And here I was sensing some sort of Steve Eddy humour.
You make a very good point. It is almost like denying one's own power to insist that there must be a hardware cause for everything. Are they machines?
Well, if you are to believe the believers, Tom is to be brutally tortured (not tested) into revealing the "truth" about cables, by an adversary.
And we know torture (so far) ends in nulls.
So on and on it goes, the excuse-o-meter spinning wildly.
Last edited:
And here I was sensing some sort of Steve Eddy humour.
Not this time I'm afraid.
You'd think they were.
se
In evidence of audibility? Why? No new developments there.
Me too. Especially if it flushed jneutron out of lurking mode. That would prove rather embarrassing....to both of you
I will.What's " **** " ?
A pile of steaming biomass, usually of high end audio origin.
Mmmm, I don't think name-calling really elevates the argument, to be honest.
That said, I've been pretty vocal that the "objective-subjective" false dichotomy is the sort of fallacy that leads to fuzzy and inaccurate thinking. A properly controlled test leads to objective results, determined by subjective choices.
That said, I've been pretty vocal that the "objective-subjective" false dichotomy is the sort of fallacy that leads to fuzzy and inaccurate thinking. A properly controlled test leads to objective results, determined by subjective choices.
real scientific experiences have no subjective choice in the
choosen protocols, otherwise they wouildn t be scientific...
choices are dictated by the effects that are supposed to be
observed, and all is done to eliminate the human subjective
choices, as they are incompatible with a scientific approach,
where the result is independant from any human will...
Sounds similar to my little system.
And no patch bays for the last 10 years rdf?
Nice. When was it built?
But yep. Including post op for television, voice talent production suites, obviously television and radio stations. I recall one big room in the production house in the same building I worked for 10 years in Toronto on Ontario Street that had a room that looked like that. Built around a SSL Scenaria. When I asked what they do in it the reply was 'entertain clients'. A showpiece in every sense of the word. The bulk of audio work was done elsewhere.
SY, architecturally and topological regarding ABX box vs. cable. Inserting an ABX box has no effect makes perfect sense if a cable has no effect either. Not a conclusion to be made before auditory tesing for me but it all depends on your belief system
If I understand you correctly, then you're asserting that all sensory research is not science. But I think you're under a misapprehension that the subjective choice is a choice of the protocols- that is very much incorrect. The subjective choices are made by the test subjects under the conditions of a predetermined experimental protocol.
You may want to read a bit on how sensory testing works.
don t make me tell what i didn t told..
any serious testing must follow scientific protocols to
allow separation between what is caused by instrumentation
and what is independant from these influences...
if the result yielded is not in line with what was expected,
then the first thing to do is to repeat the experience..
if it doesn t change nothing, then the protocols must be
re evalueted to find if there s an error at the basis of this test,
rendering it flawed from the start..
if nothing is found, then the conclusion is that there s
effects that are unknown, and they will only be displayed
with a new experience whose protocols are calculated
to allow quantitative differentiation between what is known
and what is still not explained...
it s a fact that many dfiscovery were made this way, as
the expexted results and real world measurements showed
difference that couldn t be explained with the experience
precision borders...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.