Testing audiophile claims and myths
Jul 21, 2013 at 12:07 PM Post #2,072 of 17,336
Quote:
Has anybody attempted to sell audiophilr power stations by any chance?

during a tour of a professional studio - built as a "end game" studio by the owner with a (long hallway) wall of  Gold, Platinum albums he mastered, a few Grammy's
 
he bragged about being online the next day after a storm the previous week  knocked out power to the region for days - running the studio on his battery bank powered AC line regenerators
 
Jul 21, 2013 at 4:07 PM Post #2,073 of 17,336
Hey guys, nice thread!
 
Admittedly, I haven't been able to go through all 139 pages yet... Just wanted to drop a note that over the last 6 months or so, I've put up a blog to document a few things for myself from an objective perspective (after years of exposure to audiophilia) and put my thoughts together in some of the "Musings" posts.
 
I don't have any fancy gear or recording device, but even without that, I think there's something to be learned with just simple measurements...
 
Main site:
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/
 
It all started when I was curious about folks who claimed high quality MP3 (~320kbps) was bad, so I set up a "blind" survey between transcoded MP3 (higher-than-normal bitrates, removal of lowpass filtering in LAME) to hide the obvious spectral anamalies in a standard MP3 encode with the original uncompressed CD rip without going through the psychoacoustic algorithm.
 
Procedure:
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/02/high-bitrate-mp3-internet-blind-test.html
 
Results:
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/02/high-bitrate-mp3-internet-blind-test_3422.html
 
Discussion:
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/02/high-bitrate-mp3-internet-blind-test_2.html
 
Subjective Descriptions:
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/2013/02/high-bitrate-internet-blind-test-part-4.html
 
Relatively small "study" at about 150 respondents (including some from Head-Fi). Interesting seeing the results come through and correlation with quality / price of equipment.
 
Jul 21, 2013 at 8:30 PM Post #2,075 of 17,336
@Archimago
 
Nice experiment and write up!
beerchug.gif

 
Cheers
 
Aug 1, 2013 at 1:06 AM Post #2,078 of 17,336
Jebus!  I just googled that and checked out their website.  Now, I'm not one for s**t-canning things that I have no personal experience with but I'm pretty sure putting anything additional in the signal chain is only going to remove something (e.g. low/high pass filters) or add something (e.g. noise).
 
These things cost 2 grand a pair!  Now I'm sure active processing of a signal (e.g. DSP) can alter the signal and produce some of the effects described on the website but what can a lump of "carbon nanotubes" do considering you are plugging your current interconnects into the damn thing anyway!
 
/rant over
 
Aug 1, 2013 at 1:14 AM Post #2,079 of 17,336
Quote:
Hey guys, nice thread!
 
Admittedly, I haven't been able to go through all 139 pages yet... Just wanted to drop a note that over the last 6 months or so, I've put up a blog to document a few things for myself from an objective perspective (after years of exposure to audiophilia) and put my thoughts together in some of the "Musings" posts.
 
I don't have any fancy gear or recording device, but even without that, I think there's something to be learned with just simple measurements...
 
Main site:
http://archimago.blogspot.ca/
 

 
really great site, glad i found this!  
 
Aug 3, 2013 at 1:04 PM Post #2,081 of 17,336
Well, I can't believe I've read all 139 pages of this thread!
 
I subscribed mainly to thank:
  1. Prog Rock Man for the extensive compilation of audio blind tests. Great work.
  2. xnor, bigshot, jaddie, Steve Eddy, mikeaj and others for the sometimes enthralling input.
 
I'm a musician, sound engineer, music producer and DJ from Belgium and Switzerland.
 
Since my teens (in the late 70s), always been on the rational side of  the audiophile "border". Partly because I've been exposed very early to sociology, social psychology and the like, so I knew how tremendously and easily the human senses can be abused and fooled by expectation, suggestion, perceived authority etc... (EDIT oh and by manipulation, marketing nonsense and the like, of course).
 
Aug 3, 2013 at 1:57 PM Post #2,082 of 17,336
Nice to have you around, wizz!
 
Aug 3, 2013 at 4:54 PM Post #2,083 of 17,336
Quote:
 
I know a lot of people that noticed improvements brought by cables in general. You cannot just throw that aside.

 
Argumentum ad populum. Sigh. Cable believers seem to have an endless cornucopiae of fallacies ready to be thrown at the unbelievers, just as cultists do.
 
Besides, of course we can throw that aside! This is called being rational. Even, dare I say, adult. If in your book a claim (a "noticed improvement" is just that, a claim), whatever silly it is, automatically gains credibility by simply being repeated by more and more people, despite the lack of any proof, then... there is a whole lot of b*s on earth that you are bound to be taking seriously!
biggrin.gif

 
Just open any tabloid: thousands of people on earth actually believe what's printed in these. By your book, because there are so many people believing in what is claimed in these, we shouldn't throw these claims aside? Pah! Count me out.
tongue.gif

 
Aug 3, 2013 at 5:29 PM Post #2,085 of 17,336
In this debate, something that bothers me somewhat, it's the use of the word "placebo" when dealing with audio perceptions that can't be measured or proven.
 
The placebo effect originally refers to a phenomenon that is, actually, measurable and provable. A patient takes a pill that is supposed to have no effect, but gets better nonetheless. The improvement is measurable (regression of symptoms - like fever, for instance) and sometimes -actually rather often- the "false" pill does better than the real one.
 
To me "placebo" is a term that doesn't fit these audio illusions, since they can't be measured. They're not real... the original placebo effect, on the other hand, causes real, actual, measurable improvements in the patient.
 
What we're dealing with in audio is, in my view much closer to hallucinations, where the brain creates "logical" patterns causing the senses to see, feel, taste or hear things that aren't actually there (at least not in the form we think we sense them). More close to optical illusions, as well. They have been discussed here btw, its a great way to remind people that we should NOT trust our senses, because our senses play tricks on us all the time.
 
Just curious, has anyone here already played a game that I love, which is to concentrate (kind of) on audio noise (pink noise for instance) until actually hearing in it voices, melodies, chords, even a full orchestra? I do that often when taking a shower. It's fun, and rather easy if you have a bit of imagination. I know other people, musicians or not, who play that game too. Sometimes, the illusion can even get pretty uncanny! It's a bit like looking at video noise (like we could with old TV programs...) and seing movement in it. We sure see these things ven though they aren't there per se.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top