I was done talking to Arny. It's pointless when an individual won't accept his own demands.
I'm curious. Those of you reading the thread just saw Arny bob and weave, doing everything possible in hopes of obfuscating the question. A question he raised. As this is the Sound Science forum and everyone likes to point to the truth, why didn't any of you remark on such dishonest behavior? I understand that you agree with his audio-political position, but is that a good reason to disregard the blatant intellectual dishonesty? In my world it's not, so I choose not to give him a podium to spread the disease on Head-Fi.
"
It's the usual golden ear propaganda that ignores the most serious issue in audio, which is that the evaluations that most audiophiles use to judge sound quality are full of all kinds of biases, and are therefore producers of both false positives and false negatives.
By false positives I mean that most audiophile evaluations are so full of inherent errors that in actual experiments they have been found to create the strong impression of audible differences even when both things being listened to are the same thing! Obviously, ludicrous but true!
By false negatives I mean that most audiophile evaluations are so full of inherent errors that in actual experiments they have been found to fail to create the impression of audible differences even when both things being listened to are the intentionally altered to sound strongly different in proper listening tests! Obviously, euqally ludicrous but true!
It is a classic case of the blind leading the blind.
"
and you then tried to go off topic with the following comment:
"Of course. Buying a system one likes is foolish. Excellent point."
Obviously that sarcastic comment had nothing to do with the Stereophile article you cited or my comment on the well-known and often commented on dishonesty of Stereophile's equipment reviews.
You then melted down and started ranting and raving about what headphones I used, and the relevance of my comment to this thread. Obviously, you were cornered and trying to force the discussion down every rabbit hole in sight. When that failed, you melted down again and promised to stop posting, which of course you immediately reversed yourself about.
Do you remember the color of your first car? Can you remember the taste of the soft-drink Coke? Can you remember the taste of Coke when drinking another beverage like Coke?
The fact is many can remember the basic qualities of sound signatures of amps, headphones and sources. The recollection may not be 100%, but good enough to remember if you liked it or not? Good enough to remember the basic sound.
It is silly to argue this fact in Sound Science. I have tested this myself many times using a proven scientific methodology.
Hmmm....any post that claims using "proven scientific methodology" without providing any information about that is highly suspect, IMO. Especially when it's the first post and the person follows up with "Done. IMO." What's the point in starting a thread like this?
Here would be an interesting color memory test for anyone. Think about one of your favorite solid color shirts (other than white) that you haven't worn or looked at in at least a couple of days. Without looking at it, go down to your local paint store and pick out the color sample closest to it. Then go back to the store with the shirt on and find the sample that is the closest match. I'd be really surprised if many people succeeded in finding the right color sample the first time.
I was done talking to Arny. It's pointless when an individual won't accept his own demands.
I'm curious. Those of you reading the thread just saw Arny bob and weave, doing everything possible in hopes of obfuscating the question. A question he raised. As this is the Sound Science forum and everyone likes to point to the truth, why didn't any of you remark on such dishonest behavior? I understand that you agree with his audio-political position, but is that a good reason to disregard the blatant intellectual dishonesty? In my world it's not, so I choose not to give him a podium to spread the disease on Head-Fi.
It's obvious you two aren't going to be great friends, however, I will say that arnyk makes proper points that are not based upon unsubstantiated anecdotes or just isolated feelings.
Here would be an interesting color memory test for anyone. Think about one of your favorite solid color shirts (other than white) that you haven't worn or looked at in at least a couple of days. Without looking at it, go down to your local paint store and pick out the color sample closest to it. Then go back to the store with the shirt on and find the sample that is the closest match. I'd be really surprised if many people succeeded in finding the right color sample the first time.
Visual memory for color is a lot better for recall capability than auditory memory for musical details or gear traits. Crime scene witnesses have higher recall accuracy rates on the stand than with auditory recall ("he said, she said" is unreliable testimony) of what was spoken or heard. It has to do with the fact that visual information processing is a lot more highly developed in our brain than is auditory info processing.
Visual memory for color is a lot better for recall capability than auditory memory for musical details or gear traits. Crime scene witnesses have higher recall accuracy rates on the stand than with auditory recall ("he said, she said" is unreliable testimony) of what was spoken or heard. It has to do with the fact that visual information processing is a lot more highly developed in our brain than is auditory info processing.
Visual memory for color is a lot better for recall capability than auditory memory for musical details or gear traits. Crime scene witnesses have higher recall accuracy rates on the stand than with auditory recall ("he said, she said" is unreliable testimony) of what was spoken or heard. It has to do with the fact that visual information processing is a lot more highly developed in our brain than is auditory info processing.
I'll preface this by saying I am not, by any stretch, a psychology person.
That being said, what you're describing (in a crime scene witness case) isn't entirely auditory. Words and language are probably stored differently than simple tones. How someone says something is an important part of the memory as well.
I'm not saying that humans don't have limits when it comes to auditory memories, but I do think that there are other factors limiting the usefulness, and that the density of the information further decreases the reliability of the memory.
That is a good question. Blind people certainly have sharper auditory skills likely from neural compensation (adaptation). Not too sure whther their long term recall for auditory info is necessarily boosted.
I'll preface this by saying I am not, by any stretch, a psychology person.
That being said, what you're describing (in a crime scene witness case) isn't entirely auditory. Words and language are probably stored differently than simple tones. How someone says something is an important part of the memory as well.
I'm not saying that humans don't have limits when it comes to auditory memories, but I do think that there are other factors limiting the usefulness, and that the density of the information further decreases the reliability of the memory.
Very true. Contextual information and emotional overtones will color auditory information and impact auditory memory processing. Not an easy topic to tackle for a scientist.
That is a good question. Blind people certainly have sharper auditory skills likely from neural compensation (adaptation). Not too sure whther their long term recall for auditory info is necessarily boosted.
With visual memory, yes. 40-50% of our brain tissue is devoted to visual processing.
We, like non- human primates, are very visual . It has entered our everyday vocabulary....
"Do you see what I mean?".
"Now look here..."
Etc.
Here would be an interesting color memory test for anyone. Think about one of your favorite solid color shirts (other than white) that you haven't worn or looked at in at least a couple of days. Without looking at it, go down to your local paint store and pick out the color sample closest to it. Then go back to the store with the shirt on and find the sample that is the closest match. I'd be really surprised if many people succeeded in finding the right color sample the first time.
Visual memory for color is a lot better for recall capability than auditory memory for musical details or gear traits. Crime scene witnesses have higher recall accuracy rates on the stand than with auditory recall ("he said, she said" is unreliable testimony) of what was spoken or heard. It has to do with the fact that visual information processing is a lot more highly developed in our brain than is auditory info processing.
well obviously it's not really for you, but for people interested in those stuff and maybe not too informed about it.
funny how I'm reminded of this TV show all the time on headfi, it's a series about human senses and of course focused on tricking them.
that particular episode is mainly about the eye witness thing. there are a great many paper, videos, and all of the guys who spent years in jail for no reason to attest of the same thing, but I found this one (even though there is too much repeating) to be the easiest to understand for people who still don't believe their brain can ever be wrong.
the TV series is mostly boring, but for beginner skeptics, it's a really great source of basic knowledge. they mostly deal with visual stuff because it's a TV show, but still they also go with psychology, and other senses. they even talk about the mcgurk effect at some point.
if audiophiles were required to watch that kind of stuff, we would be avoiding a lot of embarrassing situations where people make claims without actual evidence, simply because they believe in what they say.
this one too stayed in my mind http://www.ted.com/talks/scott_fraser_the_problem_with_eyewitness_testimony it's very much boring but much shorter and about a real case. so it's a less funny tone overall.
about blind dudes, I suspect it's a very tricky problem, because the plasticity of the brain is real, and with our senses, practice and needs do change the overall performance even though we still have the same ears. so I suspect it depends on what they guy is doing with his life just as much as the fact that he is blind.
I remember reading about online gamers(mainly FPS gamers) who had some measurable improvements with visual acuity and reaction times from playing online a lot. I think tennis players are like that too, from the practice of following the ball. of course the eyes aren't improving, only muscles, coordination and most of all, the brain dealing with the information. but in practice it could very much pass for getting better eyes/ears...
I love those subjects. (I'm sure nobody could tell ^_^)
just like for anything, acting on emotions can be great, just as it can make us do some very stupid and impulsive stuff. yes music is something to enjoy, doesn't mean that we should remove reason from everything sound related. I certainly wouldn't like the guy manufacturing my audio gears to build stuff with that mindset.
I truly believe that knowledge and control over our devices is always a bonus. biases are added parameters preventing us from having a clear "view"^_^ of the sound itself. how could it be wrong to clear the view and then decide if we like the sound and only the sound?
All purchases are truly emotional. Many don't want to admit it but even after the bean counters have counted the pile of beans, then just waited till the perfect time is right, the end decision is purely emotional.
Hmmm....any post that claims using "proven scientific methodology" without providing any information about that is highly suspect, IMO. Especially when it's the first post and the person follows up with "Done. IMO." What's the point in starting a thread like this?
Here would be an interesting color memory test for anyone. Think about one of your favorite solid color shirts (other than white) that you haven't worn or looked at in at least a couple of days. Without looking at it, go down to your local paint store and pick out the color sample closest to it. Then go back to the store with the shirt on and find the sample that is the closest match. I'd be really surprised if many people succeeded in finding the right color sample the first time.
We have all read about savants and their ability to record information, the fact that they could meet someone one time and still tell them their birthdate 20 years later. They can hear a complex song one time then play it back note for note!
That is the extreme of range. Still I would guess the order goes taste, color, sound.
Smell is also very close to memory in brain location so they corenspond. Still triggers are diferent for everyone, but emotion seems to play a big part in it all.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
