[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

List all the things you'd have to control for, then figure out how to do the controls to a standard that could be published in a peer review journal.  Then figure the costs of hiring pros to do the work.

Just get yourself an ABX comparator.
 
se
 

 

[theearbone]

But you have to control for the human element, thats the really tricky bit and why double blind tests are used at all.
 
Is a comparator available that can do minute diffrences in headphones, that would be a very specialised bit of kit.

 

[Steve Eddy]

 
Oh, and for what it's worth, one of the most highly regarded DIY headphone amps was designed strictly "by the numbers." No "tuning by ear."
 
se
 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

But you have to control for the human element, thats the really tricky bit and why double blind tests are used at all.

That's what the ABX comparator does. Controls for the human element.
 
se
 

 

[theearbone]

It doesn't tell you what the humans are picking up on though, you'd need actual people being tested and that repeated, the most complex component can't be assumed away.  Eventually it might become clear if there is an effect or not and then you could pursue just what people are hearing/sensing, it might not even be audible.
 
One of things you find when modding is that changes do not always have the expected effect, but sometimes its exactly as inline with the 'audiophile myths'.

 

[Steve Eddy]

 
Quote:

It doesn't tell you what the humans are picking up on though, you'd need actual people being tested and that repeated, the most complex component can't be assumed away.  Eventually it might become clear if there is an effect or not and then you could pursue just what people are hearing/sensing, it might not even be audible.
 

So?
 
The goal is to first establish actual audible differences. Something which to date no one has done.
 
Quote:

Eventually it might become clear if there is an effect or not and then you could pursue just what people are hearing/sensing, it might not even be audible.

 
It might not even be audible?
 
If it's not audible, then there's no audible difference.
 
Are you for real or have any idea what you're talking about?
 
se
 
 

 

[revolink24]

Quote:

 

So?
 
The goal is to first establish actual audible differences. Something which to date no one has done.
 
 
It might not even be audible?
 
If it's not audible, then there's no audible difference.
 
Are you for real or have any idea what you're talking about?
 
se
 
 

Your posts are always so matter of fact. It makes me happy.

 

[eucariote]

Quote:

Not for the person or persons being tested. But that doesn't prove there are no audible differences.
 
se
 

 
Are you just retreating to Hume's general problem of induction?  (i.e. *nothing* can be ruled out because someday we might observe the exception).  Fortunately hypothesis testing as it is practiced by scientists doesn't have such a high bar to clear.  Alpha = .05 and replication are the criteria that most all practicing scientists use to say that some effect is or is not real.  You sometimes need to test the right population for some relevant effects (MS patients to test MS drugs).  I think that is why the OP is asking people who do hear these differences to take blind tests, because they are ideal subjects for showing that a perceived difference can be heard in both sighted and unsighted conditions.  After enough replication the effects can be safely generalized, using the same criteria that are routinely used to make life-and-death decisions using hypothesis testing, like drug approval.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Don't tell him that!!!!!! His head is going to explode

LOL
 
Quote:

Your posts are always so matter of fact. It makes me happy.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Your posts are always so matter of fact. It makes me happy.

I'm just lazy is all.

 
se
 

 

[Steve Eddy]

 
Quote:

Are you just retreating to Hume's general problem of induction?

No. I'm simply saying that a null result, in and of itself, doesn't prove anything one way or the other.
 
se
 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Don't tell him that!!!!!! His head is going to explode

LOL
 

"I don' know whuh happun'. Alla sudden, he haid, it jes' 'sploded!"

 
se
 

 

[theearbone]

Exactly, in order to do the measuring you need equipment that almost no one has, therefore its expensive.  Who has an ABX comparator sensitive enough to keep up with high end headphones?
 
Secondly you can feel sound that you can't hear, I don't know how people might process that.  I don't know what happens to people kept waiting to do a test and are anxious or annoyed or tired, or what happens to their ears if they use 'phones, stop, start, stop start etc or change the order of tracks or change the order to cable changes.
 
I know that there are people that can hear beyond the normal range, and that music pros can detect things regular listeners would not in a live performance.  I don't know what influence these people have priming others on what equipment sounds like.
 
Explain how to do these tests on a non-professional budget, and then do it. 

 

[Steve Eddy]

 
Quote:

Exactly, in order to do the measuring you need equipment that almost no one has, therefore its expensive. 

In order to do what measuring exactly?
 
Quote:

Who has an ABX comparator sensitive enough to keep up with high end headphones?

 
Sensitive enough in what respect exactly?
 
Quote:

Secondly you can feel sound that you can't hear, I don't know how people might process that.

 
Doesn't really matter how they process it. If it's perceivable it'll show up in the results.
 
 
Quote:

I don't know what happens to people kept waiting to do a test and are anxious or annoyed or tired, or what happens to their ears if they use 'phones, stop, start, stop start etc or change the order of tracks or change the order to cable changes.

 
Tests have been run in peoples' homes where they're able to do them with their own system and completely at their leisure.
 
Quote:

I know that there are people that can hear beyond the normal range, and that music pros can detect things regular listeners would not in a live performance.  I don't know what influence these people have priming others on what equipment sounds like.

 
It would seem people don't need to be told anything. They routinely purport perceiving differences. That's ultimately all you need.
 
Quote:

Explain how to do these tests on a non-professional budget, and then do it.

 
I already told you. And it's been done. Granted, not with headphone cables. But with interconnects, speaker cables, amps, preamps, etc.
 
se
 

 

[gilency]

I am afraid to say anything against cables. Last time I did, I was found guilty of being a fanatic for saying that  I could not believe anybody's claims without objective evidence. Burned at the stake.