[Nightslayer]

Yes I understand wikipedia is notoriously unreliable, but for the sake of convenience, bear with me.
Placebo: (/pləˈsiboʊ/; Latin: I shall please) is a sham or simulated medical intervention. Sometimes patients given a placebo treatment will have a perceived or actual improvement in a medical condition, a phenomenon commonly called the placebo effect.
In medical research, placebos are given as control treatments and depend on the use of measured deception.
 
It originated in medicinal science. A confusion of cause and effect, where a patient receives treatment, gets better and ascribes the getting well to the treatment he receives, discounting all other factors. And to counter the placebo effect, we have:
 
Double-blind describes an especially stringent way of conducting an experiment, usually on human subjects, in an attempt to eliminate subjective bias on the part of both experimental subjects and the experimenters. In most cases, double-blind experiments are held to achieve a higher standard of scientific rigor.
In a double-blind experiment, neither the individuals nor the researchers know who belongs to the control group and the experimental group. Only after all the data have been recorded (and in some cases, analysed) do the researchers learn which individuals are which. Performing an experiment in double-blind fashion is a way to lessen the influence of the prejudices and unintentional physical cues on the results (the placebo effect, observer bias, and experimenter's bias). Random assignment of the subject to the experimental or control group is a critical part of double-blind research design. The key that identifies the subjects and which group they belonged to is kept by a third party and not given to the researchers until the study is over.
 
It is standard procedure (AFAIK) to conduct a double-blind test TWICE during pharmaceutical research, once by the drug company and another time by the suitable regulatory governmental body.
 
Both these terms have been adopted by our community over here, and while placebo is used widely in every part of the forum, the moment someone mentions DBTing it immediately gets censored by the DBT-free forum rule. So my question is, if it is accepted practice in the area where we derive the term from, why the stigma associated with double-blind testing on this forum?

 

[Willakan]

The reason it is banned is because it gets to a point where every time someone proclaims that they hear some difference which is nigh impossible for them to have heard unless you put it down to placebo/cognitive bias, someone will suggest that they prove it with a DBT.
 
This makes the subjectivists very upset and generally leads to giant undignified arguments, which begin with giant dollops of facts from one side and pseudoscience from the other. As there is hence actually nothing to argue about, the subjectivists get even more upset and start a new argument, attacking science itself. These arguments invariably completely miss the point and get caught up in the philosophy of science/quantum relativity/your ears suck and so on.
 
Thus, to protect the subjectivists from the horrors of science and to save the mods a helluvalot of work, most audio forums have restrictions on DBT mentioning. 

 

[danroche]

A LOT of forums out there, not just straight-audiophile forums, tend to frown on the idea of DBTing if for no other reason that it "ruins the fun" associated with talking about amps, cables, speakers, guitars, etc.  I can kind of see what they're saying here - the "new stuff" rush of plugging in a new piece of gear can evaporate in an instant if, according to the same testing protocols used to gauge the success of experimental cancer medications, it's objectively indiscernable from your old gear.

 

[Nightslayer]

But that's the point of the forum, isn't it? Saying that you don't want to permit DBT because it would expose the fact that your gear which you just mortgaged your house for sounds the same as the gear you were using while still living comfortably in your house is destroying, at least in my opinion, one important point of this forum, which is to give us as audio consumers the best information possible so that we can spend our money wisely as rational economic agents seeking to derive maximum utility from our purchases

 

[danroche]

Quote:

But that's the point of the forum, isn't it? Saying that you don't want to permit DBT because it would expose the fact that your gear which you just mortgaged your house for sounds the same as the gear you were using while still living comfortably in your house is destroying, at least in my opinion, one important point of this forum, which is to give us as audio consumers the best information possible so that we can spend our money wisely as rational economic agents seeking to derive maximum utility from our purchases

Yes, but some people who've just spent (or have spent cumulatively over decades) LOTS AND LOTS of money on gear will always find a way to resist even the suggestion that it was all for fashion. Embracing the DBT way can be a very humbling experience. You may discover that you could have been drinking generic cola all this time instead of Coke or Pepsi.  You may realize, horror of horrors, that a multi-page, poetic review you wrote sometime last year in praise of a boutique speaker cable was for nothing but a pricetag and a brand label.  For nearly all of us, going full-DBT in our lives means admitting that some, if not many of our assumptions or beliefs are rooted in expectation bias, placebo effect, "follow the leader", or name your subjective human failing. Next step from that is to admit a lot of sunk costs and eat a lot of crow. For many, it's just not a path they're ready to take.
 
On another one of these forums, someone once mentioned that they disliked our friend Ethan because they feared he was right. I think that kind of sums up the whole ant-DBT thing right there.

 

[deadlylover]

I think the point of this forum is to converse in the enjoyment of audio gear (though the headphone girls thread makes me wonder...hehe).
It would be very low to ruin another person's enjoyment of their gear by constantly pestering them about whether or not this or that tweak has really made a difference to the sound.
On the other hand, there are many members here who just want a ruthless low-down on how all these different pieces of equipment affect sound quality. And for that, there are specific sections in the forum in which we are more than free to discuss this.
This place is a community, I thought it would be obvious that we're here for different reasons, there's no reason to discriminate against the other group for having a different take on things.
 
Or do you perhaps honestly take so much offense with a fellow member enjoying their new cable upgrade that you feel that the 'right' thing to do is to put as much effort as you can in trying to take away a persons enjoyment with their piece of equipment.
That's a little too unreasonable don't you think?
 
I kinda see your point though, anti-cable guys hate seeing people say things like "this cable upgrade opened up the soundstage, brought better control in the bass, and removed the harsh graininess of the treble vs the stock cables".
How about you all take a step back and view it like this instead, "I enjoy this cable more than the stock one".
That wasn't so bad was it?
 
Believe it or not, I'm anti-cables too ahahahahha, but I have not become conceited, because I accept and fully understand that enjoyment has absolutely NOTHING to do with truth.

 

[Willakan]

 
Quote:

" ...one important point of this forum, which is to give us as audio consumers the best information possible so that we can spend our money wisely as rational economic agents seeking to derive maximum utility from our purchases "

Problem is, most of the stuff many audiophiles believe in is deeply irrational. As Uncle Erik put it, modern high end audio is all about fashion, not utility.
 
@deadlylover: The desire to discredit these snake oil salesmen comes not from an immature mean-spiritedness, but a desire to:
1. Save the misled money.
2. Prevent others from being misled. I saw some dreadful review on Amazon where someone had purchased the Sennheiser HD650, and found it not at all to his liking - he found it boring sounding compared to his cheaper headphones. I read on and discovered that,much to my horror, instead of him returning headphones he clearly wasn't going to enjoy, the audiophile community had instead convinced him to spend money on recabling them, with the promise of magical improvements to the sound. That guy wasted hundreds of pounds on a headphone he didn't even like, thanks to audiophile BS.
 

 

[Nightslayer]

Quote:

Problem is, most of the stuff many audiophiles believe in is deeply irrational. As Uncle Erik put it, modern high end audio is all about fashion, not utility.
 
@deadlylover: The desire to discredit these snake oil salesmen comes not from an immature mean-spiritedness, but a desire to:
1. Save the misled money.
2. Prevent others from being misled. I saw some dreadful review on Amazon where someone had purchased the Sennheiser HD650, and found it not at all to his liking - he found it boring sounding compared to his cheaper headphones. I read on and discovered that,much to my horror, instead of him returning headphones he clearly wasn't going to enjoy, the audiophile community had instead convinced him to spend money on recabling them, with the promise of magical improvements to the sound. That guy wasted hundreds of pounds on a headphone he didn't even like, thanks to audiophile BS.
 

But if you consider all in all if he actually found that he enjoyed his "upgrades", would he be deriving utility from his purchase? Shouldn't you consider the utility derived from placebo equal to utility derived from actual improvements in sound, if the listener really perceives it as such?
 
But personally I would go with the point he made, considering placebo works vastly differently on each individual, while actual measurable improvements have rather consistent effects, which would lead people to encourage others to spend money on things more likely to guarantee satisfaction than not, depending on the amount of hype the consumer is willing to buy into.
 
But that is besides the point. The main reason why people go for aftermarket cables and amps and the like is because of differences they hear in the sound. So in this case why should doubleblind testing be disregarded, if it would actually help them to make the best choice out of choosing to make the purchase or not, or choosing to spend money on a cable, an amp or a DAC?
 
EDIT: It would be nice if we could see the perspective of someone who is actually opposed to double-blind testing on the basis that it might lead to unreliable results which might mislead the consumer into missing out on improvements which are disregarded by DBTs. So far the consensus is that DBTing actually works and its main problem lies rather in its rude debunking of the ignorance-is-bliss state of mind, which rather defeats the point of the question posed.

 

[Willakan]

The moment you start selling improvements that exist only in the mind of the user, you are on ground that is totally morally unjustifiable IMO. If I sell a product that, under all scientifically measurable conditions, does nothing and rely on the user to imagine improvements...hey, I found the definition of fraud!
 

 

[deadlylover]

@Nightslayer
I think I understand a little more on where you are getting at, but I think I'll just have to repeat myself again.
Let us pretend to be gods for just one moment, so that we can suspend reality for the purpose of my post.
 
Sound is not a wave of motion in the air. Sound is not the voltage fluctuations in an audio signal. Sound is not physical.
 
As stupid as this may sound(hehe), we do not listen with our ears, we listen with our brains.
If I enjoy this piece of equipment more, it must mean that I have perceived a change in sound, otherwise I would not have a heightened sense of enjoyment.
Regardless of whether or not this piece of equipment altered the actual stimuli in which our ears hear, something as innocent as having a different state of mind has somehow miraculously changed the way something has sounded.
So sound is simply our perception of stimuli, as sound can change despite no change in stimuli.
 
Double blind testing can indeed reveal any differences in stimuli, and this due to the fact that our frame of perception is frozen solid for the purpose of the test.
But because we are gods, in our point of view, Double blind testing cannot reveal a difference in sound, because as gods, we understand that sound is dependent on perception.
 
And conveniently enough, all humans happen to listen to sound (for the purposes of this post).
Which is exactly why some humans go for aftermarket cables and amps, because they can hear the differences in sound.
It is also why these humans refuse to do double blind tests, because they heard such a real difference, they do not bother to challenge their own claims of these differences.
These differences may not exist, but that does not make them any less real. They're 'human' after all!
 
Some humans however, cannot hear a difference in sound (when the stimuli remains the same).
They are not inferior to those who can, nor are they superior to those who can, because the only thing that differs is that they can only mentally justify a difference in perception only when there is a change in stimuli.
Which is perfectly fine of course, it is normal and healthy for humans to become skeptical. But because they are so attached to their beliefs, they cannot begin to fathom the idea of challenging their belief of "sound is stimuli".
 
Quite pathetic humans are eh? Their refusal to understand each others viewpoints lead to an eternal debate of audio equipment, which will forever lead to an eternal cycle of bashing and hate to one another.
 
Now back to being human.....I hope this was somewhat enlightening.
 
 
@Willikan
Is it morally unjust to be able to bring enjoyment to someone in return for their own hard earned money?
I don't think so, because at the end of the day, it is up to the customer's judgement to decide if it is worth their money.
 
If the user has imagined improvements, that the product must have done something, no?
The user is now happy, the salesman is now happy, everybody is happy, how can you be so critical despite witnessing a "win-win situation"?

 

[Willakan]

Okay, I suppose you could say that an illusory improvement is still worth paying for, although we could debate that philisophically quite literally for ever. The main reason I suppose to stop people spending money over differences that don't exist is because it does a gigantic amount of damage to the perception of audiophiles. The idea of strange old men spending thousands on differences that only exist in their heads makes the average person think audiophiles are utterly insane. For Hi-Fi to ever approach the mainstream, the subjectivists must be tamed.permanently
 
 Consider the following horribly butchered The Matrix quote

 
Agent Smith to Audiophilia:  It seems that you've been living two lives. One life, you're an objectivist, buying audio gear based on rational reasons. You don't buy into snake oil, you don't buy into vinyl superiority, and you... understand that audiophilia will only be respected when it becomes rational. The other life is lived in subjectivity, where you purchase products that do nothing and are guilty of being led entirely by the mechanisms of cognitive bias. One of these lives has a future, and one of them does not.
 
Sorry about any Matrix fans I may have permanently damaged with that abomination.
 

 

[JadeEast]

Quote:

The main reason I suppose to stop people spending money over differences that don't exist is because it does a gigantic amount of damage to the perception of audiophiles. 

Wait a second! You're seemed concerned about peoples subjective perception of audiophiles. Shouldn't you instead have empirical evidence for what audiophiles are in reality?

 

[jackmccabe]

I blind test all my gear before I buy it if I do not hear an improvement I sell it...
Unless it is extremely functional and or pretty

 

[dvw]

I think there is a difference between enjoying a cable and posting a review recommending a cable. Example; check out Harmonic Technology's Cyberlightwave at $2,000. This cable gets great reviews from Stereophile. But, with measurement, it showed up to 10% distortion. This is from people that claimed they can hear ps jitter.
I think in these cases. These reviews need to be called out. Imagine this is any other type of product, consumer protection agency or FTC will be all over it. Because this is outright fraud.

 

[Nightslayer]

Quote:

@Nightslayer
I think I understand a little more on where you are getting at, but I think I'll just have to repeat myself again.
Let us pretend to be gods for just one moment, so that we can suspend reality for the purpose of my post.
 
Sound is not a wave of motion in the air. Sound is not the voltage fluctuations in an audio signal. Sound is not physical.
 
As stupid as this may sound(hehe), we do not listen with our ears, we listen with our brains.
If I enjoy this piece of equipment more, it must mean that I have perceived a change in sound, otherwise I would not have a heightened sense of enjoyment.
Regardless of whether or not this piece of equipment altered the actual stimuli in which our ears hear, something as innocent as having a different state of mind has somehow miraculously changed the way something has sounded.
So sound is simply our perception of stimuli, as sound can change despite no change in stimuli.
 
Double blind testing can indeed reveal any differences in stimuli, and this due to the fact that our frame of perception is frozen solid for the purpose of the test.
But because we are gods, in our point of view, Double blind testing cannot reveal a difference in sound, because as gods, we understand that sound is dependent on perception.
 
And conveniently enough, all humans happen to listen to sound (for the purposes of this post).
Which is exactly why some humans go for aftermarket cables and amps, because they can hear the differences in sound.
It is also why these humans refuse to do double blind tests, because they heard such a real difference, they do not bother to challenge their own claims of these differences.
These differences may not exist, but that does not make them any less real. They're 'human' after all!
 
Some humans however, cannot hear a difference in sound (when the stimuli remains the same).
They are not inferior to those who can, nor are they superior to those who can, because the only thing that differs is that they can only mentally justify a difference in perception only when there is a change in stimuli.
Which is perfectly fine of course, it is normal and healthy for humans to become skeptical. But because they are so attached to their beliefs, they cannot begin to fathom the idea of challenging their belief of "sound is stimuli".
 
Quite pathetic humans are eh? Their refusal to understand each others viewpoints lead to an eternal debate of audio equipment, which will forever lead to an eternal cycle of bashing and hate to one another.
 
Now back to being human.....I hope this was somewhat enlightening.
 
 
@Willikan
Is it morally unjust to be able to bring enjoyment to someone in return for their own hard earned money?
I don't think so, because at the end of the day, it is up to the customer's judgement to decide if it is worth their money.
 
If the user has imagined improvements, that the product must have done something, no?
The user is now happy, the salesman is now happy, everybody is happy, how can you be so critical despite witnessing a "win-win situation"?

Yeah I completely understood the post, that was what I meant when I asked the question of perceived utility v.s. actual utility. But at the end of the day you are saying that DBT is not a good thing because it can actually differentiate between products which do something and products which don't, which leaves no reason for it to be purposefully excluded from the cables forum. Whether people want to know the difference between their products is entirely up to them, but the option should be left open. And all people who buy into cables claim that there IS a difference, which is why they buy them.