[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eucariote /img/forum/go_quote.gif What I believe is a methodology. ... grotesque and confused to have equal footing with ideas that real, insightful and true...

No need to repeat your beloved methodology. It's not what I'm talking of. I was talking of the terms «belief» and «believer» which you use so unreflectedly and frivolously – except for yourself and your own approach. Again: I don't «believe» in cable sound, I hear it. My method of evaluating gear is taylored to my needs: If it sounds to my taste under real-world conditions (= my usual listening environment and conditions), it serves my demands perfectly. There's no belief involved, only perception. It doesn't fit your idea of a perfect evaluation methodology, but that doesn't mean it has anything to do with belief. I hope you can accept that. If not, I don't care as well.
.

 

[pdupiano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nick_charles /img/forum/go_quote.gif You can adjust for random variations and unexpected outputs by doing lots and lots of samples, then the few strange results can keep the psychologists happy but we get a decent aggregate picture. CD player Denon DCD900 analog out RCA cables-----Edirol UA-1EX USB sound card analog input set to 44.1khz-----PC Lenovo Y710 Windows Vista 4GB---ASIO drivers------Audacity set to 16/44.1 records wav files. Audacity used to plot the frequency spectra of the samples and export the numeric values to text files, imported into Excel and differences calculated and plotted as line graphs...

Perhaps I didn't make it clear, but memory does not lead to random outputs, it leads to an unpredicatable/random result. In the case of cables you have two possible outputs: 1. Able to detect something in the cables, 2. Not able to detect something in the cables. I'm not stating that memory leads to a new output (eg output 3) what I am stating is that memory prevents a person from using the same input and always getting the same output. If a third or fourth output arises, then yes you can take those into account as random variations. But that's rarely the case for well designed experiments, and is not the case here. By having memory, I'm stating that the same stimuli will lead to a different response. So say you have 2 possible outputs (A and B) and you have two inputs (1 and 2). If it is always true that 1 ==> A and 2==>B or even if 1==>A and 2==>A, then the mind could be studied as a black box (you can study inputs and outputs). But because of memory it is possible that 1==>A and then 1==>B the next time you run the test. The only way for the mind to be a black box is if a person's experiences did not affect their thoughts and responses to stimuli in the future -in other words you have a person who does not learn. That's my main reason for rejecting the blackbox notion of the mind.

Thanks for posting your testing set up. I'm trying to get more info on the audacity spectrum analysis I actually didn't know that audacity could do that for you.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just couldn't stand the steps and clicks anymore. .

Just begun a project involving 0.5 dB, 45 position steps and clicks : ).

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdupiano This is opposed to the anti-cabler view that stipulates that the source of a person's perception must come from some physical property (hence the testing) and neglects all other things.

^

Doesn't make sense. You're the one that seems to be arguing in terms of physical properties making a difference based on purities, etc. The "anti-cabler" view leans towards the hypothesis that placebo or other concepts are occurring that aren't really happening in the realm of physics and measurements.

Hence the "it's all in your head" mantra some of us tend to adopt.

 

[eucariote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif There's no belief involved, only perception. It doesn't fit your idea of a perfect evaluation methodology, but that doesn't mean it has anything to do with belief.

I hear you

And have no doubt that you hear these differences and they are consistent and real. I think that we just attribute it to different things.

You do and should enjoy your system more because of that. So do I and I can't help it. But I don't trust my senses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eucariote /img/forum/go_quote.gif It is canonical that perception -sincere, non-judgemental, reliable, experienced- is made consistent by the brain with prior expectations and information from other senses.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eucariote /img/forum/go_quote.gif I hear you And have no doubt that you hear these differences and they are consistent and real. I think that we just attribute it to different things. You do and should enjoy your system more because of that. So do I and I can't help it. But I don't trust my senses.

Man, if you can't trust your senses you are in the wrong hobby IMO?
This hobby is all about stimulating the sense of hearing. If you can't handle spending the money or trying something new it is OK. Just please do not be the party pooper discounting everybody's opinion on this matter.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif Man, if you can't trust your senses you are in the wrong hobby IMO?

Why is that? Do you trust your eyes watching David Copperfield?

Quote:

This hobby is all about stimulating the sense of hearing.

Stimulating doesn't mean you have to trust squat.

Quote:

If you can't handle spending the money or trying something new it is OK.

I'm sure we can, we just prefer stuff that can actually be attributed to a physical reality rather that "perceptions" made by something ultimately unreliable.

Quote:

Just please do not be the party pooper discounting everybody's opinion on this matter.

Opinions can be wrong in this case as it does not relate to a "taste", but instead is a debate of what the actual facts are.


As it stands, cable believers are just that - believers. Until proof is provided to the scientific community and put under scrutiny it will stay that way.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why is that? Do you trust your eyes watching David Copperfield? Stimulating doesn't mean you have to trust squat. I'm sure we can, we just prefer stuff that can actually be attributed to a physical reality rather that "perceptions" made by something ultimately unreliable. Opinions can be wrong in this case as it does not relate to a "taste", but instead is a debate of what the actual facts are. As it stands, cable believers are just that - believers. Until proof is provided to the scientific community and put under scrutiny it will stay that way.

Some of us do not watch David Copperfield.
Trust is up to you? But if you don't you are missing out!
Some can not, they try every excuse not to spend money.
You want proof... Spend the money after doing the necessary homework to define the path to travel in this hobby. You can't get every answer on the internet with this hobby. It takes money and participation. How many mini meets have you been to or organize Shike? How many people in the industry have you really addressed your concerns too? Have you really done your homework? Just asking?

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some of us do not watch David Copperfield.

Point still stands -- senses aren't trustworthy and you know it.

Quote:

Trust is up to you? But if you don't you are missing out!

Trust doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Quote:

Some can not, they try every excuse not to spend money.

So you stereotype everyone that questions it? Besides, how does this have any merit in regards to the science of cables?

Quote:

You want proof... Spend the money after doing the necessary homework to define the path to travel in this hobby.

Has nothing to do with the topic, and you're insinuating I haven't.

Quote:

You can't get every answer on the internet with this hobby.

Never said you could, but you CAN research known scientific principles. You do realize the sub-forum you're in . . . right?

Quote:

It takes money and participation.

Once again, nothing to do with topic and leans towards insinuation.

Quote:

How many mini meets have you been to or organize Shike?

Irrelevant to the topic . . . insinuating some more are we?

Quote:

How many people in the industry have you really addressed your concerns too?

Which industry? If you're talking the cable industry (I'm guessing, since that's the only thing moderately relevant here), they've replied to them . . . with marketing. It usually goes like this:

Me: "How do these improve the sound"

Them:

"It does (insert made up terms here and fake quasi science that should be featured in Star Trek)"

or

"We don't know, BUT IT DOES!"

They then follow up with a money back guarantee -- knowing full well that people are psychologically going to be inclined to believe it rather than not. It's the same reason known snake oil products have been able to sell for years.

Also, since you're so obsessed with me I have had experience with boutique cables . . . never noticed a difference. I did like having locking RCA connectors though.

Quote:

Have you really done your homework? Just asking?

This debating tactic of yours is extremely dirty and just as repetitious. You're using insinuation to try and discredit me, but then trying to hide behind the "I'm just asking questions" routine to prevent backlash should I sufficiently prove I have (even though it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand).


Maybe you should come back to this thread when you actually feel like talking about the facts and topic at hand rather than focusing on trivial items that in no way have relation to this thread.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Dirty tactics really? How? I know what the topic is very well. How can anyone prove the OP's point without doing the homework envolved to prove that cables do not make a difference and researching with opinions from the cable industry? I will take back everything I have said if you can prove it on my rig? Have a pair of Grado IC's and some DIY IC's. And some power cables too. Please prove how they sound the same? It would save me some money. Prove that the Oyaide Receptacle R1 doesn't make a difference or the Synergistic QLS-6 do not make a difference? You can discount opinions all you want, but until you do the grunt work for yourself it doesn't really mean anything. Come to the next Seattle meet, you might learn something? What have you researched for your point Shike? What experiments have you done? What gear have you used?

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif Dirty tactics really? How?

I find it hard to believe you're oblivious to this, but I'll provide an example.

example:

"This guy is a filthy liar . . . or is he? I'm just asking questions!"

Journalists lacking integrity use such a tactic as it will associate "filthy liar" with "This guy" regardless of the fact it's being phrased as a question. It's used to insinuate and discredit a person or organization usually without actually addressing points or facts.

Quote:

I know what the topic is very well. How can anyone prove the OP's point without doing the homework envolved to prove that cables do not make a difference and researching with opinions from the cable industry?

As far as current science shows, the OP is right. Cables don't make a difference unless there's something deficient with them. Until there's an instance that shows otherwise it will be the starting premise. Just like in java programming true false statements start false until proven true.

The cable industry itself is biased . . . without clear scientific principles how do you gauge the factuality? We've already demonstrated that sense are not necessarily right, but instead may be the work of the mind making differences.


Quote:

I will take back everything I have said if you can prove it on my rig? Have a pair of Grado IC's and some DIY IC's. And some power cables too. Please prove how they sound the same? It would save me some money. Prove that the Oyaide Receptacle R1 doesn't make a difference or the Synergistic QLS-6 do not make a difference?

Why do you feel the need to shift the burden of proof to me? It is your ears and your equipment you feel the need to test all the sudden. Do a proper DBT and don't whine about the results -- it's really that simple.

Even if I did a DBT with your rig, you could cry I have tin ears or are biased and skewing the results. This is why we do not try to prove the absence of something, but wait for its existence to be proven instead.

Quote:

You can discount opinions all you want, but until you do the grunt work for yourself it doesn't really mean anything.

Is that so? Well then I'm sure you've done all the DBTs and grunt work to prove it does make a difference right? How could one say they "did their homework" without performing such a task?

Quote:

Come to the next Seattle meet, you might learn something?

This feels oddly condescending.

Quote:

What have you researched for your point Shike?

The fact that there's no material evidence for cables is all that's necessary, but also first hand experience.

Quote:

What experiments have you done? What gear have you used?

I've used the gear in my rig plus some Viablue's for testing. I've done DBT, measured all the basics on them, etc. Nothing notable came as a result.

 

[pdupiano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif ^ Doesn't make sense. You're the one that seems to be arguing in terms of physical properties making a difference based on purities, etc. The "anti-cabler" view leans towards the hypothesis that placebo or other concepts are occurring that aren't really happening in the realm of physics and measurements. Hence the "it's all in your head" mantra some of us tend to adopt.

That's not the anti cabler view at all, for if the anti cabler admits that the effect is caused by something outside of physical measurements then they would have to concede that there is something going on and more importantly that they cannot measure it. Therefore this whole debate would be over and done with. The anti cabler does state that its all in a person's head, but refuses to acknowledge it, by which I mean that the anti cabler says that people cannot perceive a difference -even after admitting its in a person's head. They end up calling it a placebo or whatever and dismiss the perception altogether.

The anti cabler view keeps asking for forms of tests, and "scientific" reasons for why people perceive different things from cables. At the moment scientific reasons are bound by physical properties so all of the examples I have listed are possible sources of differences between cables. But remember that these differences will lead to differences in the transmission of the signal. In my view this change may or may not be the only reason for why people have different perceptions of the cable because I also accept that non-physical properties can affect a person's perception of the cable (eg. aesthetics of the cable). By non-physical property, I mean that it is not a physical property of the cable material (as I've listed, purity, shielding etc...) but rather a physical property that would affect the mind rather than the cable itself (aesthetics and cost).

When a person is doing AxB testing, I claim that they cannot separate the mind's effect on perception... But the anti cabler must hold that they can separate the mind's effect on perception from the testing and can therefore conclude that one cable or another cable's physical properties will lead to a person hearing something else or not hearing any differences between the two. That's the reason why I state it is a false conclusion, because people keep trying to ignore this other large piece of information calling it a placebo.

 

[eucariote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif Man, if you can't trust your senses you are in the wrong hobby IMO? This hobby is all about stimulating the sense of hearing. If you can't handle spending the money or trying something new it is OK. Just please do not be the party pooper discounting everybody's opinion on this matter.

You can't live in the garden any more after you take a bite from the fruit of knowledge.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eucariote /img/forum/go_quote.gif You can't live in the garden any more after you take a bite from the fruit of knowledge.

It's unfair to deduce a different approach on this topic from inferior knowledge. In fact it is just that: a different approach with different weightings. You're ready to sacrifice the trust in your senses in favor of a brain-controlled skepticism, whereas others – aware of the controversy – chose the opposite path and stick with their intuition.
.

 

[choomanchoo]

I will start by saying that I have skipped the entire thread only to comment on title alone, convincing anybody on an individuals opinion is pointless, that's the beauty of opinions,


As one of my favorite Head-fier's says, "If it sounds good to you, then it's good"