Roger Strummer
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2009
- Posts
- 527
- Likes
- 16
Quote:
Of course DBX doesn't take into consideration feelings as emotions aren't hearing and hearing isn't emotion. If you ask me, can I hear a difference, I would have to answer many times no, unless I listen real intently, many A/B times, for specific differences, in specific frequency ranges; clear case of undependability but differences just the same. Now if you asked me was I experiencing an emotional change, am I happy (positive impact) in context to the differences of the two cables, I would have to say yes. Two completely different questions and two completely different answers. Will I experience differences with all cables, probably not. So if you threw cables in that I didn't hear a difference on and drew your conclusions from just a cable sample of one, you'd be basing your conclusions on incomplete data; this cable yes, this cable no.
Apart from the emotion that a person might get from looking at the cable, which I'm not saying is not real, but is what we are trying to eliminate from the results since we are looking for audible differences, if the emotion is purely caused by the audio then it would be reflected in the results of the study. Now as you mentioned a sample size of one tells us pretty much nothing statistically relevant, so I want to emphasize that the selection of samples (of both participants and cables) is HUGELY important, there have been cases of well performed studies that led to untrue conclusions due to a bad sample.
For example in one study of prog rock man's thread that claims that people cannot hear differences between amps, it is arguable that the amp sample is not that good, so the margin of error is bigger than with a well selected sample.
Also remember the study is not about one individual having more than x%, it is about the average of the sample to try to control the variance you are talking about, and now that I understood you, your concern about it is very valid, just that it is taken into account in these tests (with adequate sample sizes and not dealing with any one individual in particular).
Quote:
Let me try. The basic technical issue with the DBX tests as they stand and the criteria used for declaring a positive test, is that if the test is positive, one can claim with an extremely high degree of certainty that cables make a difference to the sound.
However, if the test doesn't demonstrate a difference, this doesn't mean that one can say with a high degree of certainty that cables do not make a difference to sound. All one can say is that there's no convincing evidence to say that cables make a difference.
One controls the degree of certainty, its the famous p-value of a study. The better sample and design of the experiment, the less chance of error, so we can have "high" degrees of certainty, after all medical studies that want to see if a medicine gives you cancer or whatever have more strict tolerances than other studies, since there is a lot at stake, but shows you can reduce the chance of error. But even in those highly controlled experiments, they don't say conclusively "its impossible that XX gave you your diarrhea" (it could be an allergic reaction that was unexpected or something), but it is highly improbable it will happen.
This is very different from the vociferous, dismissive, belittling comments from anti-cablers who claim that there is no difference in sound when using different cables and that science has proven this. It has done no such thing.
Apart from the little thing I added, that is actually the spirit, your comment is very good. In more casual talk one would say that the studies have casted (big-ish*) doubts on the claim of being able to hear difference between cable so far... and then one raises an eyebrow and looks at the the world with a suspicious look .
*Doubts get bigger with more or better studies that keep showing negative results.