Because its about DIY
And now you call it science
It has never occurred to me that DIY was science
To me its about making "the tools" to get the music right
And yes, I have to rely on the work of good engineers
But time has proven to me that only what I build myself makes music sound right
And that goes for cables also
Bought gear has never worked for me
I dont buy nothing, if I can build it myself
Thats what DIY is to me
Could be my imagination, but it works
Im into "building" stuff, and not so much debating
Some others here have said the direct opposite, that they have no interest in DIY
So, what is it then, if not DIY
So is your claim that all differences audiophiles perceive between cables are imaginary?
Any evidence for your claim that you have no imaginary world?
So in your view, the brains of the 'subjectivists' do not exist in the physical world. Incredible
How could anybody ever conclude this when reading my post? Guess you completely misunderstood my words.
I was talking about perception and that humans are capable of perception without a physical stimulus. Does that make it more understandable to you?
nah...
Don't you think this sort of post is a stretch, even for this thread? Not even style points, I'm afraid
You seem to be knowledgeable, why not drop the semantic contortions. They don't add much. Perception is a construct unique to each individual. I believe Markus was speaking about reality outside of the human interpretation and/or mental constructs. But then, that could generate another 14K post thread, so let's not go there
So in your view, the brains of the 'subjectivists' do not exist in the physical world. Incredible
Don't you think this sort of post is a stretch, even for this thread? Not even style points, I'm afraid
You seem to be knowledgeable, why not drop the semantic contortions. They don't add much. Perception is a construct unique to each individual. I believe Markus was speaking about reality outside of the human interpretation and/or mental constructs. But then, that could generate another 14K post thread, so let's not go there
Last edited:
Why not start with the conscious mind first?
That would be because all entrances and exits to the conscious mind are the domain of the keyholder, the unconscious. Your question is rather like 'why not start with the mangosteen's white flesh first?'.
Perhaps I did. But equally, perhaps there's more lurking beneath the words themselves.
Its an extraordinary claim as it stands, just as the original one. So please give an example of the kind of thing you're talking about. If I dream an orange, there's a physical stimulus in my brain (and therefore in the physical world) for that orange, even though its purely a subjective experience.
Don't you think this sort of post is a stretch, even for this thread? Not even style points, I'm afraid
My opinion is purely subjective, I prefer to keep it off the forum by and large. But since you're asking, no I don't think so.
Implication : knowledgeable people are free of 'semantic contortions' ? I'm unclear the meaning of your phrase 'semantic contortions' - could you illustrate with an example?
How true.
If that's so, then Markus is making an extraordinary claim, one I'd say was religious, i.e. non-falsifiable and therefore non-scientific. What reality exists beyond our perceptions? We by definition can have no evidence for such 'reality' since if we did, it would be within our perceptions, not outside it.
Causality is a prickly minefield, best steer away from it. With no wire, there would be no antenna, hence no RF pick up.
Why? You take the view that shielding differences between wires categorically cannot affect how they might sound? If so, let's be having your reasoning.
That's your view? Never heard of pin 1 problems in balanced interconnects? But I agree, if the audiophile world adopted pro practices cables would be far less of an issue. Wonder why they don't? My guess is that selling tweaky cables is way, way too profitable so who wants to bite the hand that feeds them?
I do know perfectly well what you mean, and who you point at, and why
But Im certain, you wont find them on this forum
Sure, we have a few of the worlds greatest "audiophiles" around here, names I respectfully wont mention here.... but by far not the kind you hate so much, but quite the opposite
I think some of you have gone completely wild here, and running off the path
Maybe due time to show a little selfcontrol here
Bending the truth to unlock an argument again? Most of us are complaining about the way most DBT's are done and the results then dished up as 'evidence'. For example, just use a set of Gedlee's speakers and all amplifiers sound the same, not even talking about cables.
I believe the unconscious mind is teachable though.
Actually that research has nothing to do with Geddes' speakers.
http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf
ABX Double Blind Test Results: Power Amps
Matrix HiFi --> Blind testing high end full equipments
Dan
Hi,
Who are you?
Cheers,
I do know perfectly well what you mean, and who you point at, and why
But Im certain, you wont find them on this forum
Sure, we have a few of the worlds greatest "audiophiles" around here, names I respectfully wont mention here.... but by far not the kind you hate so much, but quite the opposite
I think you have gone wild here, and running off the path
Maybe due time to show a little selfcontrol here
Who are you?
Cheers,
Phantom pain - no physical stimulus but a perception. Maybe not the best example but you might get the idea.
I was talking about a physical stimulus resulting in an perception not about "the dream of an orange". The latter sounds more like what cable sound believers do - better sound induced by dreaming about cables.
Wasn't referring to "that research", only how easy it is to hide differences, ask Gedlee, on his speakers even a Pioneer AV receiver is as good if not better than anything else.
BTW the links you provided would rather serve as proof that DBT's doesn't work.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.