royalcrown]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, I forgot that in the internet age it's easy to voice the own opinion to a broad public – with relatively small expense. But I don't recall an «alternative» print publication. .

Of course a print publication wouldn't happen very often (however, the audio critic was a print publication that spoke out against cables), who would advertise on it? It's no coincidence that 99% of audiophile magazines are sponsored by manufacturers of equipment as esoteric and expensive as the ones reviewed.

 

[Real Man of Genius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I like to make such a connection in the context of cables, but here I'm just curious about the «typical» objectivist attitude toward digital source devices and foremost the involved developers. Either they think that millions of audio professionals are deluded themselves or that they're part of a gigantic conspiracy against the consumers. And none of the consumer magazines is willing to uncover it, because they participate on the conspiracy, not least due to their financial dependency.

No idea if I am a <<typical>> objectivist or not but I have no issue with digital source devices sounding different. They are much more complicated than cables and there are many parts that have the potential to alter or color the sound. I would expect them to sound different and be surprised if they did not.

I do believe that audiophile publications spin their coverage of the cable issue to suit their audience and to avoid biting the hand that feeds. That is a typical practice that is hardly far-fetched and does not qualify as a conspiracy.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real Man of Genius /img/forum/go_quote.gif No idea if I am a <<typical>> objectivist or not but I have no issue with digital source devices sounding different. They are much more complicated than cables and there are many parts that have the potential to alter or color the sound. I would expect them to sound different and be surprised if they did not.

Be careful. Some people are now going to suggest you try Miracle Drops.

 

[Real Man of Genius]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Be careful. Some people are now going to suggest you try Miracle Drops.

Hey, I tried the green felt marker back in the 80's.
Felt pretty stupid when it didn't do a damn thing.

EDIT: at least it didn't cost anything

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real Man of Genius /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey, I tried the green felt marker back in the 80's. Felt pretty stupid when it didn't do a damn thing.

No pun intended?

k

 

[AtomikPi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I like to make such a connection in the context of cables, but here I'm just curious about the «typical» objectivist attitude toward digital source devices and foremost the involved developers. Either they think that millions of audio professionals are deluded themselves or that they're part of a gigantic conspiracy against the consumers. And none of the consumer magazines is willing to uncover it, because they participate on the conspiracy, not least due to their financial dependency. That's a tough hypothesis. Political journalists may also be forced to self-censoring now and then, but there are at least a few braves among them who uncompromisingly stand by their conviction, e.g. by founding low-budget/non-profit publications. Doesn't happen in audio. .

I think this is a bit of a mischaracterization. There is no "conspiracy." However, if manufacturers can get away with selling DAC's for high prices, they will be happy to. It's very similar to high end cabling, except DAC's actually do have measurable, but not necessarily audible, differences. I personally have not decided where the DAC SQ ceiling is so I will wait to audition high end DAC's more extensively to make a final judgment.

Sound professionals are just as likely to have the dreaded and overblown aurally transmitted disease of placebo as everyone else. After investing time, effort, and money into their products, they aren't going to say "Well I guess that $200 DAC sounds the same as my $2000 DAC, so let me just trash it."

If you remember the stereophile/carver null hypothesis debacle, stereophile at first had to admit that they could not differentiate the carver from the $10K tube amp, but then they tried to find excuses and ignore the findings because their readership would fail if they admitted the differences between a sub-$1000 amp and a $10K amp were minimal.

 

[Bullseye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif You don't seem to speak out of own experience, but rather out of a fixed opinion (astonishing, considering your young age!).

Well, let me tell you that I have read a lot from both sides, have made up my mind referred to the things spoken, and have been very skeptic with both sides till I have settled my own ideas, always trying to find the most rational explanation. I might be mistaken in some things (most likely, as I am not perfect), but once I have found what points out to be true I try to support it till someone gives me evidence on the contrary. Then I will accept I was wrong and try to learn more about it. So far the contrary hasn't shown

Quote:

Obviously you are one of the most militant anti-audiophile activists on Head-Fi. How come? I can only recommend you to cool down and relax.

I don't know where you got that, but if I were to be anti-something I would be anti-not-using-your-head. I am always relaxed, I never get pissed off. (The part of confusing customers was showing discomfort, not anger) It is not worth it on these forums.

Quote:

Most people on earth are looking for best personal profit, but many among them try to give others (the concerned, be they customers or employers) some serious countervalue at the same time. That's how it is. There are other, worse things than cable sellers and audiophile shops. I'm thinking of arms manufacturers, tobacco companies, hard-drug distributors, investment bankers, combustion-engine manufacturers, põrn industry...

I was generalizing, shouldn't have done so, but I had imagined you would have seen it as that.

Quote:

Measurements do matter, but they don't tell everything. If measurements are near perfection (as in today's electronics devices), then they lose their meaning if there are still audible differences. But maybe they're worth exploring from a scientific perspective nonetheless, since they are most likely responsible for the differences anyway. This shows that the official hearing thresholds – established by means of blind tests! – are questionable to say the least. .

We get back to the same. We all end up talking relativism, and relativism is also relative

Oh, and don't hide your last Period in white, when you quote it you can see it

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, let me tell you that I have read a lot from both sides, have made up my mind referred to the things spoken, and have been very skeptic with both sides till I have settled my own ideas, always trying to find the most rational explanation.

When I was younger I read a lot of stuff too. Then I went out into the real world and experienced life, and found out that a lot of things I read or was taught were not actually reflected in real world experience. (I make this statement as a former died-in-the-wool skeptic who once believed, as many of you do, that cables and everything else but speakers sound the same.)

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh, and don't hide your last Period in white, when you quote it you can see it

I was wondering what that was all about.

k