Bybee Quantum Purifier Measurement and Analysis - Page 15 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > General Interest > Everything Else

Everything Else Anything related to audio / video / electronics etc) BUT remember- we have many new forums where your thread may now fit! .... Parts, Equipment & Tools, Construction Tips, Software Tools......

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31st August 2010, 10:45 PM   #141
Salas is offline Salas  Greece
diyAudio Chief Moderator
 
Salas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Athens-Greece
That is why we closed the other thread and pointed to this one. To do something plausible. Controlled listening is a valid scientific experiment too BTW. So not to leave any side uncovered.
 
Old 31st August 2010, 10:53 PM   #142
anatech is offline anatech  Canada
diyAudio Moderator
 
anatech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Georgetown, On
Hi Rodeodave,
Quote:
If there's one thing I've learned it's that the atoms don't lie.
You have that right!
Things may be difficult to measure some times, but that's the only reliable metric humanity has to be honest. The equipment George is talking about is extremely sensitive, and useful at very low signal levels as well. I'm sure he has more than good enough gear to do baseband frequencies as well.

SY is also a very careful experimenter. He knows how to set up reproducible tests and control other factors that may affect the outcome. So if SY finds anything, I'm pretty sure his results will be reproducible in any decent lab setting. The documentation will be up to anyone's standards.

-Chris
__________________
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should" my Wife
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:12 PM   #143
exeric is offline exeric  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by exeric View Post
Actually now that I think about it a modification should be to this test procedure. An equal number, but different listening group, should get their several day familiarization on an identical but modified system. When the actual double blind test occurs some will notice that one system sounds slightly worse than they remembered it. The other group will find that one system sounds slightlly better than they remember it. That is provided they hear a difference.
I think this is a terribly important point in removing any hidden biases. If it is known ahead of time that the original listening familiarization is either modified or unmodified then listeners will be able to deduce information accordingly from the double blind test as to which system has been modified.
It is imperative that there is no bias as to whether the system familiarization is done on a (one only) unmodified or modified system.
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:19 PM   #144
anatech is offline anatech  Canada
diyAudio Moderator
 
anatech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Georgetown, On
Hi exeric,
That is why testing is so very important. The numbers are what they are, no bias either way - ever. Not even a subconscious bias can exist. I would think that anyone that only has subjective tools at their disposal would welcome any testing that can eliminate bias.

Every particle and assembly of same must follow the rules of physics, no matter how strange the claims may be. IF testing finds something, anything, then you know you aren't crazy and you actually may be hearing a real effect. That's got to put your mind at ease!!

-Chris
__________________
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should" my Wife
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:20 PM   #145
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
I gather from the last post that you don't actually have any experience with double blind sensory testing or know how those are set up? That's OK, there are others who do. I suspect that Panomaniac, at least, will report his experimental results in this thread, and I hope others will as well.
__________________
The more you pay for it, the less inclined you are to doubt it.- George Smiley
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:21 PM   #146
diyAudio Member
 
auplater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: KyOhWVa tristate
Default testing, testing 1...2...3...

Quote:
Originally Posted by exeric View Post
Good. As far doing the double blind testing myself, I have neither the time or energy to do it. I should say this: it requires great familiarity with a piece of equipment to be able to notice subtle changes for worse or better. I hope you are not planning on doing the test at the Geekfest. I think the listening test should be done on very good unmodified equipment that observers have had several days preferably weeks to familiarize themselves with on different varieties of music. One's mind and ear has to narrow in on the positives and negatives of a system beforehand. This takes time. Only then should the double blind listening test occur, presumably on equipment in which one of the two presented identical systems has had the QP installed. If there is a difference it should be noticable. Equally important is the listeners overall conclusion of which of the otherwise identical systems he prefers listening to.

Actually now that I think about it a modification should be to this test procedure. An equal number, but different listening group, should get their several day familiarization on an identical but modified system. When the actual double blind test occurs some will notice that one system sounds slightly worse than they remembered it. The other group will find that one system sounds slightlly better than they remember it. That is provided they hear a difference.
Part of experimental design involves criteria decisions to determine what exactly represents acceptance/rejection of testing results (hopefully some form of multifactorial). I'm sure Sy fully comprehends this and will appropriately descibe the conditions and results comprehensively.

I'm not so sure many other proponents and thread participants here fully understand the significance of this design consideration.

John L.
__________________
"...His brain is squirming like a toad..." Jim Morrison
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:24 PM   #147
exeric is offline exeric  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
I gather from the last post that you don't actually have any experience with double blind sensory testing or know how those are set up? That's OK, there are others who do. I suspect that Panomaniac, at least, will report his experimental results in this thread, and I hope others will as well.
I'm assuming you are refering to me. No, I haven't done it but is there something in the outline that I suggested that would go against creating an unbiased listening result? How would you suggest it be done differently?
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:33 PM   #148
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
What you described bears no relation to a double blind test and you've made it clear that you won't be contributing to that aspect of testing. But other people are willing to step in and do the work, so don't worry about it.
__________________
The more you pay for it, the less inclined you are to doubt it.- George Smiley
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:39 PM   #149
exeric is offline exeric  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by anatech View Post
Hi exeric,
That is why testing is so very important. The numbers are what they are, no bias either way - ever. Not even a subconscious bias can exist. I would think that anyone that only has subjective tools at their disposal would welcome any testing that can eliminate bias.

Every particle and assembly of same must follow the rules of physics, no matter how strange the claims may be. IF testing finds something, anything, then you know you aren't crazy and you actually may be hearing a real effect. That's got to put your mind at ease!!

-Chris
Well, you have hit upon it exactly Chris. When the only tool one has is a hammer then everything becomes a nail. It used to be thought that total harmonic distortion was all that mattered. This was especially true when transistors came about. Maximum feedback occured to bring the distortion down but no notice was taken of how feedback just creates higher frequency distortion products that actually sound worse. (Maybe not so much with early transistor designs. They had to do it just to make it tolerable.)

It took a long time to realize the subtleties of the effects of massive amounts of feedback. We didn't know how the ear accepts different levels of distortion from different harmonics of the fundamental. Many of the higher order of odd harmonics came directly from the feedback process itself. Why do you assume that the situation is any different now? People eventually learned to respect that what they heard in high feedback designs was real and was causing them to sound bad. I think the individuals who actually listen to the QPs will eventually cause everyone to decide that there is something fundamental that we aren't measuring but that the ear can hear. And even if we can't discover it for a long time if enough people actually listen to the bybees and like them it will be just like before. We will realize there are things that we now don't know how to measure that effects sound.
 
Old 31st August 2010, 11:46 PM   #150
exeric is offline exeric  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
What you described bears no relation to a double blind test and you've made it clear that you won't be contributing to that aspect of testing. But other people are willing to step in and do the work, so don't worry about it.
Ok, I will help you with constructing a double blind listening test, if you want me to. But first you have to help me understand where I've gone wrong in my understanding. Also I'd like to understand how the method I described would cause the results to be ambiguous, or worse, skewed. I think that is owed me certainly because so far I'm the only one representing the opposite side of the Bybee question.
 

Closed Thread


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Info on Bybee Quantum Purifiers needed Peter Daniel Everything Else 68 19th December 2012 08:28 AM
Bybee Quantum Purifier Experience. mrfeedback Everything Else 321 27th August 2010 09:41 PM
diy bybee quantum purifiers? mbl Power Supplies 549 16th April 2010 10:38 PM
measurement and analysis tools D_Dubya Full Range 12 31st May 2008 02:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:22 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2