Off topic in Sound Science. the new old moderation.

[gregorio]

Logic again, I'm getting nervous.

I’m not surprised. However, you should try to embrace logic, especially if you’re going to post in a sound science discussion forum and don’t want to appear a fool.

Let me ask you a question, up on the forum, thousands of people are having conversations, exchanging experiences about all the things you claim to be fiction, how do you explain such a massive and fat illusion?

Right back at you, how do you explain the thousands of people exchanging experiences that the earth is flat, the thousands of others discussing bigfoot, still more thousands discussing the lockness monster, yetis, ghosts, alien abduction, homeopathy, the tens of thousands exchanging their experiences of QAnon and countless other fictions/nonsense. Do you believe all of it just because thousands discuss their experiences of it and if not, why not?

Another case, On my Marantz HD-DAC I won't detect a change on most of the tested items, but on my carefully built 10K system and with headphones B I will find out if and where I have gained

Not unless it’s properly setup and you use controlled testing. And from what you’ve described neither is the case. In fact the massive amount of noise/interference you described is indicative of a really terrible system, not worth even $50 let alone $10k!

Again, do you want to try some logic and learn something or do you just want to deal with your nervousness of it by repeating the same fallacies?

G

 

[T 1000]

In the next million posts, we will continue to talk about the same thing, and I will continue to state that I did not succeed in enlightening you.

 

[T 1000]

Нисам изненађен. Међутим, требало би да покушате да прихватите логику, посебно ако намеравате да објављујете на добром научном дискусионом форуму и не желите да испаднете будала.

Право на вас, како објашњавате хиљаде људи који размењују искуства да је земља равна, хиљаде других који расправљају о бигфоот-у, још више хиљада који разговарају о чудовиштима закључавања, јетијима, духовима, отмици ванземаљаца, хомеопатији, десетинама хиљада размењујућих њихова искуства са КАноном и безброј других фикција/бесмислица. Да ли верујете у све то само зато што хиљаде причају о својим искуствима, а ако не, зашто не?

Не осим ако није правилно подешен и ако користите контролисано тестирање. А из онога што сте описали није тако. У ствари, огромна количина буке/сметњи коју сте описали указује на заиста ужасан систем, који не вреди ни 50 долара, а камоли 10 хиљада долара!

Опет, да ли желите да испробате неку логику и научите нешто или само желите да се носите са својом нервозом понављањем истих заблуда?

Г

fool ? I would be a fool if I accepted your teachings against what I perceive

So, what several of you claim is correct against thousands. A few of you imagine and thousands listen.
Trust me your logic is your worst enemy

 

[chef8489]

I'm not sure what you're telling me, that I shouldn't trust my ears. We're not asking questionable changes in the sound here, but drastic changes.

Your non-acceptance only harms you and some collateral victims who, without real experience, will sniff your suggestions and represent your position.
Nothing will change in the real world

Your ears fool you all the time especially when your brain is involved. Its exactly how the entertainment and music industry worls. It is why proper scientific tests have controls set up to reduce and eliminate those. Yet you choose to ignore it. You fall for the marketing and and your brain and ears follow suit because you expect a change. Again its called placebo. The mind is a very powerful thing. Other than trolling in here you serve no purpose because you have no interest in actually learning about scientific testing and results. You just spout the same old oh my ears hear the difference yet you fail to prove or even attempt to do proper testing to prove that you can actually hear a difference. Guess what. When audiophiles actually submitt to proper testing, they fail the tests. Its why you guys never submit to the real tests with proper controls set in place.

 

[bigshot]

I wasn’t referring to a specific example. Just stating that even the best of us have on occasion misunderstood or misinterpreted a study or part of a study. I did it routinely when I first started reading the AES journal.

I've noticed that sometimes the summaries at the top of papers say something quite a bit different than the study itself. I don't know why that is. Maybe the person who writes the summaries doesn't quite understand or is in a hurry.

 

[Bytor123]

Sancho Panza, tilting at windmills. I don't think anyone is saying you can't hear differences, rather you need to provide evidence that you do, and that they're due to the things that you claim they are.

 

[T 1000]

Your ears fool you all the time especially when your brain is involved. Its exactly how the entertainment and music industry worls. It is why proper scientific tests have controls set up to reduce and eliminate those. Yet you choose to ignore it. You fall for the marketing and and your brain and ears follow suit because you expect a change. Again its called placebo. The mind is a very powerful thing. Other than trolling in here you serve no purpose because you have no interest in actually learning about scientific testing and results. You just spout the same old oh my ears hear the difference yet you fail to prove or even attempt to do proper testing to prove that you can actually hear a difference. Guess what. When audiophiles actually submitt to proper testing, they fail the tests. Its why you guys never submit to the real tests with proper controls set in place.

Using the term trolling only proves that you are limited in providing realistic counter-arguments.
When you can't deal with the situation, then the only thing that comes to your mind is to shout troll troll, and then your dad comes and denies me the right to participate with the explanation - trolling
If it wasn't pathetic, it would be funny.
As I already mentioned - I don't care

 

[T 1000]

Sancho Panza, tilting at windmills. I don't think anyone is saying you can't hear differences, rather you need to provide evidence that you do, and that they're due to the things that you claim they are.

Sancho Panza? what are you, another specter from the dark. To whom shall I prove?, to you?

 

[bigshot]

Back in the day, both bigshot and gregorio were banned from head-fi for an extended period of time. I hope knowing that makes you feel better.

I was banned for posting photos of a teardown of a sound enhancing dongle made and sold by Synergistic Research. It was a metal tube with a male plug on one end and a female plug on the other. Inside the metal tube was a regular wire connecting the two jacks on the ends, and tinfoil wrapped around it with a couple of pinches of gravel inside to add weight. This sound enhancing dongle sold for hundreds of dollars and it was claimed that it improved the sound quality of home audio systems in many ways.

At that time Synergistic Research was an advertiser on the Head-Fi site, and they were quite upset about my review of their product... Soon after this I was banned, along with other people who participated in and commented on the teardown. There was a period of time where Sound Science was a ghost town. That was a prior regime though. Things have gotten better around here since all of the bans were pardoned. We've built back an active community, which I'm proud to be a part of.

 

[T 1000]

We play until dad comes

 

[T 1000]

I was banned for posting photos of a teardown of a sound enhancing dongle made and sold by Synergistic Research. It was a metal tube with a male plug on one end and a female plug on the other. Inside the metal tube was a regular wire connecting the two jacks on the ends, and tinfoil wrapped around it with a couple of pinches of gravel inside to add weight. This sound enhancing dongle sold for hundreds of dollars and it was claimed that it improved the sound quality of home audio systems in many ways.

At that time Synergistic Research was an advertiser on the Head-Fi site, and they were quite upset about my review of their product... Soon after this I was banned, along with other people who participated in and commented on the teardown. There was a period of time where Sound Science was a ghost town. That was a prior regime though. Things have gotten better around here since all of the bans were pardoned. We've built back an active community, which I'm proud to be a part of.

"and they were quite upset about my review of their product"
From your excessive influence on the public, I suppose
"There was a period of time where Sound Science was a ghost town"
If he didn't have me, he was still there, I raised your attendance (literally)

 

[bigshot]

A whole system has dozens of variables. If you want to test and attribute improvement to a specific aspect of the system, you have to isolate that aspect. You can't just attribute it to whatever you choose. And you certainly can't attribute it to how much it cost, because there's no correlation between price and sound quality. There are plenty of cheap systems that sound great, and it is drop dead easy to spend a lot of money and get poor results if you do it wrong.

It seems to me that if your subjective impression is telling you that you can hear beyond established thresholds, the first thing you would do is to try to employ some controls to try to move your subjective impression closer to being an objective observation. You'd do some controlled listening tests, informal measurements, etc... to try to establish that you actually *can* hear something that you shouldn't be able to hear. You would want to have some sort of solid evidence before you start telling other people that the thresholds may be wrong because of your subjective impression.

"Observational experience" includes real world evidence engulfed in a swamp of subjective bias and perceptual error. You can't determine which is evidence and which is the swamp until you drain the swamp and focus your observation only on the parts of the experience that aren't subjective.

 

[Bytor123]

Sancho Panza? what are you, another specter from the dark. To whom shall I prove?, to you?

You're making claims in a sound science forum - an audience of clever folks with experience and understanding of 'sound science' (I don't include myself in that - I'm from a social science background. I'm here to learn), who are sceptical about what you state as fact, that's all. No one disputes your experience, just your claim that it's fact.
It is dark here, actually.

 

[T 1000]

You're making claims in a sound science forum - an audience of clever folks with experience and understanding of 'sound science' (I don't include myself in that - I'm from a social science background. I'm here to learn), who are sceptical about what you state as fact, that's all. No one disputes your experience, just your claim that it's fact.
It is dark here, actually.

OK, keep learning

 

[T 1000]

A whole system has dozens of variables. If you want to test and attribute improvement to a specific aspect of the system, you have to isolate that aspect. You can't just attribute it to whatever you choose. And you certainly can't attribute it to how much it cost, because there's no correlation between price and sound quality. There are plenty of cheap systems that sound great, and it is drop dead easy to spend a lot of money and get poor results if you do it wrong.

I had to read it twice, because I agreed with your point at first, and the second time to confirm that I understood correctly.
It's a faint glimmer, but I think there's still hope for you