[boomana]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyaan I. Sqatsi /img/forum/go_quote.gif By whomever. k

 

[catachresis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Doug /img/forum/go_quote.gif I bet many more people would think this is the better tasting burger

REDACTION [my bad]. Man, you're so messed-up, you're arguing my own point!-- aww, hell, I hate it when I ramp up the whoop-ass on somebody who's arguing my own point. Fehh. Mea Culpa, mea culpa.

 

[markw51]

When CD players were first introduced, Phillips engineers said it was "perfect sound forever." Of course, experimenters started modding right away, and one of those engineers told me it was nonsense since the CD player could not be improved upon, based on measurements.

 

[Scott_Tarlow]

Sorry, I am too busy connecting Gravity to Electromagnetic force =).

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markw51 /img/forum/go_quote.gif When CD players were first introduced, Phillips engineers said it was "perfect sound forever."

They said no such thing.

"Perfect sound forever" came straight from the MARKETING DEPARTMENT.

k

 

[haloxt]

Omega, there's many possible issues in testing cables. Consider how many people think cables make a difference. It'd be pretty surprising to anyone to discover that auditory placebo could be that epidemic (assuming it is placebo and not actual difference). So a very high degree of understanding of mental phenomena (which I think no one possesses) would be requisite in deducing with absolute certainty whether or not it is necessary to pursue testing beyond what testing has already been done. Then there's also the claims by manufacturers that our measuring tools aren't good enough, maybe so, and one must decide again whether this is the case based on his own opinion of the likelihood of either current measuring tools not being up to par, or the difficulty of demonstrating cable differences via DBT despite the widespread belief in audible cable differences. And what bothers me is that people believe they know enough about placebo and know enough about science to feel absolutely certain there is no difference.

Anyhow, this cable debacle is no worse than the controversy you have in any field (and I mean any field). In many ways it is better because most other fields have monopolies and if you choose to disagree you get ostracized and if you persist, proved wrong by being fired.

It seems to me you are interested in a good way to test for cable differences instead of partaking in the bickering between anti-cablers and pro-cablers, if so consider my tips on making a test here, I would appreciate feedback or suggestions.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f133/p...ml#post5986220

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haloxt /img/forum/go_quote.gif Omega, there's many possible issues in testing cables. Consider how many people think cables make a difference.

Many people genuinely believe they will win the jackpot on the Powerball, 99.999999% do not, what you believe is not made real regardless how many people believe it..

Quote:

It'd be pretty surprising to anyone to discover that auditory placebo could be that epidemic (assuming it is placebo and not actual difference).

See above, I have two degrees in Psychology I have no trouble withn the idea that folks can, in stunning numbers, believe things to be true which are simply not.

Quote:

So a very high degree of understanding of mental phenomena (which I think no one possesses) would be requisite in deducing with absolute certainty whether or not it is necessary to pursue testing beyond what testing has already been done.

Nope, it is for our purposes a black box, you either can detect a difference or you cannot, ignore preference as that is a distraction. Is X = B or = A, is pretty simple, you do not need to know anything abouty the neural wiring. Run the test with a few 100 folks and see if anyone can detect a difference.

Quote:

Then there's also the claims by manufacturers that our measuring tools aren't good enough,

Dubious on that one, we can easily measure the effects of different components, that is utterly trivial, my $30 ADC can be used to detect 0.01db differences in cables , unless there are some magical properties yet to be discovered ?


Quote:

maybe so, and one must decide again whether this is the case based on his own opinion of the likelihood of either current measuring tools not being up to par, or the difficulty of demonstrating cable differences via DBT

DBTs can comfortably demonstrate audible differences when such differences actually exist, i.e CODECS, level differences, frequency, distortion, noise and so on, again this is trivial, yet with cables these differences become impossible to detect, why ?

Quote:

despite the widespread belief in audible cable differences. And what bothers me is that people believe they know enough about placebo and know enough about science to feel absolutely certain there is no difference.

belief <> Fact
Forget the philosophy of science just run loads of controlled tests and see what the results are, my money (having measured cables and done DBTs) is on rare if any differences.

Here is a thought if the mega cable manufacturers are so confident in their products how come none of them have been able to show reliable differences with human subjects and controlled tests ?

 

[haloxt]

Quote:

Many people genuinely believe they will win the jackpot on the Powerball, 99.999999% do not, what you believe is not made real regardless how many people believe it..

Terrible analogy, a handful of people believing they can beat the odds has nothing to do with the fact that many people believe in cables.

Quote:

See above, I have two degrees in Psychology I have no trouble withn the idea that folks can, in stunning numbers, believe things to be true which are simply not.

I don't think I've heard much psychological explanation from you. Try to give us such an explanation for how so many people can be deceived by cables, and deceived the way they are.

Quote:

Nope, it is for our purposes a black box, you either can detect a difference or you cannot, ignore preference as that is a distraction. Is X = B or = A, is pretty simple, you do not need to know anything abouty the neural wiring. Run the test with a few 100 folks and see if anyone can detect a difference.

There's no reliable data in many fields, in particular medicine. That doesn't stop people from selling people dubious drugs. In spite of your two degrees in psychology, I do not think you are aware of the sort of sensory fallacies humans make that prevent tests involving human senses from being of any value. It's hard to do DBT's correctly because it's difficult to remove the unreliability of humans reporting what they think they sense. I say care should be taken. You say not. To each his own.

Quote:

Dubious on that one, we can easily measure the effects of different components, that is utterly trivial, my $30 ADC can be used to detect 0.01db differences in cables , unless there are some magical properties yet to be discovered ?

Measuring has not been at all rigorous in the field of audio electronics. For example, the author of xxhighend a computer media player claims he had measurable differences between two different bit-perfect digital outputs from different players when measuring the line-out of his dac. How many people have attempted to do his test which certainly deserves to be repeated if only to disprove it?

Quote:

DBTs can comfortably demonstrate audible differences when such differences actually exist, i.e CODECS, level differences, frequency, distortion, noise and so on, again this is trivial, yet with cables these differences become impossible to detect, why ?

I could give you many examples of poorly made DBT's, but since you have two degrees in psychology I guess you don't need such information.

Quote:

belief <> Fact Forget the philosophy of science just run loads of controlled tests and see what the results are, my money (having measured cables and done DBTs) is on rare if any differences. Here is a thought if the mega cable manufacturers are so confident in their products how come none of them have been able to show reliable differences with human subjects and controlled tests ?

Just a guess based on my undegreed understanding of psychology, because they don't give a damn about proving it to others.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haloxt /img/forum/go_quote.gif Terrible analogy, a handful of people believing they can beat the odds has nothing to do with the fact that many people believe in cables.

Ok, try this one - say 50% of the world believe in some form of God and 50% believe there is no form of God. So 50% are wrong and the strength of their belief does not alter the fact one way or another.


Quote:

I don't think I've heard much psychological explanation from you. Try to give us such an explanation for how so many people can be deceived by cables, and deceived the way they are.

Sigh, start with expectations, then add the affect of appearance, then cognitive dissonance, bung in a dash of groupthink and stir with a bit of social acceptance theory, half-bake in an oven and sprinkle with a dash of magical thinking. Voila !



Quote:

In spite of your two degrees in psychology, I do not think you are aware of the sort of sensory fallacies humans make that prevent tests involving human senses from being of any value. It's hard to do DBT's correctly because it's difficult to remove the unreliability of humans reporting what they think they sense. I say care should be taken. You say not. To each his own.

Wrong way around, it is the unreliability of humans that make DBTs essential and far far better than sighted tests, I have done dozen of DBTS on myself and they work, when there is a difference of a sufficient magnitude, I have used noise levels, diff CD players and filters.

Seriously try it yourself, take a piece of music and apply a few different low pass filters, apply roll-offs at 5,7,9 and 10K, I guarantee you will be able to tell the difference in a DBT, at 13K it gets harder at 15K pretty marginal and at 18K very very difficult but if you have good ears you might manage it, these are real differences and really detectable.


Quote:

I could give you many examples of poorly made DBT's, but since you have two degrees in psychology I guess you don't need such information.

Thanks but I know how to interpret experiments, though I actually did more experiments in my non Psychology degrees, yes there are some bad tests out there, I give them less credence, Blind is necessary but not sufficient.



Quote:

Just a guess based on my undegreed understanding of psychology, because they don't give a damn about proving it to others.

Yet they make such grandiose claims, such claims without evidence look, well almost religious. Perhaps they genuinely believe that their cables are better, perhaps some do not do such tests because they fear that punters might (A) not be able to tell cables apart or (B) might prefer the competition ?

That is another set of possible interpretations.

 

[wavoman]

As we have been discussing in other threads, it is fairly well established statistically that there are no huge audible differences in interconnects or speaker cables that can be detected by the population at large.

The question of whether certain golden-ear individuals can hear differences in relaxed (but blind) settings that mirror listening at home has not been settled. Because, as many here have said, the testing is very difficult.

It has been suggested that we here at Head-Fi give up our own testing and read the published literature. I would disagree, and currently harbor the fantasy that when I retire in a few short years I will engage in serious audio testing. I am a fully qualified statistician, and a few fully qualified audio engineers have said they will work with me. Ah well, that's the future, but I am taking some steps now (doing research on the right testing models, etc.).

I think A/B/X asks the wrong question, and I think it increases response bias. Answering whether X=A or X=B is not the same thing as correctly hearing a difference, and consistently stating a preference. The sensory evaluation (food) industry has mostly given up on A/B/X. I won't go on since this has been covered in other posts.

You do not have to test every individual in the world to conclude that there are no individuals who can hear a difference with high confidence. If (finally) we can design the right experiments (very hard), and run enough self-proclaimed golden-ears through it, and no one can pass, we are as justified in a conclusion of "no difference" as we are in concluding that no one can sink a basketball from mid-court 100% of the time. We need the tests to be well publicized in the audio world, and perhaps we need to offer a prize. Not a challenge, like Randi's, since he insisted that losers pay costs, and the costs to meet his (rigorous) test conditions were substantial. But if we offered $1000 and the deal to put the person's picture of the cover of some national magazine, and held these tests at musician gatherings as well as Hi Fi shows ... well then you're going to get a healthy sample. But the test conditions have yet to be perfected, so this is not yet practical.

 

[Lazarus Short]

.





There, I made my point {see above}.

 

[haloxt]

Nice post, here's my post:




I wrote my reply to nick but it won't show up until after I get back from doing some things tata for now.

 

[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wavoman /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think A/B/X asks the wrong question, and I think it increases response bias. Answering whether X=A or X=B is not the same thing as correctly hearing a difference, and consistently stating a preference. The sensory evaluation (food) industry has mostly given up on A/B/X. I won't go on since this has been covered in other posts.

Okay, forget A/B/X. What objection would you have to a simple same/different comparison. Listen to A, listen to B. Are they the same or are they different?

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haloxt /img/forum/go_quote.gif Measuring has not been at all rigorous in the field of audio electronics.

[img http://www.q-audio.com/images/eek.gif[/img]

Y'ever perused the JAES?

Quote:

For example, the author of xxhighend a computer media player claims he had measurable differences between two different bit-perfect digital outputs from different players when measuring the line-out of his dac. How many people have attempted to do his test which certainly deserves to be repeated if only to disprove it?

Where can one get the details of this measurement?

k

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wavoman /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think A/B/X asks the wrong question, and I think it increases response bias. Answering whether X=A or X=B is not the same thing as correctly hearing a difference, and consistently stating a preference.

The listener doesn't have to directly answer the question whether X=A or X=B.

k