Ah come on, that's bull - it was used pejoratively to undermine Dave's listening test & it's validity - you know it & all the readers know it.
Whoa, whoa.
Sorry, I had to go pay attention to my wife, she's getting a bit fed up with the time I spend on here.
Never mind all this backbiting about what was said in the past.
aardvarkash10's suggestion that you should go to to the department of Psychology at Trinity is good.
They'll probably jump at the chance of offering it as an exercise to students.
There may be some problems with determining whether jitter is reduced, gimme a chance to think about that, but there should be no problem determining whether there is a difference between having the attenuators in circuit and out of circuit.
If there's no difference, there's no point in going any further.
Who doesn't agree with that?
w
Sorry, I had to go pay attention to my wife, she's getting a bit fed up with the time I spend on here.
Never mind all this backbiting about what was said in the past.
aardvarkash10's suggestion that you should go to to the department of Psychology at Trinity is good.
They'll probably jump at the chance of offering it as an exercise to students.
There may be some problems with determining whether jitter is reduced, gimme a chance to think about that, but there should be no problem determining whether there is a difference between having the attenuators in circuit and out of circuit.
If there's no difference, there's no point in going any further.
Who doesn't agree with that?
w
No we don't!
Some of us (ie me, in this case) find your aggrssive tone tiresome and underming of your point of view.
Do you really not understand the basic elements of the scientific method? Do you not want to, or do you think it is not relevent to this case (or any other!)?
I am interested to learn. The way you do things is not helping.
Cliff
Open picture by right klick + open in new window
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
Nope.
"I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding." Samuel Johnson
Well, in that case you organise it then - I'll give you all the support I can. The test being contolled/monitored by two persons on opposite sides of the debate should surely carry more weight.
Over to you
.Dave.
What a wacky argument. SY was asked to do analog measurements of the device. He did. He saw no difference in the analog results. Basta.
From this he reported that if there was an audible difference in jitter, it should be seen in this test. For that he is repeatedly attacked. And with no proof to the contrary, even tho it's been asked for over and over.
Reminds me of a couple of months ago when I did a show with Jamie and Adam of Mythbusters fame. (It was fun to meet them). Someone asked "What happens when you bust someone's favorite myth? Is there a reaction?" Both laughed and said "Yes, always the same reaction." "First - we're idiots." "Second - 'we did the test wrong'." "Every time." LOL.
Sounds a lot like this thread.
From this he reported that if there was an audible difference in jitter, it should be seen in this test. For that he is repeatedly attacked. And with no proof to the contrary, even tho it's been asked for over and over.
Reminds me of a couple of months ago when I did a show with Jamie and Adam of Mythbusters fame. (It was fun to meet them). Someone asked "What happens when you bust someone's favorite myth? Is there a reaction?" Both laughed and said "Yes, always the same reaction." "First - we're idiots." "Second - 'we did the test wrong'." "Every time." LOL.
Sounds a lot like this thread.
Well, in that case you organise it then - I'll give you all the support I can. The test being contolled/monitored by two persons on opposite sides of the debate should surely carry more weight.
Over to you
Dave.
Your intent is good Dave, but the validity of the test is not improved by having diametrically opposed views "controlling" it.
Just as an overview, here are a few factors that would have to be considered in a listening test.
Can the subjects reliably perceive differences at all? This requires pre-testing (screening) of the subject pool with known different signals. Probably at different levels of signal too including frequency and volume.
Can the equipment in the test resolve a difference (oh-oh...)?
Is the testing best done with headphones, or open space?
What is a reasonable level of confidence (the stats bods can chime in here)?
chip in folks - what other factors need to be considered before the testing begins? Aside from the obvious - what is the hypothesis?
OK, that's fair. I had a third of my lung removed in May, I'm just recovering from chemotherapy, I'm out of work and going broke and it's jkeny's modification. I wouldn't want you to get the idea I'm feeling sorry for myself. It'll keep my mind off my other problems.
I'll nip down to the uni. on Monday and see what they say.
w
Keep talking, I feel better already.
Actually they took those out a good while ago.
Anyway I understand the problem pretty good, and we have got a uni in this town, so if nobody else is prepared to do it, I'll go down there and enquire if they're prepared to help. With the current economic climate they may try to extract some payment, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. It may be possible to get students to volunteer as subjects, but I know that in some instances a fee is paid. From that point of view, it would be nice to have a second string to our bow, so a volunteer to try somewhere else might help.
A difference test is the first priority. I think we could simply ask them to devise conditions, but can anybody think of anything that might pose a problem?
Suggestions as to how the jitter aspect could be handled are also welcome, preference testing is straightforward enough, but there's always the possibility that people prefer more jitter rather than less. It doesn't seem likely to me, but we all have to consider it as a possibility.
w
Actually they took those out a good while ago.
Anyway I understand the problem pretty good, and we have got a uni in this town, so if nobody else is prepared to do it, I'll go down there and enquire if they're prepared to help. With the current economic climate they may try to extract some payment, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. It may be possible to get students to volunteer as subjects, but I know that in some instances a fee is paid. From that point of view, it would be nice to have a second string to our bow, so a volunteer to try somewhere else might help.
A difference test is the first priority. I think we could simply ask them to devise conditions, but can anybody think of anything that might pose a problem?
Suggestions as to how the jitter aspect could be handled are also welcome, preference testing is straightforward enough, but there's always the possibility that people prefer more jitter rather than less. It doesn't seem likely to me, but we all have to consider it as a possibility.
w
@Waki,
Let me be the first one to applaud your taking on some listening test - it really surprises me. I thought you were like Maggie Thatcher & many others here - "not for turning". I wish you all the best with this test but believe that it is doomed as it will fail to satisfy a core group here. In that sense I feel it will be an overly complicated & ultimately a waste of time but I may be wrong?.
I have given up on this thread, thinking that some sense might prevail or at least some attempt at equanimity. I would suggest that the best you can do is a solo listening test with whatever controls you want but the main objective is to satisfy yourself of the veracity or otherwise of what is claimed here about the improvement in sonics. Then you can answer the question for yourself of whether this is the result of more or less jitter. I also as a side benefit suggest to you that it will give you a handle on what jitter sounds like.
Anyway, after a long & tiresome thread I'm unsubscribing & would kindly ask SY to send on the Hiface + attenuators + charger (I think that's everything?) to the US address I gave him. I thank him for this & am willing to pay whatever costs are incurred.
Let me be the first one to applaud your taking on some listening test - it really surprises me. I thought you were like Maggie Thatcher & many others here - "not for turning". I wish you all the best with this test but believe that it is doomed as it will fail to satisfy a core group here. In that sense I feel it will be an overly complicated & ultimately a waste of time but I may be wrong?.
I have given up on this thread, thinking that some sense might prevail or at least some attempt at equanimity. I would suggest that the best you can do is a solo listening test with whatever controls you want but the main objective is to satisfy yourself of the veracity or otherwise of what is claimed here about the improvement in sonics. Then you can answer the question for yourself of whether this is the result of more or less jitter. I also as a side benefit suggest to you that it will give you a handle on what jitter sounds like.
Anyway, after a long & tiresome thread I'm unsubscribing & would kindly ask SY to send on the Hiface + attenuators + charger (I think that's everything?) to the US address I gave him. I thank him for this & am willing to pay whatever costs are incurred.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.