[Ghoostknight]

you guys forget some simple fact, my expierence, why would i go from clearly hearing difference to bias myself in that there is no difference believing your "theories" even when im sure there is one, you guys are free to keep doing so

also imo its pretty pointless to analyze my opinion about audio and compare it with *everything* since i actually believe science has its uses, but its not perfect, its just the best thing we got... if it would be perfect science wouldnt struggle to find new (effective) medications etc...

in regards to audio i just came to the conclusion that one should listen for themself, since you can rarely rely on other reviews in regards to your own preferences/listening habits, not all ears/systems are the same

 

[sander99]

you guys forget some simple fact, my expierence,

No, we don't forget your experience. In many situations you can and do perceive ("hear") differences due to other factors than sound, while the sound is identical or audibly identical, just like all of us and all other human beings. If you could just try to understand this, and only this! And this is not "our theory" but a fact proven beyond any doubt.

 

[sander99]

@bigshot: It seems you are underinformed or misinformed about people on the autisme spectrum, and neurodiversity in general. High functioning autistic people are just different, their brains process information different. In fact one could argue that this is not a "disorder", even that these people have autistiform talents. Many high functioning autistic people have a high IQ and are very good in logical and analytical thinking and have great eye for detail. The fact that they are different often creates friction or misunderstanding in some form or the other between them and "normal" people. "Normal" people may say autistic people take things to literally. Autistic people may say "normal" people express themself inprecise, sloppy, not well thought-through. Do you know that for example the following people all are suspected/believed to have been on the autism spectrum? Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin, Nikola Tesla, and Alan Turing.
(All this of course does not mean that there exist no total crackpots on the autism spectrum as well.)

 

[BS5711]

No, we don't forget your experience. In many situations you can and do perceive ("hear") differences due to other factors than sound, while the sound is identical or audibly identical, just like all of us and all other human beings. If you could just try to understand this, and only this! And this is not "our theory" but a fact proven beyond any doubt.

Precisely.

That has been stated dozens of times but it is completely lost on Mr Ghoost.

I perceive differences in audio very frequently but that doesn’t mean the sound waves are different or that something in my environment changed the way my brain/body reacted to the sound waves.

Mr Ghoost needs to better understand correlation versus causation.

 

[bigshot]

This one has a cognitive deficit. He can’t follow a logical path. Cognitive deficit + inflexible thinking + lack of empathy and understanding of others.

Autism is not a superpower. It’s a disability to varying degrees. I think this guy is not terribly functional. If he acts like this in RL, he is very likely totally isolated.

I hope they find a cure or way to prevent autism. It’s on the rise and it holds people back.

 

[gregorio]

you guys forget some simple fact, my expierence, why would i go from clearly hearing difference to bias myself in that there is no difference

We’re not forgetting your experience and it is not a “simple fact”, it is a complex perception! And to answer your question, rationally you “would go from clearly hearing a difference to believing there is no audible difference” based on facts and reliable evidence!

also imo its pretty pointless to analyze my opinion about audio and compare it with *everything*

We’re not “analysing your opinion about audio and comparing it with everything”, we’re comparing it with the demonstrated, established science.

if it [science] would be perfect science wouldnt struggle to find new (effective) medications etc...

Another fallacy, this is the Sound Science forum, not a Medical Science forum. Science didn’t invent the human body and doesn’t completely know how it works but science did invent digital audio and does know how it works. And science obviously doesn’t need to know everything (be perfect) in order to know some things perfectly anyway, that too is a fallacy. Science obviously doesn’t know all mathematics perfectly for example, so does that mean it doesn’t know that 1+1=2?

in regards to audio i just came to the conclusion that one should listen for themself

Your conclusion and whether you believe in science is irrelevant and has no effect on science whatsoever, it wouldn’t even have any effect on science if you were an actual scientist! (unless of course you had reliable supporting evidence)

G

 

[Ghoostknight]

i think i posted enough DBT to dismiss most of the BS you guys talk about anyway....

Of course you guys can keep playing "science doctor" to justify your "established facts", have fun

 

[bigshot]

You need to stop.

 

[Ghoostknight]

This one has a cognitive deficit. He can’t follow a logical path. Cognitive deficit + inflexible thinking + lack of empathy and understanding of others.

the logical path is measurements != subjective audible expierence

i guess it always depends on which angle you look at things, either you trust your subjective expierence (or know "how much" you can trust it) or you only purely believe in measurements...

i also get it that you guys just want to live in your own bubble where "everything is established and proofen", tho what i should i say about this beside what was already said (eg objectivists bias themself just as much with believing theorys etc just as someone who "believes" their new audiogear is an improvement, its stupid to assume anything else here)

 

[George Hincapie]

Hello,

are here actually some autistic hifi listeners that would share their expierence ? or are there any studys related to the topic?

im wondering since years already if im autistic because so many treats actually fit, tho i never went ahead to get a diagnosis

but im kind of curious what particular expierence autistic people have in terms of hifi
i read/heared quite often autistic people are sensitive to louder sounds, can they for example also listen to more details on quiet music?


One thing i can think of for me:
If you give me "flat measuring speakers" i probably wont listen over 60-70db without cringing my face when high notes hit, thats what i struggled with the first 1-2 years getting my studio monitors
thats why im a huge fan of a housecurve that actually allows me to listen to 70-80db "pleasently"

Maybe coincident, maybe a treat of autism, unfortunaly i cant confirm yet... i just did some "autism quick tests" you can find on the internet and they also suggest there is a good tendency that i could have autism

Most members of this forum are on the spectrum

 

[BS5711]

…… either you trust your subjective expierence (or know "how much" you can trust it) or you only purely believe in measurements...

There is the rub.

Your assessment of how much you can trust your subjective experience is entirely a subjective assessment in itself.

There is all but no correlation between your subjective experiences and objective scientific evidence to enable you to draw a line in the sand.

 

[gregorio]

i think i posted enough DBT to dismiss most of the BS you guys talk about anyway....

It doesn’t matter how many DBTs you post. If the DBT results you post are not only contrary to many decades of well run DBTs carried out by scientists, engineers and others BUT ALSO exceed the thresholds of human hearing by a magnitude or more, then there’s only two possible conclusions: Either you have not run your DBT well, you’ve made some sort of mistake or, you’ve proven that science has been wrong for a century or so and that you are a super human. How many times have amateurs made a mistake when running a scientific test compared to how many times have amateurs proven a century worth of established science wrong and turned out to be super human? Based on that and the fact that the only DBT you described in any detail was in fact erroneous, please explain why we should rationally not dismiss your DBTs!

Of course you guys can keep playing "science doctor" to justify your "established facts",

We’re not playing “science doctor” and they’re not “Our” established facts, they are THE established facts. Some of these establish facts are about a century old, so how can they be “our” facts, you think we’re all ~120 years old here?

the logical path is measurements != subjective audible expierence

How do you measure say a DAC’s, amp’s or sound wave’s “subjective audible experience” when we can’t measure “subjective audible experience” and DACs, amps and sound waves don’t have any “subjective audible experience” anyway?

i also get it that you guys just want to live in your own bubble where "everything is established and proofen"

What guys here (or anywhere else) live in that bubble? Why do you keep repeating the same strawman argument in a science discussion forum? You think maybe if you repeat it often enough we’ll forget it’s a BS fallacy and admit you’re right?

eg objectivists bias themself just as much with believing theorys etc just as someone who "believes" their new audiogear is an improvement, its stupid to assume anything else here

Yep, we bias ourselves here with all sorts of theories, that 1+1=2, that the earth isn’t flat, that pink unicorns don’t exist, that humans do not have infinitely sensitive hearing, that the digital audio theory exists (and is correct) and countless others. In fact, we even have a name for this type of bias, we call it “education”!! And just out of curiosity, if you don’t believe in say digital audio theory then how could new or in fact any digital audio gear even exist, let alone be an improvement? You think maybe audio gear grows on trees, is mined or is created by magic?

Are you really trying to prove that you’re incapable of rational thinking, that you don’t have a basic education and that you don’t even know what a scientific theory is, despite the fact you’re arguing about them in a science discussion forum? How much nonsense can you squeeze into just one post?

G

 

[Ghoostknight]

We’re not playing “science doctor” and they’re not “Our” established facts, they are THE established facts. Some of these establish facts are about a century old, so how can they be “our” facts, you think we’re all ~120 years old here?

Serious question, do you actually laugh making such nonsense posts out of thin air?

How do you measure say a DAC’s, amp’s or sound wave’s “subjective audible experience” when we can’t measure “subjective audible experience” and DACs, amps and sound waves don’t have any “subjective audible experience” anyway?

i guess some know how to listen and some dont

Yep, we bias ourselves here with all sorts of theories, that 1+1=2, that the earth isn’t flat, that pink unicorns don’t exist, that humans do not have infinitely sensitive hearing, that the digital audio theory exists (and is correct) and countless others. In fact, we even have a name for this type of bias, we call it “education”!! And just out of curiosity, if you don’t believe in say digital audio theory then how could new or in fact any digital audio gear even exist, let alone be an improvement? You think maybe audio gear grows on trees, is mined or is created by magic?

Are you really trying to prove that you’re incapable of rational thinking, that you don’t have a basic education and that you don’t even know what a scientific theory is, despite the fact you’re arguing about them in a science discussion forum? How much nonsense can you squeeze into just one post?

m8 the fact your washing the argument away like that just shows how biased you are lol

its not called "knowledge" but "confirmation bias" and guess what, doing a DBT doesnt really help here but maybe im the only one here actually looking at things objectively

 

[gregorio]

Serious question, do you actually laugh making such nonsense posts out of thin air?

You’re the one claiming they’re “our” established facts, so you tell us!

i guess some know how to listen and some dont

What DACs, amps and sound waves “know how to listen”?

its not called "knowledge" but "confirmation bias" and guess what, doing a DBT doesnt really help here but maybe im the only one here actually looking at things objectively

Of the ~10 questions I asked you, you didn’t (or couldn’t) answer a single one, all you present is yet more nonsense. So that’s a “yes” then, you do think audio gear is created by magic and ARE trying to prove you’re incapable of rational thought, don’t have a basic education and don’t even know what a scientific theory is? And incidentally, doing a fake/erroneous DBT doesn’t help anywhere, let alone in a science discussion forum!

G

 

[Ghoostknight]

the need for justification for your beliefs has to be pretty strong that you need to keep replying on stuff you personally disagree with like that... maybe with some neuro-diversity sprinkled on top to stay on topic...

everything is said i think, you can read my opinion on various topics in various threads, no point in repeating it