[deaconblues]

Your strawman isn't very convincing. That article is about the difficulties of developing psychoacoustic models due to the variability among individual listeners. What that article states is that our current knowledge does not allow us to predict an individual's sensitivity to various encoding artifacts.

However, an ABX test doesn't seek to predict anything at all. An ABX test simply measures an individual's ability to match an unknown sample with itself. An ABX test may demonstrate variability among individual listeners. For example, a test may show that some people can reliably tell the difference between 192kbps mp3 and wav while others cannot. Variability among listeners isn't a factor that somehow reduces the validity of ABX tests. ABX tests with multiple subjects actually MEASURE that variability. You are confusing the development of models with making real world measurements.

 

[dharma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by deaconblues /img/forum/go_quote.gif Your strawman isn't very convincing. That article is about the difficulties of developing psychoacoustic models due to the variability among individual listeners. What that article states is that our current knowledge does not allow us to predict an individual's sensitivity to various encoding artifacts. However, an ABX test doesn't seek to predict anything at all. An ABX test simply measures an individual's ability to match an unknown sample with itself. An ABX test may demonstrate variability among individual listeners. For example, a test may show that some people can reliably tell the difference between 192kbps mp3 and wav while others cannot. Variability among listeners isn't a factor that somehow reduces the validity of ABX tests. ABX tests with multiple subjects actually MEASURE that variability. You are confusing the development of models with making real world measurements.

It was only small fraction of longer research... just gave for example, how constructive thinking can express, some researched items. And yes, there are many different actual measurements in this research too!

If interested to read it and argue against authors see:

APPLICATIONS OF DIGITAL
SIGNAL PROCESSING TO
AUDIO AND ACOUSTICS

edited by

Mark Kahrs
Rutgers University
Piscataway, New Jersey, USA

Karlheinz Brandenburg
Fraunhofer Institut Integrierte Schaltungen
Erlangen, Germany

2002

(readable/downloadable also in in Scribd)

 

[spanimal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAttorney /img/forum/go_quote.gif Many people here consider DBT as the absolute listening test to prove a difference or otherwise. I don't agree at all with this premise. Any listening test methodology has it's risks. I agree with the comments about placebo, gullibility, wishful thinking, etc. These are all valid reasons a listener may fool themselves into an incorrect judgement and you have to understand the risks in order to reliably overcome them. BUT there are also mind tricks that can occur when doing AB comparisons. For example, where A and B are similar on major parameters (volume, frequency), then your mind will have a reasonable tendency to assume they are the same - and miss the fact that there are other subtle-but-important differences. And DBT is worse still because it introduces stress into the situation. I'm not saying that DBT or AB tests have no purpose - I'm saying that the mind tricks are a higher risk for these type of tests then the type I prefer, which is basically to listen normally to my unchanged system for a long time (months) and then insert just one new item and listen normally. Now some people (manufacturers, hi fi dealers, professional reviewers) have to learn to reliably do AB tests (not necessarily DBT) - their livelihood depends on it. But for most amateurs (myself included) it's a minefield to get such a test right. I should add that I've no scientific proof for this. Just years of experience trying to find the most reliable way to improve my sound system without wasting money.

Agreed. Trying to prove this point wrong would be useless as there would be no quantifiable data that will make me believe otherwise.

 

[spanimal]

Bear with me with this one:

Two sine waves. Both have an amplitude of +/- 10 units. Both cross the time line at 0 and extend to +/- 10 units. On a technical basis, both have the same volume and frequency (I am open to be proven wrong, as in all honesty I am not sure). However if one sine wave is a parabolic curve leaning just a little to the appearance of a square shape and the other just a little to a triangular shape - though both measure the SAME, they MUST have a different sonic presentation. This is a question perhaps Nick Charles may be able to answer. Who, by the way, is the ONLY member of the skeptics - that show any sense of intelligence and maturity in representing his point of view - the rest of you can learn a lot from him in the way you present your points of view.

On a sidenote, can someone please explain to me the term TROLL and TROLLING as it is used in the context at head-fi. Just to make myself clear - I did not look for differences in cables or, anything, for that matter, it happened by chance that I have experienced these differences in my moderate system. THEN I joined head-fi to share with others that have had these PROFOUND experiences - only to be greeted by a sick ****.

I have only just started to read this thread from the beginning and it appears that many have already posted my arguments in their opinions - to no avail. I can not stay idle while some members try to rob other members of experiencing profound changes that will trigger paradigm shifts to ways of thinking away from established conventions. Of which these experiences are absolutely paramount to mankinds rise to the level of creativity, knowledge and understanding that we are at today. Of which we will continue to evolve to even greater capacities when the closed minded populace is put to rest.

Skeptics pose the same resistances as when challenging religions to the possibilities of sciences. "But the books says" - Forget the books, just smell the bull **** - then again we can not measure the smell of bull ****.

 

[Bullseye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanimal /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bear with me with this one: Two sine waves. Both have an amplitude of +/- 10 units. Both cross the time line at 0 and extend to +/- 10 units. On a technical basis, both have the same volume and frequency (I am open to be proven wrong, as in all honesty I am not sure You have no idea should be better). However if one sine wave is a parabolic curve leaning just a little to the appearance of a square shape and the other just a little to a triangular shape - though both measure the SAME, they MUST have a different sonic presentation. This is a question perhaps Nick Charles may be able to answer. Who, by the way, is the ONLY member of the skeptics - that show any sense of intelligence and maturity in representing his point of view - the rest of you can learn a lot from him in the way you present your points of view. On a sidenote, can someone please explain to me the term TROLL and TROLLING as it is used in the context at head-fi. Just to make myself clear - I did not look for differences in cables or, anything, for that matter, it happened by chance that I have experienced these differences in my moderate system. THEN I joined head-fi to share with others that have had these PROFOUND experiences - only to be greeted by a sick ****. I have only just started to read this thread from the beginning and it appears that many have already posted my arguments in their opinions - to no avail. I can not stay idle while some members try to rob other members of experiencing profound changes that will trigger paradigm shifts to ways of thinking away from established conventions. Of which these experiences are absolutely paramount to mankinds rise to the level of creativity, knowledge and understanding that we are at today. Of which we will continue to evolve to even greater capacities when the closed minded populace is put to rest. Skeptics pose the same resistances as when challenging religions to the possibilities of sciences. "But the books says" - Forget the books, just smell the bull **** - then again we can not measure the smell of bull ****.

TROLL in action!

Seems you should not forget your books.

You say they have same amplitude of |10 units| and they extend to +-10 units? You are saying the same thing! And both have the same volume? Seriously, where did you study physics?

I think you should rewrite your question. And with your post you gave us a good reason to laugh at your intellect. You, man of science (jiggle

)

 

[deaconblues]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dharma /img/forum/go_quote.gif If interested to read it and argue against authors see:

Why would I argue against the authors when I agree with what they say? I'm arguing that you missed the point of the article and that you're applying it to concepts for which it is inapplicable.

And as for spanimal: It looks like you're ready for the next level of paradigm shift.
Machina Dynamica Products, Audio tweaks, Clever Clock, Intelligent Chip, Codename Turquoise, Tru Tone Duplex Covers

 

[dvw]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanimal /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bear with me with this one: Two sine waves. Both have an amplitude of +/- 10 units. Both cross the time line at 0 and extend to +/- 10 units. On a technical basis, both have the same volume and frequency (I am open to be proven wrong, as in all honesty I am not sure). However if one sine wave is a parabolic curve leaning just a little to the appearance of a square shape and the other just a little to a triangular shape - though both measure the SAME, they MUST have a different sonic presentation.

These two "sine" waves will not measure the same. A square wave is composed of a sum of many harmonics. In another word, the example you posted is actually two signals with different harmonic component.

For detail, please look up Fourier Transform.

 

[spanimal]

Cheers mate. Thanks for clearing that up, indeed my examples of sine waves deviating from a parabular in any way would no longer constitute an absolute sine wave. The topic of Fourier Transform is a fascinating one. Is there a forum that you are aware of specialising in the field of mathematics? - Thanks.

 

[Dreadhead]

Fourier transforms are pretty basic math. Mathworld is a good place to start.

 

[gilency]

Quote:

Originally Posted by deaconblues /img/forum/go_quote.gif Your strawman isn't very convincing. That article is about the difficulties of developing psychoacoustic models due to the variability among individual listeners. What that article states is that our current knowledge does not allow us to predict an individual's sensitivity to various encoding artifacts. However, an ABX test doesn't seek to predict anything at all. An ABX test simply measures an individual's ability to match an unknown sample with itself. An ABX test may demonstrate variability among individual listeners. For example, a test may show that some people can reliably tell the difference between 192kbps mp3 and wav while others cannot. Variability among listeners isn't a factor that somehow reduces the validity of ABX tests. ABX tests with multiple subjects actually MEASURE that variability. You are confusing the development of models with making real world measurements.

Very well said. To say otherwise would unscientific and gullible.

 

[gadgetman]

I don't mean to offend anyone, but is there any data\polls correlating those with the belief in USB cables affecting sound quality to their age group?

I'd imagine the younger audience who are familiar with how lossless USB must be to transfer their 'loots' (mp3s, porns and some school papers) to their USB drives wouldn't believe in that 'myth' as readily as those who don't use USB as much.

 

[dynamics]

Paying for cables anything over $50 is a complete rip off. I can't believe some of you guys the money you spend on single cable that is about 3' long.

I love Blue Jeans and Monoprice

.

 

[AudioCats]

kids, you are wasting your money, they are all the same, exactly the same as the Monsters.

 

[olblueyez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynamics /img/forum/go_quote.gif Paying for cables anything over $50 is a complete rip off. I can't believe some of you guys the money you spend on single cable that is about 3' long. I love Blue Jeans and Monoprice .

Why pay 30 when you can pay a dolla fifty for one of these?

Is a BJC better than the one above???

Quote:

Originally Posted by AudioCats /img/forum/go_quote.gif kids, you are wasting your money, they are all the same, exactly the same as the Monsters.

So I guess you have tried every cable with every piece of equipment?

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynamics /img/forum/go_quote.gif Paying for cables anything over $50 is a complete rip off. I can't believe some of you guys the money you spend on single cable that is about 3' long.

I paid ~$150 for a pair of 20 cm ICs.

(It was a good investment.)
.