KeithPhantom
100+ Head-Fier
First of all I want to thank you for expressing your view on this subject, since is really important to have different sides in an argument. Personally, I also learn more how others think and why they do.It is funny going from you about me making up my mind. You are disregarding experiences of tens thousands of people because you are unable to explain something.
Maybe the problem is not that it is not true but the scientific methods are not right or going into insufficient level.
Here comes the bashing So my multiple experiences over time are "anecdotal impressions", but yours are the only real truth
I don't know who from the two of us is right. I'm just writing my experience and the experiences of some people I know, which were the same though without me influencing them or vice versa.
But as I wrote, if I'm even deluding myself it is worth the few dollars for electricity as my enjoyment of music after that is higher. And I encourage people to try it out and decide for themselves. Because it does not matter, if it is the equipment change, or a change in their mind, it is often to better
I will not deny that you personally may perceived changes, this is something many have said. In spite of that, the problem is the lack of evidence for it and the exaggeration of the deltas perceived when they are to a scale that's way below any possible psychoacoustic or physiologic perception of any human, even including outliers.
Because others may claim it is true it does not make it true, that's a bandwagon argument, maybe you should revise your argument and present testable and repeatable evidence of that and your other claims.
About your scientific method argument, you have the burden of proof since you're asserting it cannot reveal and/or approximate us to the truth. As for this, you have to provide your own method to achieve a better result than the one we have been using for centuries and has provided us with repeatable evidence of how the world works.
Finally, it is important to know the science behind audio, not just in terms of finances and cost, also the sheer knowledge is needed to build better equipment, to understand more about psychoacoustics (a different realm of audio science), etc. The science behind it reveal how it works and lets us compare and infer over the equipment we're using to represent the audio.
Disclaimer: because you use a fallacious argument doesn't mean that your conclusion is automatically wrong, it just means the argument is faulty and cannot truly explain the reason your conclusion may be true.