[JerryLove]

Quote:

The idea of painting a volume knob affects sound is actually from yourself if my memory still work properly.

 
That is correct... but *you* believe it's possible; where as most of us trust our reason and "science" to tell us that it is not possible.

 

[PIratelord]

Quote:

 
That is correct... but *you* believe it's possible; where as most of us trust our reason and "science" to tell us that it is not possible.

 
No idea where the "most of you" is from. Who are you actually representing? 
 
I not only believe it's possible. I have showed you how it could be possible as well. 

 

[haloxt]

He represents science!

 

[PIratelord]

Quote:

He represents science!

Good to know. I might have been messing with the wrong person then. 

 

[JerryLove]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PIratelord /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
No idea where the "most of you" is from. Who are you actually representing? 
 
I not only believe it's possible. I have showed you how it could be possible as well. 

Are you disputing the claim that "most people believe that painting a volume knob will have no effect on sound"?
 
I suppose that's less silly than your belief that painting a volume knob might change the sound.
 
I'd be interested in seeing the results of a pole "do you believe it's possible for putting paint on a volume knob to change sound" and find out what "most" think.

 

[PIratelord]

Quote:

Quote:

Are you disputing the claim that "most people believe that painting a volume knob will have no effect on sound"?
 
I suppose that's less silly than your belief that painting a volume knob might change the sound.
 
I'd be interested in seeing the results of a pole "do you believe it's possible for putting paint on a volume knob to change sound" and find out what "most" think.

I think you just have not read my points patiently, again. Or you simply just twist my arguments into your personal flavour. 
 
I'd be interested in seeing the results of a pole "Do you believe it's possible to deliberately make the sound of an amp sensitive to the colour of it's volume knob?" 
 
It would be a lot more interesting if you can put a big enough price there for anyone who successfully make one. Why not? You don't think it's possible anyway. 
 
Again and again, I told you that's irrelevant to this power cable discussion. 
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

Piratelord, you cannot prove a negative. Everyone knows that.

If you contend that a power cord makes a difference, the burden of proof is on you.

Also, you're offering the unknown as "proof" that something might work. That makes no sense whatsoever.

You're acting like cables exist in a vacuum where anything is possible. The problem with that position is that there are - literally - hundreds of millions of electrical products out there. Similarly, there have been hundreds of millions of tests, going back a good 120 years. If there was a mysterious force governing power cables, then you must assume that these anomalies would turn up in all sorts of electrical goods. But they don't. Everything behaves according to understood physics and science. So if your power cord actually produces a different result, all sorts of strange results should be turning up in - again, literally - millions of different electrical products. If what you're proposing is true, then you should be finding anomalous results with light bulbs and electric motors, just to name two.

Further, if the electrical signal is changed enough to be heard, then that ought to show up on a DMM, oscilloscope, spectrum analyzer, etc., as well. That they don't strongly suggests that there is no difference.

Again, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. If you assert something, then back it up. You can't expect someone to prove a negative.

If you think your personal experience is enough to justify a claim, then you must demonstrate that you are free of bias and not susceptible to placebo or expectation. That's tough, since the human mind is a complete sucker for those things. If you can demonstrate that you aren't biased and placebo doesn't work on you, I imagine you could make quite a bit of money as a test subject.

 

[keanex]

1+1=2 can easily be proven given a definitive definition of 1 and 2 being agreeable to the equation. Also, no power cord, not even a $2913798173 one, will increase any sound quality. Anyone who believes otherwise is deluded and ignores basic science.

 

[Yoga Flame]

Piratelord, it seems that you are making the argument that it is possible that power cords/painted volume knobs can make an audible difference; in the same sense that it is possible we are all living in a computer simulation a.k.a. the Matrix. That is, philosophically, there is no way to say with absolute certainty that it isn't the case.
 
Is that right?

 

[PIratelord]

Quote:

Piratelord, you cannot prove a negative. Everyone knows that.

If you contend that a power cord makes a difference, the burden of proof is on you.

Also, you're offering the unknown as "proof" that something might work. That makes no sense whatsoever.

You're acting like cables exist in a vacuum where anything is possible. The problem with that position is that there are - literally - hundreds of millions of electrical products out there. Similarly, there have been hundreds of millions of tests, going back a good 120 years. If there was a mysterious force governing power cables, then you must assume that these anomalies would turn up in all sorts of electrical goods. But they don't. Everything behaves according to understood physics and science. So if your power cord actually produces a different result, all sorts of strange results should be turning up in - again, literally - millions of different electrical products. If what you're proposing is true, then you should be finding anomalous results with light bulbs and electric motors, just to name two.

Further, if the electrical signal is changed enough to be heard, then that ought to show up on a DMM, oscilloscope, spectrum analyzer, etc., as well. That they don't strongly suggests that there is no difference.

Again, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. If you assert something, then back it up. You can't expect someone to prove a negative.

If you think your personal experience is enough to justify a claim, then you must demonstrate that you are free of bias and not susceptible to placebo or expectation. That's tough, since the human mind is a complete sucker for those things. If you can demonstrate that you aren't biased and placebo doesn't work on you, I imagine you could make quite a bit of money as a test subject.

 

[size=medium]

My point is not to prove a power cable makes a difference.
My point is that it's not easy to proof it makes no difference by using basic science. 
I suggested that it is not appropriate to make the subject a definite negative by analysing basic science only. 
I did not propose anything neither did I conclude whether it definitely works or doesn't. This is exactly what I suggested in my first post, that it's more appropriate to share experience, not telling others something is definite. 
 
These points went right from my first to my last posts, which don't seem to conflict too much with what you just suggested. 
 
PS: My wife who knows nothing about Hifi, identified the difference between a Siltech Ruby Hill G6 and a 15 dollars unknown power cord, on the amp, in a blind test. Although she was not able to tell how better the ruby hill was, she did say it sounds better. 
This is my own experience, but I don't have to prove that power cable works to anyone. I have absolutely no interest in doing so. I only suggested others to try for themselves. 
 
Just in case you didn't notice, I was not the one who always assert or conclude things, not unless I was made to do so. 
​

[/size]

 

[JerryLove]

Quote:

I personally don't like people who keep talking about physics here. If someone really care about science you should understand that the most subjective way to share your comment is by sharing your own experience, not your belief. Why so sure about how physics would behave before you understand ALL of them?

 
Quote:

I didn't say it WAS NOT TRUE until a company produces it, I said it's IRRELEVANT TO TALK ABOUT. Please read patiently.

 
I'm sorry, I thought I had understood you to say "possible".
 
Do you believe that it is possible that painting a volume knob changes the sound, or do you believe it is impossible that painting a volume knob changes the sound? You've wasted far more time talking circles around the question than it would take to answer it (the answer being at most two words).
 
In debate, I would be discussing shared framework.
In philosophy, we would be discussing presuppositions.
In legal parlance I'm offering a rebuttal for your statement.
From a scientific perspective, I'm testing your hypothesis with an example.
 
In any case: *you* actually raised the question of whether one could make a statement about whether something could affect sound without listening directly. Your claim that one cannot is patently false.
 
Furthermore: it is pre-facia silly. If you would like relevance: the relevance is that I am reframing your claim so as to make its inherent silliness apparent. You must either admit that you, yourself, do not believe what you have asserted (by acknowledging that painting a volume knob cannot have sonic impact despite not knowing all of physics), or you must believe / pretend to believe that we cannot know whether painting a volume knob has sonic impact.
 
In either case: your response will discredit your earlier claim (which, as I mentioned, is both false and silly).
 
It is a corner you painted yourself in before I even arrived in this part of the thread. Your unwillingness to answer so simple a question appears merely evasive.

 

[PIratelord]

Quote:

....

Also, you're offering the unknown as "proof" that something might work. That makes no sense whatsoever.

....
 

I pointed out the discussion on painting the volume knob was irrelevant many times. However, Jerrylove claimed "there's a company in elbonia which is selling brown paint for volume knobs which make the sound more chocolatey. Hey, you can't prove there isn't. " I was simply following the logic. 

 

[JerryLove]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PIratelord /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

My point is that it's not easy to proof it makes no difference by using basic science.
​

 
It's very easy to establish if it makes an audible difference: ABX tests do so quite well.
 
Quote:

I did not propose anything neither did I conclude whether it definitely works or doesn't. This is exactly what I suggested in my first post, that it's more appropriate to share experience, not telling others something is definite.

 
Of course you did: you asserted (though in passive-aggressive language) that one cannot be "sure about how physics would behave before you understand ALL of them"
 
Quote:

PS: My wife who knows nothing about Hifi, identified the difference between a Siltech Ruby Hill G6 and a 15 dollars unknown power cord, on the amp, in a blind test. Although she was not able to tell how better the ruby hill was, she did say it sounds better.

 
Are you in or visiting Florida? I would be thrilled to conduct an ABX test with your power cables. You or your wife can guess which is which. I'm only an hour from Disney: I'll put you up in the guest room for your trouble and you can go vacation. If you manage it, I'll be right here next to you touting power cables.
 
If not: perhaps someone else in your area will.

 

 

[keanex]

Quote:

 

[size=medium]

My point is not to prove a power cable makes a difference.
My point is that it's not easy to proof it makes no difference by using basic science. 
I suggested that it is not appropriate to make the subject a definite negative by analysing basic science only. 
I did not propose anything neither did I conclude whether it definitely works or doesn't. This is exactly what I suggested in my first post, that it's more appropriate to share experience, not telling others something is definite. 
 
These points went right from my first to my last posts, which don't seem to conflict too much with what you just suggested. 
 
PS: My wife who knows nothing about Hifi, identified the difference between a Siltech Ruby Hill G6 and a 15 dollars unknown power cord, on the amp, in a blind test. Although she was not able to tell how better the ruby hill was, she did say it sounds better. 
This is my own experience, but I don't have to prove that power cable works to anyone. I have absolutely no interest in doing so. I only suggested others to try for themselves. 
 
Just in case you didn't notice, I was not the one who always assert or conclude things, not unless I was made to do so. 
​

[/size]

I just flew around my house, literally flew. You have to believe me because I posted it.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Again, you cannot prove a negative, Piratelord. If you're struggling with that fact, check out some formal logic.

What you are saying is that because not everything is understood, then power cables could work.

That's a non sequitur. Because some part of theoretical physics isn't full understood does not mean that some guy cranking out cables in his garage has somehow unraveled the Great Mysteries of the Universe. The more likely supposition is that the guy just made something up without any backing evidence and is hoping to make a profit. If you disagree, please point us to the test results.

Also, you seem to miss the point that if cable claims are true (which would be odd, because the cable mythology is chock full of self-contradictions. If the assertion of one manufacturer are correct, then it would mean that several other manufacturers are dead wrong.) they would invalidate a bunch of stuff that already works. If every loopy cable theory were correct (notwithstanding the contradictions), then your computer probably wouldn't turn on, your light bulbs would misbehave and your car wouldn't run.

You must take the claims in the context of what already exists.