[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS This is a DBT-free forum. That means that discussions of DBT's are not permitted. You seem to have difficulty grasping this concept.

Just answer his question...

No. Double blind tests have not been made. This wouldn't stand up to that sort of thing. It's easier to gather together a bunch of unverifiable anecdotal evidence and confuse the issue with a lot of pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by omedon I suspect that it has something to do with the fact that people either are not at all, or shouldn't feel, obligated to back up each and every one of their opinions with a DBT which some people expect them too.

This is the internet. That is a given.

The reason as far as I see it is that certain folks can't discern the difference between an argument on point and a personal attack... so they launch into personal attacks instead of arguing on point.

See ya
Steve

 

[NotJeffBuckley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot This is the internet. That is a given. The reason as far as I see it is that certain folks can't discern the difference between an argument on point and a personal attack... so they launch into personal attacks instead of arguing on point. See ya Steve

Steve, you're just an AGENDA fiend. Of course, it's only an "agenda" if you're asking for substantiation, not at all an "agenda" if you're relentlessly attacking anyone who asks for substantiation. There is only one "agenda," you see. Persecution and all that.

Let's be blunt and honest. The reason that this forum is DBT-free is because no higher-end audiophile stuff has reliably stood up against double blind tests. Self-proclaimed golden ears apparently can't tell the difference between cables and in many cases between friggin' amplifiers if they can't see what's playing, and that goes against the philosophy. Somehow. This is usually explained (in my opinion very inadequately) by some sort of proclamation that "DBT is flawed" because there are many things which have to be very carefully watched for under expecting circumstances to pick out, a process that can often take weeks of listening. I like to call these things "audio expectancy" or more commonly "placebo," but that's just me being Captain Dogma, the Empirical Avenger!

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tachikoma Again, someone needs to put this whole reason of having this thread in perspective. All discussion prior to some major DBT-ing had been about which part of the product is BS, and which part actually works. We all know that there is nothing quantum about the bloody _box_, but what if it can be proven that it does work at a different level? Granted, I am an amatuer science guy; but has anyone given any empirical evidence (as you people enjoy putting it) that the product will not work at a different level?

That's kind of like saying, "It's absurd to think that a Ouijii board will allow us to speak with the dead, but who's to say we might not be able to contact space aliens with it?" If something is snake oil on one level, the odds are excellent that it's snake oil on every other level too.

See ya
Steve

P.S. I would like to know exactly what "gas-like" is. It's not a gas... but it acts like one? What is it? A solid? A liquid?

 

[NotJeffBuckley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot P.S. I would like to know exactly what "gas-like" is. It's not a gas... but it acts like one? What is it? A solid? A liquid?

I'm guessing jet-puffed Jell-o.

 

[eyeteeth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotJeffBuckley This is usually explained (in my opinion very inadequately) by some sort of proclamation that "DBT is flawed" because there are many things which have to be very carefully watched for under expecting circumstances to pick out, a process that can often take weeks of listening. I like to call these things "audio expectancy" or more commonly "placebo," but that's just me being Captain Dogma, the Empirical Avenger!

This just happened with me with the APC surge/power conditioner. After a few days of short term back and forth listening I was mighty impressed and had basically made up my mind to buy it. I loved it. Then I just ignored it sort of, listened to music non-critically-normally for a few hours at good volume and I came to hated it, my bronze ears were ringing! Had I relied on DBT I'd have been stuck with something that did not suit me. Blind testing can be useful (I've tried and will continue to in the future) but it's not THE final answer.

I'm still mad about the Pepsi challenge!

 

[Beauregard]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyeteeth ... Then I just ignored it sort of, listened to music non-critically-normally for a few hours at good volume and I came to hated it, my bronze ears were ringing! Had I relied on DBT I'd have been stuck with something that did not suit me. Blind testing can be useful (I've tried and will continue to in the future) but it's not THE final answer. ...

You're making the common mistake of not realizing that there's nothing about a DBT paradigm that requires frequent A/B switching. The best way to approach a blind A/B test is to replicate the listening circumstances that you use to evaluate equipment sighted.

Simply, one listens to each component until he or she feels comfortable in hearing a difference and then determines a preference. In a formal A/B-X test, one doesn't move to trials identifying X until confidence has been achieved that you can detect a difference between A and B.

This failure to note that proper blind evaluation imposes no restrictions on the listener other than blindness results in a lot of the strawman arguments used by DBT opponents.

Soo... did I manage to sneak this in before the thread was locked???

Best,
Beau

 

[omedon]

Aw heck since everybody is at it. This question has been bugging me for a while. What is so 'scientific' about a DBT? I mean if it is performed on just one person then it is totally subjective. Right? It is completely dependant on that person and has no weight any further than that. If I suceed or fail at a DBT that says absolutely nothing about the likelihood of anybody else detecting of failing to detect a difference.

In order for a DBT to have any kind of scientific weight/accuraccy wouldn't it have to be performed on good sized random sample, ~1000 people or greater, in similar and repeatable conditions?

To get a scientific DBT in that case would take plenty of money and man hours to perform. So there is a very good reason they don't happen on esoteric audio products with very limited markets.

Does anybody else see it this way or am I way out to lunch?

My apologize to the moderators. This will be the first and last time I mention the unmentionable

 

[Wodgy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by omedon Aw heck since everybody is at it. This question has been bugging me for a while. What is so 'scientific' about a DBT? I mean if it is performed on just one person then it is totally subjective. Right? It is completely dependant on that person and has no weight any further than that. If I suceed or fail at a DBT that says absolutely nothing about the likelihood of anybody else detecting of failing to detect a difference.

It depends on what conclusion you're trying to draw. If the goal is to disprove the notion that this kind of device (or any tweak/cable) does nothing, then a single person reliably able to detect differences with the tweak in his system proves that the device is not a placebo.

If you're trying to draw the conclusion that a majority of people are able to hear a difference, then yes, you need to study a larger number of people. But most audiophiles aren't interested in the majority of other people -- they tend to believe they have special/trained/golden ears -- so this isn't a big issue.

On the other hand, no number of double blind tests will ever prove that this kind of device does nothing. That's why even the true believers needn't fear DBT. A person can always claim he's the one in a thousand/million whose ears are able to detect a difference, the rest of the world be damned. The only reason DBT discussions are banned on this forum is because an uncivil poster from HydrogenAudio with a vaguely anti-Semitic name came over some time ago and proceeded to wreck every thread with DBT talk.

 

[shplorgh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wodgy It depends on what conclusion you're trying to draw. If the goal is to disprove the notion that this kind of device (or any tweak/cable) does nothing, then a single person reliably able to detect differences with the tweak in his system proves that the device is not a placebo. If you're trying to draw the conclusion that a majority of people are able to hear a difference, then yes, you need to study a larger number of people. But most audiophiles aren't interested in the majority of other people -- they tend to believe they have special/trained/golden ears -- so this isn't a big issue. On the other hand, no number of double blind tests will ever prove that this kind of device does nothing. That's why even the true believers needn't fear DBT. A person can always claim he's the one in a thousand/million whose ears are able to detect a difference, the rest of the world be damned. The only reason DBT discussions are banned on this forum is because an uncivil poster from HydrogenAudio with a vaguely anti-Semitic name came over some time ago and proceeded to wreck every thread with DBT talk.

Good thing that doesn't happen anymore eh?

 

[elrod-tom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hungrych Good thing that doesn't happen anymore eh?

My thoughts exactly...I guess it's going to take the issuance of some official warnings to get this BS to stop.