[nycbone]

So what is science, then?
 
Quote:

QFT.
I tried to explain this a couple of times, but it seems the "scientific minded" here just don't get what science actually is.
 
In answer to the OP: I don't need sciense, proof or DBT to know the differences I hear. Why should I bother?
 

 

[Cymbal Monkey]

Actually at 19 he's got better hearing than a middle aged man. The younger you are, the better your hearing.

 

[Kees]

Quote:

Actually at 19 he's got better hearing than a middle aged man. The younger you are, the better your hearing.

His ears may be better, but his brains don't know what he's hearing.
 

 

[Kees]

Quote:

So what is science, then?
 

 

In short: a working model for our perceived physical reality. It is not correct, but sufficient to allow us to work with certain phenomena in a more or less predictable way. It is far from complete. In the course of time most parts were proven to be wrong and had to be revised or replaced.
To make this model your definition of reality is foolish. To say that if some phenomenon is not in the model it can not exist is utter nonsense.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

His ears may be better, but his brains don't know what he's hearing.
 

Au contraire, mon ami.
 
I am not the one at the mercy of my brain, without even knowing.
 
Your limitations as a human run deeper than you can possibly imagine. The quicker you understand this, the better. There are many things failing you at this point, all of them are psychological. You ears aren't failing you, your constructs are.
 
But we can just leave it at that.
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Actually at 19 he's got better hearing than a middle aged man. The younger you are, the better your hearing.

Well, sort of.  A 19 year-old with perfect hearing might get a better frequency response.
 
But a 50 year-old, classically trained musician with a few degrees in music theory will have a much deeper understanding of what's heard.
 
And, either way, a properly calibrated oscilloscope will pick up differences that no human can hear.  You can give it very minute changes in frequency that humans cannot distinguish, but every 'scope will.  How likely is it, then, that a human can hear differences below the threshold of what can be measured?

 

[Kees]

Quote:

 

Mmmm I am not too sure about that one. I have a biological advantage due to my age, and have been listening to music all my life (yes short in comparison to yours. I have very eclectic tastes, and my gear is pretty darned good if I do say so myself.
 
Seems experience is an easy card to play, but considering it is this exact experience that is in question, maybe not. So, years and years of hearing things that are only proven (*sigh* so far)  to not actually be there, does not sound like good experience to me. Or any experience at all really. In fact, it would be something that discredits any experience one has.
 
So it would seem that as far as a variable, goes, time spent listening to and evaluating cables has absolutely no bearing on training your ears, and therefor overall experience.
 
But alas, I have enjoyed your reviews Kees, and don't want to get into poo fights with older members. So, I will stop here, because you can't win all the battles, especially when the troops don't even know the war is already over.

Having better tools is of no use to you if you don't know what to do with them.
 
"So, years and years of hearing things that are only proven (*sigh* so far)  to not actually be there, does not sound like good experience to me."  There is no proof whatsoever possible that something is not there, so this is a complete nonsense remark.
 
Time spent listening to equipment tought my brains (not my ears) what it is I hear and what to listen for if I want to find specific characteristics. Experience can teach you that, if you are willing to learn.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Having better tools is of no use to you if you don't know what to do with them.
 
"So, years and years of hearing things that are only proven (*sigh* so far)  to not actually be there, does not sound like good experience to me."  There is no proof whatsoever possible that something is not there, so this is a complete nonsense remark.
 
Time spent listening to equipment tought my brains (not my ears) what it is I hear and what to listen for if I want to find specific characteristics. Experience can teach you that, if you are willing to learn.

If you are always teaching yourself to hear things that are not there, then anyone, after a length of time, would be convinced there is something there, I will give you that, and that it would make it especially hard to renounce anything given the time and effort spent learning said useless technique.

 

[sokolov91]

and FWIW I am not in anyway claiming to be the epitome of music listeners. 

 

[sokolov91]

Ghost pains, after an amputation, are a good way to view cables. 
 
The mind is so ready to receive stimuli, that it creates its own.

 

[eucariote]

Quote:

In answer to the OP: I don't need sciense, proof or DBT to know the differences I hear. 
 

That's where people who believe in cables and people who believe in DBT are in perfect agreement..

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

That's where people who believe in cables and people who believe in DBT are in perfect agreement..

haha... ignorance is bliss
 
If they simply refuse to do DBT, then they feel (why i know not) that their arguments, and perceptions are actually valid. If they were to be destroyed by DBT (which they would) then they would feel bitter, and still not want to believe there is nothing there, so for them it is a lose, lose situation. 
 
No one like to feel they are crazy, or they are flawed.

 

[nycbone]

Kind of the same thing...
 
The working model is developed through rigorous testing of falsifiable hypotheses.
 
The model develops as past/current hypotheses are rejected and new hypotheses are stated.
 
And the process continues...
 
 
 
Quote:

In short: a working model for our perceived physical reality. It is not correct, but sufficient to allow us to work with certain phenomena in a more or less predictable way. It is far from complete. In the course of time most parts were proven to be wrong and had to be revised or replaced.
To make this model your definition of reality is foolish. To say that if some phenomenon is not in the model it can not exist is utter nonsense.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Everybody has a different road to travel with their hobby. DBT's are not desired by all in their audio journey. To say "ignorance is bliss". Come on? There are some arguments that will not be destroyed by a DBT. DBT is just one way to try something. It is not the only way. To feel crazy or flawed? That's reaching a bit?
 
Quote:

haha... ignorance is bliss
 
If they simply refuse to do DBT, then they feel (why i know not) that their arguments, and perceptions are actually valid. If they were to be destroyed by DBT (which they would) then they would feel bitter, and still not want to believe there is nothing there, so for them it is a lose, lose situation. 
 
No one like to feel they are crazy, or they are flawed.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Everybody has a different road to travel with their hobby. DBT's are not desired by all in their audio journey. To say "ignorance is bliss". Come on? There are some arguments that will not be destroyed by a DBT. DBT is just one way to try something. It is not the only way. To feel crazy or flawed? That's reaching a bit?
 


 

I mean that no one like to feel flawed or crazy, so staying away from DBT would be ideal if you were a cable believer. Not because they are in and of themselves crazy, just because they are fools of their own mind.
 
To think your perceptions are not perfect is a scary thought on some level, and some like to relish in the fact they can just ignore that important fact.
 
DBT is very simply, and tells us clearly what machines have been telling us for a very long time, without a bias and preconceived notion, a human can not identify which cable they are listening to, or even come close.
 
So DBT clearly states that people are a victim of their own minds, not that our ears can pick up this magical change that the machines can't. 
 
This magical change has names, and it is bias, expectation, pre conceived notion, placebo effect etc etc... it is nothing that an untrained ear cannot hear, or something that requires experience.
 
It is simply a state of mind and set of beliefs that are totally unrelated to the reality of our world.
 
to think otherwise is foolish, even if there is the absolute smallest chance that cable believers are right.