[liamstrain]

Quote:

 
 
So your stance is that cables may make audible differences in blind tests, but not due to material or construction choices? I don't think anyone's refuting the claim that cables 
 
do make an audible difference... It's just that the difference cannot/have not been detected in properly conducted blind tests.
 

I may have formed my words clumsily. The fact that properly conducted blind tests have not shown a difference, leads to the conclusion that it is not material or construction that creates the differences people hear when doing sighted swaps, etc. Trying to cover all those bases, I may have given the wrong impression. Apologies.
 

 
 
 
 
Quote:

Yea you don't need to do a separate experiment because the data favours your stance, but it'd be interesting to conduct a blind test to see if you can detect the differences. 
 
If your test results go against your original hypothesis then redo the test a couple of times just to make sure. If the results still go against your original stance, then I don't
 
see how you can remain on the same camp anymore. 

 
And because mine is the null hypothesis - it is contained already in the formulation of theirs. That the evidence favors mine, is just a happy coincidence.
 
It might be interesting to do my own tests and see what I hear or don't hear. But you've named a LOT of if's before I'd  have to re-evaluate my position. And frankly, if the preponderance of evidence conflicted with my own results - I'd probably have to accept that it is more likely there is a flaw in my methodology, than that I had evidence to truly refute all other studies to date. At the most, I would have to admit that subjectively, I found differences - but i would not expect anyone else to be convinced by my results. 
 

 

 

[Head Injury]

 
So your stance is that cables may make audible differences in blind tests, but not due to material or construction choices? I don't think anyone's refuting the claim that cables 
 
do make an audible difference... It's just that the difference cannot/have not been detected in properly conducted blind tests.
 
 
 
Yea you don't need to do a separate experiment because the data favours your stance, but it'd be interesting to conduct a blind test to see if you can detect the differences. 
 
If your test results go against your original hypothesis then redo the test a couple of times just to make sure. If the results still go against your original stance, then I don't
 
see how you can remain on the same camp anymore. 

That exactly what we're refuting, though. Cables don't make an audible difference. At the very least, no difference has been demonstrated. The differences are a result of cognitive biases and not the cables themselves. No correlation between sound and construction has been demonstrated. No real audible difference between unbroken cables as been demonstrated at all. The measured differences are below the realm of audibility.
 
The only positive evidence thus far presented was soon abandoned by the poster before any proof of repeatability was demonstrated.
 
It's easy to flub a blind test if you're not looking for differences. That's why it's the believers that need to test. They won't purposely produce null results, consciously or subconsciously.
 

 

[bmiamihk]

Science? this aint no science lab. Dont be such a geek. Take it or not either way you can believe what you like. fact is I bought many higher end earphones and I will continue buying and not only reading about so called facts. Why would I say a cable helped when if it didnt I just go buy another high end earphone?

 

[Nom de Plume]

What sub-forum is this? 
 
Quote:

Science? this aint no science lab. Dont be such a geek. Take it or not either way you can believe what you like. 

 

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Science? this aint no science lab. Dont be such a geek. Take it or not either way you can believe what you like. fact is I bought many higher end earphones and I will continue buying and not only reading about so called facts. Why would I say a cable helped when if it didnt I just go buy another high end earphone?

Because your subconscious is thoroughly convinced that the cable makes a difference.

 

[drez]

Quote:

That exactly what we're refuting, though. Cables don't make an audible difference. At the very least, no difference has been demonstrated. The differences are [most likely] a result of cognitive biases and not the cables themselves. No correlation between sound and construction has been demonstrated. No real audible difference between unbroken cables as been demonstrated at all. The measured differences are below the realm of audibility.
 
The only positive evidence thus far presented was soon abandoned by the poster before any proof of repeatability was demonstrated.
 
It's easy to flub a blind test if you're not looking for differences. That's why it's the believers that need to test. They won't purposely produce null results, consciously or subconsciously.
 

Free editing 

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Free editing 

This was already implied in the sentence before it.

 

[drez]

Connotation is not part of scientific prose - we need to play scientist properly (I'm kidding of course - my impersonation of a scientist is pretty lousy) 

 

[Head Injury]

Why would we need to play scientist properly? It's not like anyone's going to actually read it anyway. I'm not going to clarify every sentence I type with "maybe"s. Not until there's some evidence that suggests a "maybe" is worthwhile.

 

[drez]

Well IMO to separate hypotheses from results consistently (again I should note that I am famously inconsistent)

 

[Head Injury]

That the audible differences between cables is the result of placebo and not cable construction is not a hypothesis. It is a theory. It is supported by evidence.
 
Unless you are suggesting there is another reason for the differences?

 

[Blue Boat]

Sure, we all hate the people who come in here claiming that they are not subject to bias. Sure,  all the evidence now points to there being no audible differences between cables. But this is the science forum. You have to keep an open mind about things. Scientists don't just "leave it at that". They continue to look for evidence that might support/refute their original findings. And they accept new evidence and add it to their own, provided the evidence was obtained from properly conducted experiments.
 
Head Injury, you're not being a "scientist" who's willing to look and assess test results/new findings, you're just being a diehard skeptic.

 

[Head Injury]

\Quote:

Sure, we all hate the people who come in here claiming that they are not subject to bias. Sure,  all the evidence now points to there being no audible differences between cables. But this is the science forum. You have to keep an open mind about things. Scientists don't just "leave it at that". They continue to look for evidence that might support/refute their original findings. And they accept new evidence and add it to their own, provided the evidence was obtained from properly conducted experiments.
 
Head Injury, you're not being a "scientist" who's willing to look and assess test results/new findings, you're just being a diehard skeptic.

I'm not leaving it at that. I encourage further testing. I never said I didn't.

 

[drez]

My opinion would be that placebo is not the sole possible explanation, while it has been demonstrated to reproduce the results of sighted impressions... where was I going again...  
 
I better stop here and agree that it is probably supportable to state that placebo is the most likely factor at play, as long as we define the domain of this statement to be the existing body of blind cable testing.

 

[liamstrain]

 
 
Quote:

But this is the science forum. You have to keep an open mind about things. Scientists don't just "leave it at that". They continue to look for evidence that might support/refute their original findings.

 
 
At some point, however, you do stop and move on until a new technology, or advance in measurement resolution, or new claim comes along to test. You don't wake up every tuesday and say "well, the last 10,047 experiments showed X result... let's try another one, just to make sure..."