Just to add on to my previous comment, Sean Olive has put together a terrific training program to help focus your hearing and interpretation. I have found it of great value in helping me nail down my perceptions.
Harman How to Listen
I don't think they are exactly the same several of the comp caps are different.
As many of the contributors here are past their younger years, I suggest that those who hold strong views on DBT matters should have an audiologist's reading of their hearing ability for each ear and that their curves be published in this thread.
Any volunteers?
IF there is noted loss, then such contributors should, by their own agreement, disbar themselves from voicing an opinion on DBT! [SY is naturally excused as his problem is more that he will not hear rather than he cannot hear!]
I only once attended a formal, everything hidden DBT. Of those who volunteered to act as testers, 6 out of 8 were well in their 60s. On the other hand I knew a recording engineer (of considerable reputation for good work) who freely admitted that he could not hear anything over 8K in one ear and 6K in the other.)
Any volunteers?
IF there is noted loss, then such contributors should, by their own agreement, disbar themselves from voicing an opinion on DBT! [SY is naturally excused as his problem is more that he will not hear rather than he cannot hear!
]I only once attended a formal, everything hidden DBT. Of those who volunteered to act as testers, 6 out of 8 were well in their 60s. On the other hand I knew a recording engineer (of considerable reputation for good work) who freely admitted that he could not hear anything over 8K in one ear and 6K in the other.)
Hence the (s)
(Christophe talked about a 5532, in response to posts about a 5534)
Why? You're assuming that the experimenter is the test subject, that he has obtained a null result, and that he is then drawing broad conclusions from a sample of one. That's a whole pile of unstated assumptions.
First rule of experiments: define specifically the question to be asked. Then don't do post-facto handwaving.
Trust me, I am far more open-minded than they are. There was a time when nothing was measurable - history had to be allowed to happen.
Explain why some people see colours while they listen to music - even try thinking of how that can be would not be impossible, but might take a bit more time, right?
Yet, it's really not much of a mystery - some of the things we perceive can be explained by measurement, to a degree, other things we hear and are not measurable, who is to say that will stay permanent? Stimulus and capture, that is what it boils down to. It is very difficult to do it dynamically and it may not show up statically. But in time, the techniques and equipment will eventuate and the status quo will change. Then those who stay will the status quo may have to eat humble pie and acknowledge (and give them credit if they do) or will the recede and find some way to find fault? Every man has to make decisions every day - I am no predictor of what they do.
Notice Stuart, SY, made a point of 'hypothesis' just a short while ago. He suggests that I have not backed up a hypothesis with some kind of measurement. But hang on, there is a flaw here, if something is observed by the senses, does it not need aired, and that might include a hypothesis that in turn will be modified as 'pursuit of knowledge' advances? And in that phrase is the very meaning of science 'pursuit of knowledge' which is a dynamic and deeply human endeavour. Stuart will imply that my methods are in some way 'unscientific' and yet he does not realise that I have a number of friends for many decades, scientists from no other than the premier university down here, The Australian National University in Canberra (and don't for a nanosecond doubt that I would put THAT on a public forum if it was not true), and not one of them have even remotely suggested that - and they never will because unlike some here, they know the real me and not as some shyster that Stuart is suggesting). In that he is just going too far (that is slander no less). And never has my way of making a living been unacceptable because they know me as an honorable and fair-minded person. Would they associate with me if they thought me a huckster and a swindler (shill)? No way Jose'. BTW, one of them, Derek, we have had the discussion about how some scientist have gone over to the 'dark side' chasing dollars in the corporate world and that he knew some who had and called them "scientists for hire" and if you want to know more about those, read 'Merchants of Doubt' by Oreskes and Conway. an absolute read for those who want to understand the current state of science.
I have just had half a bottle of Shiraz Rose' and it has given me a bit of Dutch courage - but needed to say that.
Now... we had a discussion about DBT, double-blind-tests and I have aired a number of reasons why I am an agnostic - not one of my concerns have been addressed.
Why are they not seeing an opportunity to turn an agnostic into a believer - I mean, blind testing works absolutely in other areas, so I am NOT a disbeliever. But does it translate well into perception that has to based on something as interpretive as music? In my mind that raises a whole bunch of questions - but nobody is willing to engage. Seems like a lost opportunity to me.
Think about this for a second. Do you ever listen to the same music the same way twice? I don't think so. Do we ask the listener to listen to the the sax on the left, the voice in the middle, the rhythmic abilities, the spatial relations between instruments themselves, etc? Or do we explore different parts of the music when we listen next time, this time it is the phrasing of the sax on the left. As we listen without compulsion, we actually explore the musical soundscape in front of us, pick from its palate that suits us and our mood at that particular moment. Even listening live to a symphony orchestra, I let it take me where my mood wants it to do. In double-blind-testing we take all that away - the choices we unconsciously want to make. I have problem about that. Maybe music suitable for DBT should be a single instrument and a fairly dead acoustic and in mono - this means that the brain will not need to make too much of a decision as to where listening will be more focused? That might work a bit better, but hardly ideal.
You know, we should be allowed to have that discussion and not be shouted down. In fact, we have a right to speak up without condemnation. We have free speech, even if we are not as brainy as some, right?
So... I am quite willing to have a civil discussion about that - but it takes two to tango.
Off to dream about music.
In the meantime, can we change the tone and by the morning somebody will have addressed those concerns without just waving them away. Fair enough?
But no more slander please.
Last edited:
Let people/scientists make those mistakes because out of some will come something good. It's basic maths, as long as more steps go forward that backwards, then the backwards ones served a purpose too. One of them is humility.
No, I don't want scientists to stop making mistakes - that in itself would be an even greater mistake.
"An expert is somebody who has made every mistake possible in his own [narrow] field." Niels Bohr
He also said: "Do not speak more clearly than you are able to think."
That one makes me smile.
Did someone say (almost) Gilbert's Chips ?!?!??
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/part...-feedback-amplifier-ad830-lt6552-tda856x.html
And did someone say ad844 pin 5?!?!??
"Gilbert's Pin"
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/part...plifier-ad830-lt6552-tda856x.html#post3392798
Last edited:
Since I also explicitly and repeatedly also said "ears-only listening," the rest of your post is based on a false assumption. Your excuses for peeking and not trusting your ears are not something that can be answered because they make no sense whatsoever.
As I said to Bill, the other thread was closed. Dragging it in here is inappropriate. I'm not moderating this thread, but as a member, I can suggest that you reacquaint yourself with the forum rules.
It's well known that the sound in concert halls varies considerably from seat to seat, as well as in rooms
of a private home, which typically have much poorer acoustics than a purpose designed hall.
Listening to audio equipment in an anechoic chamber (or with good headphones), it is much easier
to hear various aspects of the sound, DBT or not. Of course, this requires normal hearing, and an open mind.
Last edited:
synesthesia? Been known of since well before any of us were born. Lots of musicians have it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_with_synesthesia
- Status
- Not open for further replies.