Latest Thread Images

Featured Sponsor Listings

I Don't Understand You Subjective Guys

Aug 17, 2012 at 12:44 AM Post #842 of 861
Quote:
steve eddy said:
 
If the evidence isn't flawed, then those who would dismiss it wouldn't have any rational foundation to do so.
 
Why do you keep arguing for not doing the tests just because not everyone will accept the results?
 
se
Click to expand...


Well I'm not really arguing against the tests but rather even if you do the test and succeed in them there will always be the extremists who will dismiss it and bash it regardless. My point is there will never be a true consensus on either side. Its beating a dead horse.
 

 
Aug 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM Post #843 of 861
Quote:
lee730 said:
Well I'm not really arguing against the tests but rather even if you do the test and succeed in them there will always be the extremists who will dismiss it and bash it regardless. My point is there will never be a true consensus on either side. Its beating a dead horse.
Click to expand...

 
So you're claiming that EVERYONE on the "other side" would dismiss evidence even if it isn't flawed?
 
I'm not seeing dead horse beating so much as your trying to create a no-win situation out of thin air with your self-defeatism.
 
se
 
Aug 17, 2012 at 12:52 AM Post #844 of 861
Quote:
steve eddy said:
 
So you're claiming that EVERYONE on the "other side" would dismiss evidence even if it isn't flawed?
 
I'm not seeing dead horse beating so much as your trying to create a no-win situation out of thin air with your self-defeatism.
 
se
Click to expand...

 
Did I say "everyone?" Maybe I shouldn't say never though. But highly unlikely.
 
Aug 17, 2012 at 1:02 AM Post #845 of 861
Aug 17, 2012 at 1:05 AM Post #846 of 861
Quote:
lee730 said:
 
Did I say "everyone?"
Click to expand...

 
No, you didn't say "everyone" explicitly. But you did say it's just beating a dead horse, which seems to imply that everyone would dismiss it. Otherwise, why use that as an excuse not to do anything?
 
Quote:
Maybe I shouldn't say never though. But highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

 
Based on what exactly?
 
Can you cite some instances where the evidence was not flawed and the results were dismissed?
 
se
 
Aug 17, 2012 at 1:29 AM Post #848 of 861
I can understand - not usually agree with but understand - how one might be ambivalent about listening tests even when they are carried out as rigorously as we can evision. What I don't understand or agree with is finding fault with comparison of electrical signals, such as null tests with osciloscopes. That takes the ear and brain out of the comparison process. Either the signals being fed to the transducers we listen to are identical or audibly identical by reason of level, or they are not. As for the usual counter about not taking the ear and brain out of the process, I call total BS. None of this is about the variability of hearing between individuals. It is about what the hardware and software are doing to the signal that will be heard by the individual listener.

When it was commented that if something was obviously audible it would be easily measureable, if the measure was electrical that WOULD be a slam dunk definitive. When the entire input creating the sound is being compared, there is no wiggle room about what can be measured and what can't be, or isn't being, measured. For that to be true something beside the electrical signal would have to be moving the transducer being listened to, and no one here is suggesting pixie dust.

I'm not sure if this was for the USB thread or this one, probably apropriate to both, but here it is.
 
Aug 17, 2012 at 6:00 AM Post #849 of 861
I have to ask if this thread should be re-titled 'I don't understand you Steve Eddy guys'  ?  
tongue.gif

 
Aug 17, 2012 at 12:19 PM Post #851 of 861
Quote:
clarkmc2 said:
What I don't understand or agree with is finding fault with comparison of electrical signals, such as null tests with osciloscopes. That takes the ear and brain out of the comparison process. Either the signals being fed to the transducers we listen to are identical or audibly identical by reason of level, or they are not.....
Click to expand...

 
I don't understand it either. Nothing wrong with your logic..... and yet it doesn't square with what subjectivists hear. Which means, assuming for the moment they may be right, that we just have to measure harder!
 
An example of "measuring harder" was the Acuity attempts a while back  Shock! Horror! Cable companies start a Measurements programme
 
The trouble was, the Acuity thing got prematurely over hyped by an over enthusiastic magazine editor. What they delivered, at least in the early stages, was poorly presented and certainly a long way from convincing a sound scientist. I think they're still doing their stuff and maybe the results are better presented now, but I'm past caring (there goes Mr "I don't care" again!).
 
But the point I'm making is that if an oscilloscope doesn't demonstrate a contentious difference, then maybe you need to find something else that does. And there are people who are trying just that.
 
PS. It doesn't help when subjectivists overstate their "night-and-day" moments. I've also had night-and-day moments, but I square this by reckoning that certain kinds of objectively small changes can genuinely result in a night-and-day emotional response - which can't necessarily be repeated at the same emotional level in the cold light of another day.
 
Aug 17, 2012 at 2:18 PM Post #854 of 861
TheAttorney, Well, my main point being that the only physical connection between the equipment that can or cannot make a difference to what a headphone or speaker sounds like ends at the terminal of the transducer. Nothing is passing through it but electricity. Null the tweaked and untweaked signals and see (not hear) if there is any difference and see if it is strong enough to be audible. So please tell me what else but a difference there could possibly affect what sound is made?

I suppose I need to mention that only changes in the electrical signal can make sound from the transducer. DC can move the soundmaking element, but not back and forth. I can also mention that this works for any and all sound. Music, noise, distortion, ultra and sub sonics, anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top